CS3 and lightroom or Aperture

I don't really need all the functionality of CS3 but would probably from time to time need more photo editing than Aperture offers. I would like to learn one program and prefer not to give up tight OSX intergation that Aperature offers...suggestons?

tidysteve, I agree with you completely. Having used Lightroom for many months, and also Aperture for many months, I have to say that Aperture is by far the more mature program. It is simply not fair to say that Lightroom is a better program -- it is a very different program, to be sure, but certainly not a better one. It is less stable than Aperture, less fully featured. LR lacks the loupe, smart albums, and more seriously it lacks soft proofing -- an absolutely essential element for serious photographers.
As for the much vaunted development module of LR I would say it is much more intuitive than Aperture's tools, but not more fully featured. Clarity is a souped up sharpening tool. Highlight recovery is equal between the two programs. And so on. I've achieved identical results in Aperture but it does take more time to learn the program.

Similar Messages

  • Adobe cs3 and lightroom

    Hi,
    Are there any MB users who can let me know if these apps run well on a 2.2 with 2mb of ram, macbook. I am a photographer who is looking to go apple and for the sort of work it will be needed for the size of the MB suits my needs rather than a MBP. Any help would be great.

    My partner runs phtoshop cs3 and lightroom on a 1st gen cor duo macbook with 2mb of ram, the images take a second or two to sharpen when you open RAW images, other than that everything works pretty well, if you are buying a new one you shouldn't have any problems, go for it, you wont be disappointed.

  • Canon 5D Mark II, Photoshop CS3 and Lightroom 2.4

    All,
    I know that this has to have been answered elsewhere, but I have not found what I'm looking for.
    I have purchased a new Canon 5D Mark II camera which will arrive Wednesday.  As far as software on my Mac Pro, I have Adobe Creative Suite 3 Design Premium, which includes (obviously) Photoshop CS3.  I am also running Lightroom 2.4.  I am under the understanding that in order to open RAW files from the 5D Mark II, you need to have Adobe Camera Raw 5.X, which is not supported by Photoshop CS3.  I also understand that Lightroom 2.4 CAN open the 5D Mark II RAW files.  First off, are both of my statements to this point accurate?  If so, can I use Lightroom to open the RAW files, do whatever adjusting I would like in Lightroom, then export the modified file (in TIFF, for example) to Photoshop CS3, and go on my way?  Or will this not work?
    If the answer is no, what are my options for using the software that I have with my Canon 5D Mark II?  Am I REQUIRED, now, to upgrade to Photoshop CS4?  If so, can I buy the CS4 Upgrade for Design Premium, if my CS3 Design Premium is the Education version?
    Thanks for any help on this...I'm hoping to avoid spending any more money than I need to in software just to be able to process images from my new camera.  I'm sure I could always use the Canon supplied software to open the RAW files, but I'd prefer to do so in the Adobe family of programs.

    cabasner,
    I upgraded to CS4 when I got my 5D2, and I can't stress enough how much better CS4 is. It's worth the upgrade even if you didn't get the 5D2. It's more stable that CS3, and ACR is insanely better (as is the Bridge... that's actually usable now!). ACR in CS4 has Adjustment brushes for Exposure... that's right, touch-up areas in ACR and it's totally non-destructive. Vibrance has been added also. In PS, your Dodge & Burn tools have a totally new algorithm which works so much better it's nuts. You even have a Legacy checkbox to see the difference. With the insane amount of image data in the 5D2, those tools work very well. You also have OpenGL support in CS4 now, which means you can view the image at any percentage and it looks like 25/50/75/100. And since your graphics card is now used, Photoshop CS4 is FASTER. And with the Clone Tool you can see what will be put down on the image inside the tool's circle, BEFORE you press the mouse. Talk about an easy way to line up the edit! Oh, then there's all the Adjustment layers... man, talk about a non-destructive time-saving edit! And the panels now stay off to the side, not covering up the image anymore. There's more, I'm, not even remembering everything. Adobe got PS right with this version. I would spring for CS4 in a New York minute, it's the perfect partner for our 5D2s.

  • Photoshop CS3 and Lightroom print discrepancies

    Hello,
    I am having an issue with printing from Lightroom.  I have a profile for my printer/driver/inkset that I have used successfully with Photoshop.  When I print an image in Lightroom with the "profile manages" using this profile with the same driver, the image is dark.  the exact same image exported from Lightroom to Photoshop prints beautifully with the same driver/paper/inkset.
    I have double and triple-checked my driver and lightroom print settings but cannot find anything that appears out of whack.  I use a saved pre-set to ensure that my printer driver settings are identical each time.
    Does anyone have any ideas?
    thank you,
    George Pappas

    Thanks for the additional information, Andre.  Your symptions seem to point to the same underlying cause of the problem that I have experienced even though your particulars are different.
    I have been quiet on this issue becuase I have been involved in a "deep dive" through the problem with Adobe Technical support and by trying to make sense of the other causes/effects/workarounds found by members of the Lightroom and other forums.  For now, I do not have a solution yet, but hope to have more tangible information and a solution to post within a couple of weeks.
    I have been through four tech support interactions with Adobe and one from Canon.  Unfortunately, these calls were less than satisfactory.  While the people on the phone were nice, there very unhelpful and primarily engaged in "pass the buck" behavior by claiming the problem was somewhere else.  The last support call with Adobe lasted 40 minutes with a very nice fellow who gave me USELESS feedback and directed me to a knowledgebase article that had nothing to do with my real problem.
    Let me be clear, I am a 20+ year software industry veteran and understand the complexities of this stuff.  It is obvious that Adobe and Canon cannot put fully qualifed (and expensive) people on the first point-of-contact for support issues.  However, they should have a reasonable escalation procedure that routes a  problem of appropriate complexity to a highly qualifed person after a reasonable number of support attempts are unsuccessful in solving the issue.  So far, this has not happened and is very frustrating to me.
    Here is what I know of the underlying cause of the issue thus far.  It appears to be caused by the interaction between Lightroom, the operating system's color management, and the printer driver.  In essence, each of us are getting prints that are "double" or "triple" color managed even though we are trying to select one color managment workflow for our output.
    Photoshop/InDesign and other adobe applications use their own color management engine called ACE.  Lightroom does things differently and uses the computer's operating system CM functions.  I believe this why my prints continue to look good when printed out of Photoshop yet look lousy (too dark) when printed from Lightroom.  Lightroom is making assumptions when it sends a print data stream to a printer driver that doesn't yield the same result becuase each operating system performs color management tasks somewhat differently and print drivers from Canon/Epson/HP also do not use the operating systems CM functions the same way.  For Mac users, if you add the printing engine architecture change from of Mac O/S 10.4 to Mac O/S 10.5 you throw an additional level of change into the equation which is not helpful.
    So, where does that leave all of us who have this problem?  I believe that for a given print driver/profile/operating system, Adobe will need to provide us with a workaround that will result in quality prints.  To do this means that someone in Adobe who has the knowledge has to put together a specific recipe of options that work for the major printer manufacturers/OS's/printers.  The long run solution will, unfortunately, occur over time as Adobe modifies how Lightroom makes certain assumptions when it sends print data streams to printer drivers and printer manufacturers will update their printer drivers to be more bulletproof regarding operating system color managment differences.
    Sorry for the long-winded message.  Unfortunately, this is one of those seemingly simple problems that has a lot of underlying complexity and does not yield a "one size fits all" solution.  I will keep this group updated on what I learn as I work with Adobe.
    Best,
    George

  • Processing Canon G10 RAW Images in CS3 and Lightroom 2.1

    I've not found a post on point. If I've missed one, sorry.
    Contemplating getting a G10. After research here's what I understand. Please, correct me if I am wrong:
    1. To process a G10 image in ACR, one has to have 5.2. One cannot use 5.2 in CS3. To process the image in CS3 one has to first convert to DNG. This can be done by way of a separate converter OR in Lightroom 2.1, on import.
    2. Lightroom 2.1 will process the image in either RAW or DNG formats.
    So, since I own both Lightroom and CS3 -- I will be able to use ACR in Lightroom if I don't want to convert to DNG first.
    Am I right?
    I don't want to buy the camera if I can't use my usual workflow.
    Thanks.
    sjh
    PS. I think my CS4 Master Suite will arrive tomorrow. But, there is a lot of odd information about ACR and the G10 out there so I thought I'd take the time to clear it up and see if I got it right.

    Lightroom 2.1 does NOT support native files from the G10. LR 2.2, which will be released in December will. So for both programs you need to use the Adobe DNG converter 5.2 to convert to DNG for the time being. It is unclear whether when you have LR 2.2 and CS3 installed whether "Edit in Photoshop" will work correctly with files from cameras such as the G10. It will always work fine if you use dng.

  • Would Photoshop CS3 and Lightroom 3 work on  mavericks?

    I have had photoshop CS3 since I was a freshman and college (and haven't really seen a need to update) and use lightroom 3 wich a bought  two years ago. And wanted to know if I need to update them before downloading the FREE mavericks. Right now I am running snow leopard, and I know since lion the file systems have change. And I do not want to be forced to update date to photoshop cc, because I am not to keen on a subscription service.

    I suggest checking here:
    http://roaringapps.com/

  • CS3 and lightroom raw converters change colour of  5D files when importing.

    The problem is that lightroom and CS3 systematically go through raw 5D..CR2 photos and change colours, even when set to "as shot". I think part of the problem is that i upped the saturation in camera, and the raw converters have been stripping this away to desaturate colours... but in doing this they have taken too much away and left photos very desaturated and looking nothing like colours that were actually there.
    I have taken some with all settings on camera default, yet still there is a slight but noticable shift in colour.
    anyone shed any light on this, or had similar experience.
    Ali.
    P.s. Using vista, but same on windows XP.

    >I think part of the problem is that i upped the saturation in camera, and the raw converters have been stripping this away to desaturate colours
    The main problem is that you don't understand what a raw file is...the ONLY raw converter that can read settings set on the camera (other than exposure and ISO) are those that use the camera SDKin your case, DPP. A raw file has no real rendering and the raw converter must give it one. What you are seeing change is the difference between the Canon SDK and the Camera Raw default. And note that the Camera Raw "default" is just that, a default rendering. If you don't like it, you can change it and make the changes based on camera serial number and capture ISO as well.
    What you need to do is forget the camera settings (except exposure and ISO) and concentrate on learning how to use Camera Raw to get the renderings you want...

  • I need upgrade for cs3 and light room 1.1

    My canon 5d mark II raw files are unreadable?  Files will not open in cs3 and lightroom 1.1. HELP!

    What Jeff said, but with some additional details:
    We provide backwards compatibility in CS2, CS3 and CS4 for new cameras through our FREE DNG Converter:
    Win: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4924
    Mac: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4923
    There are other benefits to using DNG besides backward compatibility if you haven't explored those:
    The metadata, keywords and raw adjustments are stored in the file - along with a processed preview of the image. This makes the file portable and keeps your metadata safe and secure.
    DNG files are smaller than the original raw file which will save you disk space and time in the long run.
    DNG is an openly specified file format which means the file format isn't going away. So if you use another raw processor that supports DNG, you don't have to worry about compatibility or portability of your metadata.
    The Complete Picture with Julieanne Kost - LR/PS - The Advantages of the DNG File Format (LR/PSCS5) | Adobe TV:
    http://tv.adobe.com/watch/the-complete-picture-with-julieanne-kost/the-advantages-of-the-d ng-file-format/

  • Moving CS6 and Lightroom 4 to new computer

    Is there a way to install upgrade versions of Photoshop CS6 and Lightroom 4 onto a newly purchased computer without having to reinstall all previous versions. I have been upgrading Photoshop since CS3 and Lightroom since Lightroom 2. What a pain if I have to reinstall all of that.

    PGC001 wrote:
    Is there a way to install upgrade versions of Photoshop CS6 and Lightroom 4 onto a newly purchased computer without having to reinstall all previous versions.
    That's how I do it every time. The upgrades include the full code so they'll install the full software.
    Launch the PS CS6 and LR4 upgrade installers, enter your upgrade serial number.
    When the installer cannot find a qualifying earlier version on your hard drive it will ask for the serial number from an earlier version.
    Enter your earlier version serial even if it's an upgrade serial number - for PS CS6 that'll be CS3 or CS4 or CS5. For LR it'll be any earlier version serial number.
    The installation will then complete.

  • IPhoto, Aperture and Lightroom

    The basic question - should I stay with iPhoto or move over to Aperture or Lightroom? I've done a ton of reading on the web and end up with more questions than I started with! Some of the reading included http://digitalmedia.oreilly.com/2007/03/05/aperture-vs-lightoom.html and http://digitalmedia.oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmedia/2007/03/05/aperture-v s-lightoom.html?page=1
    Background stuff: I have been a long time user of iPhoto plus iPhoto Buddy which allows me to manage several iPhoto libraries (actually about 15). My photography is of three very different types - the first type being family and friends which are mostly candid shots that document the moment and are often a tad short on the artistic side. The second type is when I try to be Ed the Serious Amateur (my website http://blueorbimages.com/index.htm#). The third type consists of photos I use in reports I create for the consulting work I do - overseeing the proper construction of building exteriors for large buildings such as hotel, office buildings and hospitals. These photos are purely documentary. I have been shooting jpegs but am now shooting RAW for my serious work and jpegs for the Family stuff. In switching over to RAW I also took a hand at using Adobe Bridge as I use PS CS3 along with a lot of the other CS3 components - Dreamweaver, Flash, Fireworks, etc. While Bridge is a good file organizer I started to look at Lightroom as a better tool. I also have been looking at Aperture for the same reason. I am now leaning toward Aperture in part due to the ability to "manage" my current iPhoto files, the "versions" feature and the preservation of the original. As stated before - I also have a number of unanswered questions:
    I use SuperSlideshow Pro for creating my web pages. I want to keep the "slideshow" format - am I correct in that Aperture only produces thumbnail type galleries?
    From what I've seen on this forum I have concluded that I will be better served to export/import all my iPhoto images to Aperture rather than access the iPhoto images via references - is this correct?
    Two features in iPhoto that I use frequently are to email images (often reducing the file size) and to export images for resizing for other purposes - insert in Word reports, upload to a photo forum that I belong to (Photozo.com), merge into a data base I created in Filemaker for managing the printing, framing and displaying of my work at various exhibits. Are these features available in Aperture?
    I'm a big user of Photoshop for my consulting work as well as my serious photography - cropping, color balance, adding text and symbols and the precise management of color in the printing process - I do most of my own printing on an Epson 2200. How easily can I go from Aperture to PS and back to Aperture?
    I get a feeling that MacWorld SF 2008 may give us an update to Aperture - any thoughts here?
    Any other issues I should consider?
    BTW my Mac is an Intel 2 x 2.66 dual core with 7GB RAM, 30" Apple display and a 21" Samsung display and 1.5 TB disk space spread over 3 drives. I feel I should have no problems with horsepower, monitor real estate or storage space when using Aperture. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
    Thanks in advance for any and all input/comments.
    Ed

    I use SuperSlideshow Pro for creating my web pages. I want to keep the "slideshow" format - am I correct in that Aperture only produces thumbnail type galleries?
    Correct, although there are export plug-ins for Gallery etc.
    From what I've seen on this forum I have concluded that I will be better served to export/import all my iPhoto images to Aperture rather than access the iPhoto images via references - is this correct?
    I never had enough images in iPhoto to know, hopefully others can answer.
    Two features in iPhoto that I use frequently are to email images (often reducing the file size) and to export images for resizing for other purposes - insert in Word reports, upload to a photo forum that I belong to (Photozo.com),
    Aperture has an 'email image' function, you can set quality/size etc. For use in other apps such as Word you will either need to turn on Preview generation (with a performance hit) and will be able to drag-n-drop directly, or you will need to export Versions as needed to the Finder and then import to the other app.
    merge into a data base I created in Filemaker for managing the printing, framing and displaying of my work at various exhibits. Are these features available in Aperture?
    There's an Aperture-to-Filemaker export plug-in, but as I don't use Filemaker I've no idea how useful it will be. If you are relatively knowledgeable when it comes to AppleScript you should be able to set up your own copying of data between the two apps.
    Note that LightRoom has no scriptability +at all+, and only gained the ability to add export plug-ins in the most recent version, so there aren't many yet.
    I'm a big user of Photoshop for my consulting work as well as my serious photography - cropping, color balance, adding text and symbols and the precise management of color in the printing process - I do most of my own printing on an Epson 2200. How easily can I go from Aperture to PS and back to Aperture?
    Reasonably easily, but it's going to involve 16-bit uncompressed files so will use up HD space quickly. You shouldn't need to be doing any cropping or colour balancing in PS as that can be done first in Aperture.
    I get a feeling that MacWorld SF 2008 may give us an update to Aperture - any thoughts here?
    It seems likely...
    BTW my Mac is an Intel 2 x 2.66 dual core with 7GB RAM, 30" Apple display and a 21" Samsung display and 1.5 TB disk space spread over 3 drives.
    A minimum of 2GB RAM and as good a graphics card as you can afford...
    Ian

  • Aperture 2 and Lightroom 2

    Hello everyone.
    I know this question has been asked before, and I have read some previous threads about these two products. However, I was hoping to have a few things clarified for me that I was not to sure about.
    I just recently started to really become involved with Digital Photograph. Purchased my first SLR (Nikon D80) and love it. I really found a hobby I enjoy.
    With all the pictures I am taking and will be taking, I obviously need to find post processing software that suits my needs. Here is where Aperture 2 and Lightroom (and to a degree, CS3) come into play.
    Let me ask some obvious questions first.
    1.) Lightroom 2 is a organizing piece as well as editing software piece correct? lets you get into the photo, make adjustments. Pretty good editing from what I can tell.
    Can it be said that LR2 and A2 do the same thing, just differently? A2 lets you organize your photos and edit them as well. They just do it differently correct? For example, A2 lets you edit in full mode.
    I guess that is one of my main questions.
    2.) Fundamentally, what are the main differences between L2 and A2?
    Down the road, I am planning on using CS3 (or CS4) to take advantage of layers and do the really cool fun stuff. But that is down the road when I am more experienced.
    I downloaded both LR2 and A2 and installed the trials and plan to use them over the next 30 days to 'test them out.'
    A2 seems to 'plugin' better to the iMac, which I expected.
    With LR2, from what I can see, I could use LR2 instead of iPhoto for my organizing/cataloging, and if I wanted to move photos from LR2 to iPhoto (to make books, calenders, etc. etc.), I would need to export it out of LR2 and import it into iphoto. That correct? Where as Aperture 'co-exists' easier with iPhoto?
    Is there really anything that stands out and separates the two?
    The other thing I need to consider is when I bring in CS3 down the road. What is the easier way to integrate everything.
    Appreciate the help.
    Cheers,
    Jason

    Hi,
    I migrated to the iMac from PC around a month ago and was evaluating my photo options both before and after the migration. The difference with me is, I guess, that I haven't previously been much of a user or any version of Photoshop, so had no Adobe-centric preconceptions to colour my own evaluation of Lightroom and Aperture.
    I guess I qualify as an enthusiastic amateur who finally migrated from film to digital 5 years ago, after 25 years of film. On the PC, my photo management comprised folders on the hard disk plus Picasa to provide some basic abstraction layer and album facility. Editing was very basic and relied on The Gimp if no addressed by Picaca's built-in adjustments. Then I started taking photos in RAW rather than jpeg, and it all went to custard as they say.
    Picasa didn't cut it any more, RAW opened up a lot more options and my collection was becoming unmanageable. Tried ViewNX - limited manageability. Tried Lightroom 2 on the PC - wow, this is more like it. Didn't like ACDSee, iview. Migrated to Mac, and started comparing all over again.
    Lightroom - given my previous try-out I was expecting Good Things, so left the start of this trial until after using Aperture for 2 weeks. Suddenly Lightroom felt clunky - very modal and constraining.
    Aperture - didn't really know what to expect. Imported all of my photos as referenced and found my folder structure replicated by albums. Kind of disconcerting initially as I couldn't work out where the Masters were, nor the true behaviour of albums, projects and folders in Aperture. Then it clicked - great version control and cataloguing, non-destructive edits etc etc, logical collections of photos. It worked more like my thought processes, rather than my thought processes having to adjust to how the software worked.
    For my uses, Lightroom's closer integration with Photoshop is a bit of a non-event as I don't chop up photos - just develop them. Anyhow, Photoshop Elements is there if I REALLY need it (so far not at all after a month).
    I can see how previous experience with Photoshop or Lightroom would create a preference for continuing with Lightroom. For me, there's no business reason, emotional attachment or previous experience to consider, so Aperture won. Lightroom was uninstalled after 2 weeks.
    Regards,
    Calx
    PS - I think from an interface design perspective, Aperture is an amazing piece of software, leaving aside other comparison aspects.
    Message was edited by: CalxOddity

  • Camera raw and Photoshop CS3 from Lightroom

    (2.5) If I open a raw image from Windows Explorer or Bridge (which I don't use much), Camera Raw 4.6 opens. It doesn't open if I Edit In Photoshop CS3 from Lightroom, but says "This version of Lightroom may require the Photoshop Camera Raw plug-in version 5.5 for full compatibility. Camera Raw version 4.6 is the latest version available for Photoshop CS3".
    There are two choices: Render using Lightroom and Open Anyway. If I say the former, it doesn't use the file name, but does something like -2.tif.
    I'm not sure what these two choices actually do.
    Secondly, if things were working properly, would Lightroom actually open the Camera Raw window? If so, is there anything I can do short of upgrading PS to CS4?
    Thanks.

    Just a little history of the profiles being displayed for your camera model. The camera calibration tab only displays the profiles that are specific to your camera and model. The earler profiles were named after the version of ACR that was in use when they were created.
    So.
    ACR 4.2 the first profile created for your camera model when support was introduced.
    ACR 4.4, Adobe created/ updated new profiles for most of the supported camera models with this release of ACR.
    Adobe Standard Beta, updated profile when the Beta of ACR 5.0 and LR 2.0 were introduced.
    Adobe Standard, Updated profile for the final release of ACR 5.0 and LR 2.0. This then is the latest profile created for your camera model. I think it should be the closest to your camera standard.
    Adobe did not create any other camera matching profiles Vivid, Neutral etc other than for the more popular Nikon and Canon models.  I have an Olympus so I am in the same boat.

  • I bought the photoshop cs2 cs3 cs5 and lightroom and lightroom 4. i can't install on may new macbookpro 13inch?

    i bought the photoshop cs2 cs3 cs5 and lightroom and lightroom 4. i can't install on may new macbookpro 13inch?

    On which operating system are you trying to install these Adobe apps?
    Please specify the operating system name and version.
    If you have purchased new Macbook Pro, then you should have atleast Mac OSX 10.9 or later. However, i doubt you will be able to install most of these apps on it as they are pretty old apps except CS5 & Lr4.
    Still you can give it a shot and check.
    What happens when you try to install them?
    Do you get any error message? An error screenshot or full text of the error, should be helpful.
    ~ Arpit

  • Round trip from Aperture to PS CS3 and back problem

    Hi everyone; I hope someone can help me to solve this. I posted it before but the only suggestion I got was to check if the processed photo is not stacked under, which it isn't.
    I have PS CS3 set as my external photo processing app (exports are PSD 16-bit 300 dpi) in Aperture 2.1.1. When I process the picture in CS3 and then save it(mind you I only SAVE, I do not do SAVE AS) as PSD (or TIFF) Aperture only shows me the original file in preview with the little circle informing me about the round trip to CS3. So the processed file does not show. Instead I only see two identical versions of the same photo or a layer from CS3.( I mean, I see the master and the version with the little circle).
    If I save the work in PS CS3 as jpeg and then import into Aperture, it shows fine. When trying to import the processed and saved PSD and TIFF files, Aperture only shows the original file.
    If it helps, I am working on layered pictures (HDR) where I use different parts of different pictures to get wide dynamic range. I export 3 or so photos from Aperture at once to CS3, process them into one, flatten the picture and save it.
    And then Aperture just shows me the original file as version. I really need your help with this.
    I have done this before 2.1.1 and it worked. Not sure if I have changed anything that might be causing this.
    Thank you for your ideas.

    Ernie, the photos are captured by Canon XTi so they are in CR2, saved to my internal HD and then "loaded" to Aperture as referenced files.
    As for PS CS3, I am not sure whether I have it set up as a scratch disk or not (if you could let me know where to check it).
    Yesterday, I did yet another round trip and found out that when I finish in PS and SAVE and CLOSE, then the file shows up properly in Aperture. What I was doing before was I SAVEd if but did not close. Then I would SAVE AS in PS to make sure I have some kind of a version of the file if the one in Aperture fails to work.
    So it seems I cracked it but I would still like to hear what you have to say, or anyone for that matter. It seems to me that the SAVE-CLOSE is crucial.

  • Best Setup, iPhoto 11 & Aperture 3 and Lightroom 3

    As I use all three of these apps, as well as Photoshop CS5, I've been thinking hard how I want to set up all these apps. The first obvious issue is storage. It would be insane to keep three copies of my images, so the obvious choice is to store images in subfolders of the Pictures folder in my account hierarchy. Then have all three apps reference the images from there rather than copying the images into their own library structure. Would all agree to this or is there some hidden gotcha to this?
    I know iPhoto and Aperture can share info back and forth. Is there a preferred way to set up what app gets images from or to another that you all would recommend? Can one app be the 'master' and the other two be slaves?
    What would be the best bet, also, for importing the images to the master. The images are already in folders and subfolders according to how I would like them to be in the master app once the import is done.
    Finally, is there a way to support a dual storage system, one where my folder structure is maintained, top level folders within pictures being the project, subfolders being the events, or whatever terminology the app uses, with a second structure using top level by year, sub-levels by month and day? Both systems in use together.

    Aperture, Lightroom and iPhoto, to one extent or the other, all do the same job. The best advice is to pick one horse and ride it.
    All three apps want to manage the files. Yes, all three can reference the same set of files too, but none can see or work with the processing of the other. So, the Lightroom version of the photo is different that the iPhoto one is different from the Aperture one. And, none can even see the other without some form of exporting.
    Best analogy I can think off: Writing your novel in Word, Pages and TextEdit - one paragraph in each. It just makes everything more complicated.
    I know iPhoto and Aperture can share info back and forth.
    Aperture and iPhoto are entirely different applications that work in very different ways.
    The only communication between the two is as follows:
    Aperture is able to parse the iPhoto Library to allow it to import the contents while stacking the Originals and Modified versions, preserving metadata and so forth.
    Aperture can share its Previews with the iLife apps, including iPhoto.
    That's it.
    So, specifically, what interaction there is between the two is designed to facilitate migration from iPhoto to the more powerful app. After that, iPhoto has exactly the same relationship to the Aperture Library as, say, Pages or iMovie.
    iPhoto has no knowledge of, and knows nothing of how the Aperture Library works. It cannot read the Aperture library.
    EDIT: BTW: Lightroom has no knowledge of the other too at all. And Vice Versa.
    Really, working with all three makes no sense to me. You'll be doing triple the work. It will unnecessarily complex and that's how you get data loss.
    That and a dollar might get you a cup of coffee some places.
    Regards
    TD

Maybe you are looking for