Editing in Aperture vs Lightroom

The one thing that bugs me about LR is when you're adjusting an image, lets say the contrast, the image pixelates and you can't really see it until you're done the adjustment. It's hard to see the change as it happens.
I don't have Aperture, yet, but does this also happen in Aperture?

Well, Aperture sometimes takes time to "load" an edit, but it doesn't go all pixely at least.

Similar Messages

Work with both: iPhoto and Aperture (or Lightroom)

I have iLife '09 and the newest MacBook pro with Leopard (last edition) and I am New in Apple Scene.
All my photos now are imported in iPhoto. How can I organize lot of photos, when I want to work with Aperture (or Lightroom)? Do I need then iPhoto? Or only organize all photos in Aperture?

Aperture, Lightroom and iPhoto all cover the same ground in different ways.
iPhoto is aimed at the domestic market. It's very user friendly and works very well with Point and Shoot cameras especially.
Both AP and LR are focussed firmly on the Pro Shooter shooting high volumes of RAW. They both have significant learning curves.
That said, there is much to be gained as an Amateur photographer using either app if you are shooting RAW. Much less so if you you're shooting jpeg.
You can download trials of both AP and LR.
AP works in a limited fashion with iPhoto. You can share your Previews with iPhoto, for instance, and there is a facility to easily migrate from iPhoto to Aperture. You can migrate an entire library or just particular photos.
LR is utterly unaware of iPhoto. There is a third party plug-in that facilitates exporting from LR to iPhoto. There is no easy way to migrate from iPhoto to LR.
Subject to the caveats above about shooting RAW: I would use Aperture as the primary organisational and processing app. I choose AP because it's much more powerful that iPhoto and because it has excellent OS integration entirely missing from LR.
Regards
TD

Finder vs. Aperture/iPhoto/Lightroom et al

I’ve tried everything from iPhoto to Lightroom to Aperture, but have found happiness with Finder+Tags. I offer this “solution” for image organization and archiving for anybody who is interested.
Caveat: this is a narrowly defined system that works best, for me, under these conditions.
I shoot in RAW, so conversion is always a primary component of any process
I use the Desktop for initial organization, but also works by importing directly to any spot on your HD for review
I do all my RAW conversion in Adobe Camera Raw and editing in Photoshop for layering and compositing reasons
This is a low volume workflow, one image is edited at a time, no batch processing
Having said all that, the simple Finder Tag workflow using colors as categories:
Import images > Desktop folder > Name and Tag folder YELLOW > Tag images RED for conversion/editing > Delete untagged images
RED Tagged image > ACR > Photoshop > Edit > Save & Tag (GREEN + PURPLE or GREY) and change RAW original from RED to ORANGE
Files keep the camera file name + Tags; Folders are arranged by simple 4-digit code (MM/DD) + Tag YELLOW (still editing one or more images) or GREEN (finished editing).
That's it. It's simple and it works. For me. But I'm always open for any comments/criticism and suggestions on how to make it work better.
Brian

To get an idea of the benefits of Aperture and Lightroom you might visit the DAM (digital asset management) forum and see what they say about those applications over there.
The DAM Forum
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto (iPhoto.Library for iPhoto 5 and earlier) database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've created an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger or later), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. It's compatible with iPhoto 6 and 7 libraries and Tiger and Leopard. iPhoto does not have to be closed to run the application, just idle. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.
Note: There now an Automator backup application for iPhoto 5 that will work with Tiger or Leopard.

Aperture vs lightroom vs adobe bridge

I'm very very very new to all this, I plan on buying an imac soon and I'm trying my hand at amateur photography, but I am unsure what the difference b/w aperture, lightroom and adobe bridge is. Can anyone explain the differences in a nutshell?

Alejandra-
What Charles said. Aperture, Bridge and Lightroom are all applications for advanced digital image handling. Each has a steep learning curve that requires prerequisite full conversance with the Mac, batch image handling and digital photography in general. Simply running a trial version of Aperture, for instance, will not give a novice an appropriate idea of how Aperture behaves and what it is capable of.
Take at least a thousand digital pics and manage them using (free) iPhoto. Buy (inexpensive) Adobe Photoshop Elements and learn basic image editing and manipulation. Then re-ask your question. New Aperture and Lightroom versions and new training routines will then be available and you will get much more relevant advice. Do not run the 30-day trial until you have righteous hardware and training CD tutorial(s) in hand.
Planning an iMac purchase be aware that images processing is very hardware intensive. Anyone intending images processing should plan on buying strong hardware: Mac Pros, Macbook Pros or the highest end of the iMacs. Best performance will come from the strongest hardware. 2 GB RAM should be considered minimal.
-Allen Wicks

Export aperture to lightroom

Please help, I have wasted so many weeks and hours trying to Export my 44,000, 270 GB image library from Aperture over to Lightroom . It's a nightmare! Nothing works.
First I tried using the built in Aperture importer inside lightroom. It take 8 days to transfer 25% , then it crashed. I did see that it had preserved project structure and keywords. I was storing my masters on a separate toshiba 3.0 bus drive.
I then started a new catalog in Lightroom and tried all over again, this time with a Thunderbolt 2TB drive. The inbuilt aperture import plugin started off a lot more promising, much faster, but after 4 hours of only 5% it seemed to slow down. I cancelled the process. I hoped that I can break it down into smaller chunks by running the plugin again, hoping that Lightroom would be able to detect duplicates and not import them.
However, it did not let me run the plugin a second time.
I have now paid for and downloaded a third party programme called Aperture Exporter. When I ran it however, it seemed to come up with so many errors (not imported CR2 or mov files, for example) that it was hardly worth the try. Need my money back
The next thing I tried was just exporting one project (march photostream, with 800 images) to my desktop in a folder. That also seemed to have an error or two, but when I imported into LIghtroom, it seemed not to recognise that there was already a 2015 folder there, so it put the images losely in date subfolders, but not in the pre-existing year 2015! ARRGHHH!!!! So I don't think it recognised duplicates (but I'm not sure yet).
What am I to do>??? I just want my photos in one place!!! Not Photos, not Aperture, but LIGHTROOM!!!!
It should not be this difficult - i dont even care anymore about my aperture keywords, edits or anythihg - just the dates going into the right places so I can sort it all out again in Lightroom.
What is a CR2 file anyway.
Please help advise me on the workflow I should be following, which plugin I should try with again, or how to do it manually but quickly. I have very little time!!!

From an Aperture point of view this is quite simple: Export your images to the Finder, write any metadata you prefer to the images on export, at whatever setting you choose.
https://documentation.apple.com/en/aperture/usermanual/index.html#chapter=21%26s ection=1%26tasks=true
has details of that process.
All you say about Aperture problems is:
The next thing I tried was just exporting one project (march photostream, with 800 images) to my desktop in a folder. That also seemed to have an error or two,
I'm not sure what help you expect with a problem described as vaguely as "an error or two".
what to do about my workflow - should I be trying to export folder by folder from Aperture? Exporting Versions?
I exported project by project from Aperture. Then imported to Lightroom. There is no right way, there is only the way that you want to do.
Same with exporting versions or originals. No right answer. It's what you prefer.
As for errors, what are they?

MBA and Aperture or Lightroom

Does anyone have experience using the Late 2008 1.86GHz MBA with either Aperture or Lightroom? I am a newcomer to digital photography and was warned off the 1st gen MBA for use with either of these programs.
I'd appreciate learning from users' real world experience.

Aperture Works great. If you are doing any editing etc - the fan will come on after a minute or 2 - but it runs fine. I submitted a large review of the new MBA SSD machine and the various heavyweight programs it can run well etc, but it was rejected by the site admins here since I didn't ask any questions in my review.
It runs fine. there is no worry about it overheating the machine etc, or it slowing down the system excessively. I don't have an overly large photo library on the MBA - but I only use Aperture for editing and not for tagging etc. Same goes for Photoshop CS3 and Logic Pro - they both work great.
Message was edited by: McGilli

This image cannot be rendered for editing because Aperture does not support

Editing Error: This image cannot be rendered for editing because Aperture does not support the image format.
I have been having this issue when trying to open photos in CS4. It only seems to be affecting images from the last year or so, although I'm using the same cameras (Canon 7D, 5D, and S90) as before. My library is large, going back to year 2000, and all the older images seem to work fine, but most all of the recent files display this error when trying to open them is CS4. I've tried the methods described in other threads and on the support website, namely starting aperture while holding option and command, pulling up the options to rebuild the library in various ways. I've done all three options, the last two twice, with no change. This is very frustrating to not be able to use the program in the way I had planned... Any ideas? I'm wondering if my library is simply too large- although I'm not sure if breaking the library into smaller chunks is the best way to go. I prefer having all my photos together. I have found that iMovie fails to operate properly when events get too large. Is this a similar problem?

Again, thanks for the input. As for the first suggestion, when I import without renaming they all work, but as of late, all appear to work no problem. It seems like it was a block of time from roughly October 2009 through November 2010 where most all the files imported during this date demonstrate the problem. As for the second suggestion, I've tried both 8 and 16 bit TIFF and PSD file types selected in the editor preferences, with no luck.
My next move has been to relocate the offending files out of their current location to another location (they are referenced, not managed). In doing this, I encountered what seems to be a file access or privelege error message, although about 20% of the files were moved, and in doing so, it seems to have solved the problem for those. But I don't have a good way of isolating the involved images outside of Aperture, and I don't want to move them with Finder anyways since that would ruin the referencing.
This bug is getting so complicated I'm ready to throw my hands in the air and just go back to Lightroom. Aperture has so much potential, especially in regards to integration with ipods, iPads, other Macs, etc. but in the 4 months I've been using it, I have spent WAY more time addressing buggy issues like this one than the amount of time supposedly saved using Aperture instead of Lightroom.

Aperture vs Lightroom Color Renderign

Like many I have downloaded the Lightroon beta to stack against Aperture. It is an interesting excercise to run the two side by side on a 30" screen. Takes a bit of grunt.....
I have a question that maybe someone can answer:
If I open the same image (either RAW or JPEG) in both Lightroom and Aperture, and ensure that all auto editing is turned off (I think!) there is a MAJOR difference in the color rendering of the same image between the two applications. I have to say that Lightroom seems to be doing a MUCH better job on flesh tones than Aperture. But why are they different???
An explanation, would be greatly appreciated.
Rgds
Chris

I think I am doing better than that. In the small cog menu at the top of the Aperture adjustments pane there is a menu option 'Remove All Adjustments' which I select prior to comparison. Likewise in LIghtroom there is a Reset button bottom right corner of the Develop pane. I would point out however that even pressing this reset button produces a different color rendering than that in the Library area of Lightroom. I therefore see THREE raw states
1.Lightroom Library
2. Lightroom Develop (with reset pressed)
3. Aperture Master Image.
This used to be a problem with the likes of iView Media Pro in that it was not color managed but both Aperture and Lightroom are color managed and yet producing completely different renderings of color.
Chris

Aperture to LightRoom conversion

I'm a potential buyer of LR but one thing that is holding me back is the prospect of manually trying to load my images from aperture to LR. My library contains around 10k images so I suspect its not a large one compared to others but the prospect of recreating my folders/categories and re-importing them never mind reapplying the editing (if I export the masters) is a daunting task one of which I'm not quite ready for.
Is there a migration path from aperture to Lightroom either from Adobe or third party?
TIA
Mike

I just moved my images from Aperture to LR beta and the method I used took a little work but it went very smoothly, which is what I care about.
First, I created a folder structure that mirrored my Aperture folders (Project > Folder > Album).
Next, I selected all images in each Aperture album and relocated the masters to the corresponding folders I created in the first step.
Then, I imported them into LR.
It all went pretty smoothly but it took a little time. I should say I only have about 6K images in my managed library with about 15 -30 images per album so a collection of tens of thousands will no doubt be a big pain using the same procedure.
One weird thing happened though. When I started using LR everything was crisp and responsive but after importing ALL of my images LR was so darn slow I had to force the app to quit and restart my machine. I mean the thing just ground to a halt even after I forced LR to quit.
SO, on a hunch I went back into Aperture and deleted everything. All the projects, folders, and albums. Then I went back to LR and the thing was fast. No problem opening any files, switching modules, making adjustments, etc.
I have no idea if the leftover file references in Aperture caused a problem but after they were gone all was/is good.
For reference my machine is a 17" MacBook Pro Core Duo w/2GB ram.

Interesting speed test - Aperture vs Lightroom

Still noodling on the whole Aperture v Lightroom thing and I as I mentioned in an earlier post, I like the corrections (develop) portion of Lightroom but pretty much like everything else in Aperture, especially the workflow and organization. The thing that I find troubling is the SLOW speed of Aperture.
So, I have Windows running on my 1GB Macbook via Parallels and installed Lightroom for Windows and it FLYS. The speed is the same or faster under Parallels/Windows than Aperture is natively and may be faster then just OSX version of Lightroom. . .wow.
This leads me to believe (hope maybe) that a performance bump for Aperture is in the works and probably won't be that hard for Apple. It almost seems like some debug/logging has been left on. . .
Adam

I totally agree that in real life working conditions that Aperure is a faster program. I think we have to qualify this speed issue...Lightroom has less system requirements that Aperture so it appears to be faster on the surface. The best way to test the program is to run it through its paces with your current workflow.
I posted the following findings on anoher forum...
LIGHTROOM
PRoS
- Easier to pick up and use
- Slightly more in depth Editing Tools (Curves, more color sliders, Black Level etc). Can acheive the same with Aperture, but not as easily.
- Fast (but with a few gotchas - must let the program finish building previews etc)
- Can create and share Presets with other users and apply Presets on Import
- History - can go easily back to Prior state
- System requirements not that stringent. Can also Mac & PC
- Healing Brush/Clone Tool is nicely done
- More Camera support...
CoNs
- File Management (DAM) seems to be the least in depth part of the program.
- Stacks/Virtual copies could be more intuitive. This seems more to be an after thought in this program and I am not sure what Adobe was doing here. Aperture just does a much better job in its exectuion. People that use both prorams will understand what I mean. Lightroom Also doesn't handle the import of Raw/Jpegs with same name well. Need to do a workaround.
- Modules (forces you into set way of doing things). The best part of the program is how easy it is to figure out due to the modules, but that is the part of the program that limits you the most once you figure it out. You end up hating the thing you love the most. The modules slows down your workflow to the point that it is counter productive and negates any speed increase the program has on the surface.
- User Interface is somewhat customizable, but you cannot customize the view as much as in Aperture...I actually found the interface too restrictive with the modules.
- Email feature and watermark feature not as intuitive. Sends images for email to a folder.
APERTURE
- Best FM/DAM Features of the two. Program clearly geared more towards File Mgmt
- Loupe - This tool alone gives Aperture an advantage
- Stacks - Extremely well done
- Versions etc...
- Can get CLOSE to Canon DPP (colors) conversions when using this program much faster than Lightroom. The best way to describe this is Aperture has less editing tools, but they are all very functional.
- Faster to Navigate and do things on the fly due to open nature which greatly speeds up your Workflow. Program geared more towards managing large amount of images IMO. The open nature of the program makes it much faster tool to get a final product when working with large number of images.
- Emailing functions are very intuitive (e.g. adding watermark etc). Click on email and my image goes straight to mail resized and with a watermark just add the persons namde and hit send. This is one feature that illustrates why with Apple you feel as if you are working with one big program, than a bunch of seperate programs.
- More Customizable UI..Can display images a multitude of ways
- Presets for each section
CoNs
- Learning Curve. The program is daunting at first due to its wide open nature. I suggest buying a book or you will miss out on many of its features. Many folks are not aware of the depth of the program.
- Focus was on clearly more on File Mgmt features than on editing features. The Editing features needs to be more in depth and improved. E.g. The Lift and stamp Tool is extremely difficult to use. Lightroom also has a few features that Apple should a good look at. I.e. Curves, History, More sliders etc.
- POWER HUNGRY - The program requires way too much computer (GPU) to run it adequately. I think Apple focused too much on using Aperture in the beginning to promote hardware. The program still cant get pass that stigma.
- The program locks you out once you start your conversion to Jpegs (you can’t work in the program during this time). Apple has to correct this because it really cuts down your productivity.
Conclusion
The best way to figure out if a program works for your particular needs is to test it under your working conditions. I had a week of down time and I decided this was the time to learn and test Lightroom vs. Aperture because I was looking for an alternative to Cannon DPP mostly due to how it handled shadow details and also sorting through pics etc.
Background: I am a fashion/model photographer and in my field we shoot a lot of photos to ensure we have that Money Shot . A shoot with over 1000 images is quite common. From this I have to narrow down to the best photos to send the presentable sample to the client without overwhelming them. One week turnaround is customary. I shoot only RAW so I have to do some edit to get the pictures to a state where they POP. Photoshop is not used in this phase unless I see a shot that needs something done that my DAM software cannot do and I HAVE to send it to the client because it is a winner.
After testing both software, I chose Aperture. It has some drawbacks, but I found it t be the better program for my needs. It helped me tremendously to sort through photos, apply keywords and create smart albums. For Example I came up with a key word Submission Package and I created a Smart Album tied to that keyword. I went through the images and tagged all the shots that caught my eye immediately with that keyword. This was while deleting the obvious bad shots, and editing the pictures and lift and stamp. Click over to the smart album titled Submission package and all the shots I want to send was sitting there already edited and ready to go. This made the program much FASTER in getting a final product.
I tried this with Lightroom, but the modular nature frustrated me because I don’t do things in a set order...For Example I might be applying Keywords, then see a pic I want to crop, then I decide I want to stack a few pics, then I want to tweak a photo. I was so tired of switching between modules and trying to remember what I could do where that I just gave up and went back to Aperture.
Ultimately I found that Aperture was a faster program in exection. At the end of the day it is all about of getting a great product in the shortest amount of time to my client and Aperture helped me the most to meet this objective...
Macbook Pro Core Duo 2.16 Mac OS X (10.4.8)

Aperture or Lightroom 4???

Hi!
I'd like to know which one is better between Apreture and Lightroom 4...
At school, I use Photoshop and I want something that kinds of work the same way. I mean that it's not just for editing pictures in order to make them look prettier. I also want to use it to make pictures of my own, just like in photoshop, where you can like take part of one picture and add it to another one and everything... Sorry if I'm not using any technical terms, I'm not really into this stuff, it's more like a hobby and also a complementary class... English isn't my mother tongue too, so I might sound a little weird and I'm sorry...
Thanks for helping me anyway!
xx
*By the way, I'm going to use it on my MacBook Pro (whitout Retina display)

Aperture, Lightroom, and iPhoto are digital asset managers. The part of your entire workflow that they cover is from recorded exposures (files you make with a camera) to the best you can make your pictures. You use other software -- graphics packages, which do compositing -- to take those pictures and make them into other grapics entities. Photoshop is a graphics package. There is overlap between Photoshop and Aperture, but they are very different products, designed for different users doing different things.
If you want something that works like Photoshop, get Photoshop or Pixelmator or GIMP or the equivalent.
As for the comparison between Aperture and Lightroom: they are functionally equal. Use the one that makes you happy. For more information on the comparison, read the many posts here and elsewhere. Start with the posts listed on the right column under the heading "More Like This".

When trying to use "Edit a copy with Lightroom Adjustements" from Lightroom, Photoshop opens but no photo is displayed.

I can see from searching online that this is a regular question but I have not yet seen a solution.
I am running Lightroom 5.4 and Photoshop CC 14.2.1, both kept updated via the monthly subscription, on a 2013 MacMini running OSX 10.9.3
Starting with jpg's:
If I try "Edit a copy with Lightroom Adjustements" - Photoshop opens but no photo displayed in PS
If "Edit a Copy" or "Edit Original" then Photoshop displayes the file OK
If I am using Canon Raw files (.CR2) from my Canon 70D, then AS EXPECTED Lightroom starts Photoshop with the intervening dialog box about opening a copy or original but again just a blank screen and no photo displayed.
Has anybody found a solution yet?
Thanks in advance

Hi Victoria,
I dont have 3.6. but I installed lightroom 4 and the function worked fine. But i didnt like the version 4, as it consumes a lot of resources.
I can open raw files without any problem.
And this function had been working before and suddenly this stopped working. I didnt do any setttings changes even.
Really appreciate your help on this.

Because I listened to Adobe earlier today about whither uninstalling Elements would affect Photoshop and Lightroom on my computer, Lightroom no longer sees Photoshop in the EDIT IN Menu of Lightroom. I found an article on the help site saying to delete th

Because I listened to Adobe earlier today about whither uninstalling Elements would affect Photoshop and Lightroom on my computer, Lightroom no longer sees Photoshop in the EDIT IN Menu of Lightroom. I found an article on the help site saying to delete the filecom.adobe.Photoshop.plist, which I looked for, its not there so it can't be deleted. The next step is to uninstall Photoshop and reinstall. This isn't an option because of all the plug-ins and modifications of the work space. Does any one have a better solution?

<moved from Downloading, Installing, Setting Up to Photoshop Lightroom>

Where are the edited files located in Lightroom?

I want to be able to use my edited files in InDesign but the only way I know how to do it is to export them to a folder in the finder. This poses a couple of problems. For one it doubles the amount of disk space I use and perhaps more importantly it will not bring the changes I make in Lightroom over to InDesign. Does anyone know where Lightroom saves the edited files after they have been edited in Lightroom?

I don't know InDesign, so your mileage may possibly vary, but I don't get involved in formal LR exports and imports when editing with other apps. What I do when I need to use another editing app in addition to LR is right-click the image in LR and select Edit In... and pick the app I want to use.*
I'm given three choices for the other app: Edit a Copy With Lightroom Adjustments (the choice you want in your example), Edit Copy (start over, ignoring what I've done in Lightroom), Edit Original (ditto, but BZZT! not a great idea, to me at least).
The file opens in the other app (and also in Lightroom, as a copy) in the default file format that app is set to use, such as .tif, assumed here. I make the edits I want there, and then I Save the image again within that app. That saves the app-edited .tif copy back to the Windows folder being used by Lightroom for the imported .dng Lightroom image files. Note also that there is now a second copy of the image that appears in the Lightroom filmstrip, adjacent to the right side of the .dng image, that is the .tif file and reflects all the edits in the other app. I can make further edits within Lightroom to the .tif (or to the .dng file without the app edits), but in the .tif file, I now can't undo any changes made before I saved in the other app. Those edits, including the Lightroom edits before opening in the other app, have now become destructive edits in that .tif file. (This is why I recommend working with a copy, not the original.) If I need to undo something LR did before I went to the other app, I delete the .tif file and start over with the .dng.
When I'm done editing from LR (I let LR manage the final edited copy), I can Export that .tif file with any additional edits LR made, Print from within LR, etc.
*If you can't see the app you want to use when you select Edit In, go in LR to Edit>Preferences>External Editing tab, and under Additional External Editor, click the Choose button and navigate to the .exe file for the app you want to use. You also set the file format and other preferences there. Save your new preference with the OK button, and right-clicking will bring the other app up in LR as an Edit In option.

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

Editing in Aperture vs Lightroom

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for