Toronto Photography Meetup Group

So this is my 8000th post at TPMG.... ya 8000! I must be addicted. But given that I have been an organizer for a long time, its no surprise I guess.

Anyhow -- some of you know that I am probably going to be picking up a macbook pro 13" in the next month and a bit, after my gig in Whitehorse. Switching to the mac platform is going to be a big leap for me... although I have been doing a lot of work recently on our new iMac and Macbook pro in my office, as I had to setup the software and update the system to be current, so I am getting some quality time in learning how things work on the mac platform. Until now, my only real experience has been printing with the iMac's and Pikto... otherwise, I really had no clue how they operate.

Anyhow .. I am wondering whether I should invest in lightroom or aperture. Currently I am using ACDSee Pro4 for my file management, and I do my editing in Photoshop CS5.

I would like to hear constructive feedback from users of both packages. Thanks so much for your thoughts.

Having never used Aperture and been only using Adobe products, my first inclination would be to stick with LR. A couple of thoughts around this, one, if you ever do go back to PC it should be easier to port the LR catalog over so you're not tying yourself into one vendor/platform for the actual hardware. Two, Apple being secretive and not really publishing future plans makes changes to Aperture less tranparent so you'll never know what they're really going to do with the product. It may live a long lustrous life but with Apple you just never know (take Final Cut for example).

At the end of the day, I'm not sure one product is better than the other so it's really a toss up but I would assume if you're going to continue to use PS it would integrate better with LR in the long run.

David, it's such a personal decision that your best best is to honestly download free trials of both of them and try both of them out. Then get the one you like better. Fanboism aside, I think these days both products are very mature and their feature sets are extremely similar if not the same.

This one will probably be tricky. I use Lightroom and love it, but from what I read, Aperature is just as good. I guess you would have to play with both and see which workflow/interface you like better. Lightroom is cross platform; more resources, more tutorials, more plugins, etc. With aperature, you might be limiting yourself, but thats just off the top of my head as I've never used Aperature.

A Buddy of mine has Capture One and it's pretty sweet.
I have lightroom on both Mac and PC and love that the licenses works on both and I'm on the same platform regardless of OS.

I'm used to Aperture and every time I decide to try Lightroom (three times now) I just get frustrated at the layout, it's not very intuitive to me. Aperture puts most of its functionality right in front of you. Lightroom doesn't (in my experience).

The key point here being you're used to it. People used to Lightroom would likely say the same thing about Aperture. Layout, etc in the end is what makes it very personal.

I used this resource back when I picked up my D80 and needed something more powerful than iPhoto to process RAW files... which is about four years ago:

http://photo.rwboyer.com/

His stuff on Aperture and file management are very useful. However, most of his writing on the matter is probably all in his ebooks now. As a user of both applications, he much prefers Aperture for managing his images. Maybe if you dig through the site you can find some of his old articles. He also contributes regularly to the Apple forums on Aperture.

I haven't tried Lightroom, and I could always give my buddy at Adobe a call if I wanted to.

Part of me agrees with Dimitris, but to counter-argue: rumours to the effect of Jobs' legacy for Apple is about the future of digital photography, and if you believe them then I think they will have a strong commitment to photography in the future.

Photo management software tends to play leap-frog, so one is always stronger than the other. Right now I think LR4 will leap ahead for a little while.

Photo syncing to the iPad works well too... if that may be a factor.

Ultimately, try them for yourself. They both have free trials.

Three questions:
1. Do you have a desktop computer?
2. Will it still be used?
3. Do you plan on using the new macbook computer for *all* of your photo editing work?

If a windows PC is ever still on your horizon, stick with LR, because you can install it to both platforms, and the LR license allows you to install to two computers.

I have lightroom and Capture One. Capture One has some powerful features much faster on large files plus some good networking & tether features. Once you get use to the weird data base Lightroom does 90% of everything I need to do while offering an excellent batch workflow.

Yeah... what Metrix said. I could make due with either app depending on the job.

Personally, not a big fan of Aperture though.

+1

Other than that, LR4 beta seems to have better processing engine than Aperture 3, but Aperture 4 is due soon, based on Aperture 1 -3 release cycle. Also, Aperture 3 is cheaper from App Store than LR3 off the shelf.

I was at a workshop over a year ago with Seren Dipity and we tethered to a CaptureOne system and it would not record the image on the local camera card - it would only drop the file on the Mac. Maybe it was a missed setting but we could not find it. That said, CaptureOne was waaaayyyy faster at tethered shooting.

I use LR on a PC some I can't comment on Aperture on a Mac.

I think it fair to say at least right now Lightroom has more features - and generally slightly faster updates for raw support. However, aperture has the features I need and want and I love how I don't have to be in a certain module to do certain tasks. In aperture you can jump around and do what u want in any mode or window. But I agree with others - give both a test. Also note on the Mac app store aperture only costs $79.

Congrats on the 8K milestone BTW!

I haves used both. I prefer LR. Mainly because of the clear organization of your photos. They are on your hard rive, and can be accessed even without LR. Aperture, on the other hand hides your photos in a "package." I thought I was deleting an old file and lost all of my photos.

At the time I used aperture, it was incredibly sluggish as compared to LR, although they have probably fixed that by now. They both use the Adobe Camera Raw for their develop module, and since LR is an Adobe product, it works seamlessly for me on my Mac.

For me, I just wish someone had told me that before I bought Aperture!

The tricky thing is setting up export options in LR, but there are great tutorials that will help. I have found much more help with LR than I found with Aperture.

This, from an absolute Apple-head.

I haves used both. I prefer LR. Mainly because of the clear organization of your photos. They are on your hard rive, and can be accessed even without LR. Aperture, on the other hand hides your photos in a "package." I thought I was deleting an old file and lost all of my photos.

At the time I used aperture, it was incredibly sluggish as compared to LR, although they have probably fixed that by now. They both use the Adobe Camera Raw for their develop module, and since LR is an Adobe product, it works seamlessly for me on my Mac.

For me, I just wish someone had told me that before I bought Aperture!

The tricky thing is setting up export options in LR, but there are great tutorials that will help. I have found much more help with LR than I found with Aperture.

This, from an absolute Apple-head.

Actually in Aperture you can have the program store the files in the library (in the package hidden away) or you can run your files via managed reference (you store where and how you want and Aperture just links to them). This is how I run Aperture. All of the edits, adjustments you make are still in the aperture library file (so do not ever delete) but your photos are where you store them (even if on an external drive which does not have to be attached - as the tumb nail and preview versions made are actually also stored in the library).

I will also admit it was a bit sluggish back in the day - but version 3 (with latest updates) runs quite nicely - especially on a newer mac with some extra memory. And this is also from an Apple-head (20 years on a Mac and counting).

Jordan

Why invest in anything...at least not until you've downloaded the FREE demo versions and tried them out for youself. Afterall, yours is the only opinion that matters.

Personally (on my work Mac) after having tried both LR & AP I decided to stick with PS as it's much faster for the work I do.

ya, all good thoughts. Thanks guys.

David

Adorama is having a Valentine's Day sale on Lightroom 3. US$79.95 with "free shipping".

http://www.adorama.com/ABLRV3MWE.html

Try contacting Helen Oster to get the free shipping extended to Canada.

Good luck.

It is B&H's turn - it is only $69.99, today only witrh them:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/7 ... tware.html

Thanks James Cheaper then an upgrade license. I'm hoping Lightroom 4 comes out in the spring so I get a free upgrade.

Just got a 13" MBP last month. I would say stick with Lightroom, especially if you already have catalogs to migrate, it's been running very nicely on my MBP.