Newbie asks: Aperture and PhotoShop - why have both??

Question

Though this is more of a general question regarding photo editing, I'll post it here as this seems to be where most of the shutterbugs hang.
I just bought my wife a Nikon D200 for Mother's Day. Though she's definitely not an expert photographer (she barely knows how to use her current Nikon N60 film camera), she seems to have a real knack for taking beatiful shots of the kids, vacation vistas, etc.. I bought the D200 not because I felt she needed all of it's features, but more because I wanted something that was built like a tank, and would hold up to years of use in a variety of outdoor/indoor environments. Though very expensive, I thought the D200 was worth it if it lasts longer than the more affordable offerings. ..I mention all this only to avoid being criticized for "over-buying".
Anyway, what is the ONE essential picture editing software package that we should buy to take advantage of this wonderful camera?? I say one, because I don't think my wife will be too keen on moving images through three or four different applications to make fairly minor adjustments. ...She may take 30 pics/month, so were not talking huge project sizes. ..Perhaps a starting point would be if someone could briefly explain the differences between Aperture and Photoshop and why someone would have both. ..And if forced to pick just one of them, which would you chose? The iPhoto that came with our new iMac is outrageously cool! ..But it offers very limited adjustment tools.
IMAC (early 2006)   Mac OS X (10.4.4)   1.5 G Ram
IMAC (early 2006)   Mac OS X (10.4.4)   1.5 G Ram

Answer 1

I'll relate how I use both Aperture and Photoshop and why I do what I do so you can come to your own conclusions. I have been using Aperture since it first came out and Photoshop for 10 years.
Though Aperture was originally thought to be a Photoshop competitor (back when it was first released), it is not. Rather, it is a very good front-end to Photoshop. I use Aperture to read in my digital photos from my Nikon camera so I can easily go through them and pick out the ones I want. I should note that generally when I go out and do a "shoot", it is not uncommon for me to run through 200 or more pictures. So I have a significant sorting and selecting process when I get home to my computer. Photoshop is NOT good at this, that is why Adobe added Bridge a couple of years ago. Aperture is more of a competitor to Bridge (though Bridge comes free with Photoshop). I should note that though I like Bridge, Aperture has it beat hands down when it comes to letting me review my photos.
As I have learned to use Aperture, it has taken over many of the front-end adjustments I used to make in Bridge and Photoshop. Things like adjusting the saturation, brightness, contrast, levels, cropping, leveling and sharpening were what I formerly did with my Adobe products, but now instead very easily do with Aperture. I prefer doing these adjustment in Aperture since they are non-destructive to my original file, and the adjustments are kept in a XML sidecar file so the adjusted image file is very small and saves me lots of disk space.
If I like what I see in Aperture, then I can easily publish (books or web) or print from there. Aperture has some great web generation features in it. But, these features are not flexible with their format styles and are geared for use by professional photographers who want to show their work to their clients. But still, it is fun to easily create a web site. And if you have a .MAC account, there is a very nice fit between the two productions. (Note: you can also get this same functionality with more page creation flexibility with Apple's iWeb and to a certain degree with iPhoto).
Aperture has also helped me organize my photo library so that I can easily find that one photo, or set of photos, I want, when I want them.
So, if I'm using Aperture more-and-more, what am I using Photoshop for? As good as Aperture is, and it is getting better, it is no competitor for what Photoshop does best. I wouldn't think of using anything but Photoshop when I need to do "serious" work on my photos. Image repair and restoration, patching, touchups, very fine adjustments, special effects, application of filters, noise reduction, to name a few things, are (to me) Photoshop only. Also, for now, Photoshop has a much better zoom and image inspection feature than does Aperture. Though the loop in Aperture is useful, I find it to be a bit more klunky than the zoom feature in Photoshop.
Both programs are pricey, though Apple has made Aperture a lot more attractive with the recent price reduction from $499 to $299.
And, I agree. Elements is also an excellent choice, though I'm not sure if it supports RAW files the same way Photoshop does. I'm sure the Adobe site will have that information.
Good luck, and congratulations on the new D200. Your wife will really like it.
Jeff Weinberg