I've been trying to decide which DAM to use. Yeah....I have both, and each has their advantages and disadvantages. I've come up with what I think are the best/strongest features of each. Thoughts?
This is a discussion on Aperture vs. Lightroom within the Post Processing Central forums, part of the Photography Information category; I've been trying to decide which DAM to use. Yeah....I have both, and each has their advantages and disadvantages. I've ...
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
I've been trying to decide which DAM to use. Yeah....I have both, and each has their advantages and disadvantages. I've come up with what I think are the best/strongest features of each. Thoughts?
"Work is for people who don't know how to surf"
Nikon D7000 D200, 24-85 4.5/5.6, 50 1.4, SB800
MacBook Pro 15", Aperture 3, Photoshop CS5, Topaz Adjust and DeNoise
The thought has passed my mind whether to switch to LR4.
I've been with Aperture since it came out and it has done what I need it to do.
So I'll stick with Aperture.
In the off chance you are still interested in thoughts on the matter... When I was on windows I used LR, when I moved to mac I moved to aperture. The largest selling point for me was the integration into OSX. I love my things "just working" and hence, my love for my apple eco system. Ive not regretted the change.
I still have not found any good reason to switch from Aperture to LR. Don't know how true but I've heard that Aperture will be coming out with an Aperture upgrade to compete with Photoshop or have features well-liked by Photoshop users.
It'd be interested.
I used Aperture for several years when it first came out and then moved my photo processing to a Windows machine. In the Windows environment, I started using Bridge a few years ago and recently decided to try Lightroom. I'm not interested one iota in the developing & processing capabilities - - strictly in the digital asset management, and I continuously find that I am comparing what I have to what I could do in Aperture. Given my own choices, I would be using Aperture.
I welcome comments on any picture I post... Thanks.
Tripod - (n., archaic.) 1. Image stabilization
Wes Clavey, WB2SVF | My LUG Gallery Album
Scott Bourne switched and he was one of the first to write a book on Aperature for Apple. He explains why here:
WWDC – Apple’s Latest Announcements From A Professional Photographer’s Point-of-View « Photofocus
Here's the post before he actually decided to switch:
Here’s Why I’m Seriously Considering A Permanent Switch To Adobe Lightroom « Photofocus
He has said in his podcasts that the bottom line is that his photos just look better in lightroom.
Last edited by MHampton; 09-11-2012 at 08:07 PM.
I'm a capture one nut now. The only thing C1 doesn't have... well two things, 1. Gradient Filters.... and 2. Better file management. But hey that's what Adobe Bridge is for!!
Regardless, use what you got.
"A camera, like a guitar, is just a box with a hole in it. Until it is placed in the hands of a TRUE artist, it will not make music, only noise."
Ugh hate Bridge lol. My combo of Photo Mechanic+LR4 make me tres happy. I tried aperture about three years ago and thought it was extremely weak in comparison. To each his own and all that but Lightroom lets me blaze through my workflow like it's nothing.
I tried Aperture, but prefer Lightroom myself.
Thanks all for the updated responses. I did read both of Scott Bourne's posts when they were first published, and listened to the PhotoFocus podcasts where he and Rich Harrington (who did a couple of on-line training workshops for Kelby Training on Aperture). His view of the WWDC announcements isn't held by a lot of other pro photographers. A lot have already switched to a rMBP. He's correct that LR4's develop module currently does a better job at processing (mostly because of the revamped PV2012, Highlight/Shadow and other sliders). However, I personally think his views on Apple's direction are way off.
At any rate, I'm still trying to "like" LR4. My biggest struggles are its Module-based workflow (vs. Aperture's project based), heavy dependence on Photoshop for editing, and Blurb as their only book publisher.
"Work is for people who don't know how to surf"
Nikon D7000 D200, 24-85 4.5/5.6, 50 1.4, SB800
MacBook Pro 15", Aperture 3, Photoshop CS5, Topaz Adjust and DeNoise
What editing are you still doing in Photoshop?Originally Posted by Charles Putnam
Any sort of major retouching/cloning/etc. As an example, I had an image where I had to clone out a pink broom. Difficult if not impossible in LR4. Fairly easy in PS CS5 (what I was using at the time), and REALLY easy in Aperture (IMO Aperture did a better job than PS CS5). I did 95%+ of my editing in Aperture and rarely flipped anything to Photoshop. Using LR4, I'm finding that I can edit about 85% of my stuff in just LR4.
Side note/rabbit trail - the Content Aware features in PS CS6 rock.
"Work is for people who don't know how to surf"
Nikon D7000 D200, 24-85 4.5/5.6, 50 1.4, SB800
MacBook Pro 15", Aperture 3, Photoshop CS5, Topaz Adjust and DeNoise
Don't really care for bridge myself but hey, it's either that or buy LR4 just to use the photo management features. Tried Phase One Media Pro, and that's slow and laggy. Don't like it at all.
"A camera, like a guitar, is just a box with a hole in it. Until it is placed in the hands of a TRUE artist, it will not make music, only noise."
I use Photo Mechanic for all of my selecting, rating, previewing, etc. Clean, simple, and fast.
How does it compare to Lightroom? And I'm referring to what you just listed. Assuming you've used LR before.
"A camera, like a guitar, is just a box with a hole in it. Until it is placed in the hands of a TRUE artist, it will not make music, only noise."
Posting Permissions
|
|
Reply With Quote
