Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Aperture or Lightroom ??  (Read 33205 times)
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2889



WWW
« Reply #120 on: July 11, 2014, 02:58:45 AM »
ReplyReply

I think it is a bit early to pass judgement on how it all fit together until we see a bit more of what Apple has envisioned.

And that was my point in asking "Well, you (in the sense "one") don't have to make a decision right now, do you? And seriously why would you?"

I would probably wait and see, but I'd be hugely unsettled and maybe I might be upping sticks. But even if I wanted control of my pictures/workflow to be limited to one brand of computer, it's wishful thinking to imagine that Photos is going to provide an equivalent experience without a barking pack of plugins. Today's "monolithic" (your word) Aperture/LR give most users a coherent "pro" workflow with no need for plugins, and while some of these Photos apps will be little diamonds, I suspect putting Humpty Dumpty back together again will prove too much of a Rube Goldberg / Heath Robinson exercise for the mass of Aperture/LR users.
Logged

Bob Rockefeller
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 160



WWW
« Reply #121 on: July 11, 2014, 06:44:23 AM »
ReplyReply

And that was my point in asking "Well, you (in the sense "one") don't have to make a decision right now, do you? And seriously why would you?"

I would probably wait and see, but I'd be hugely unsettled and maybe I might be upping sticks. But even if I wanted control of my pictures/workflow to be limited to one brand of computer, it's wishful thinking to imagine that Photos is going to provide an equivalent experience without a barking pack of plugins. Today's "monolithic" (your word) Aperture/LR give most users a coherent "pro" workflow with no need for plugins, and while some of these Photos apps will be little diamonds, I suspect putting Humpty Dumpty back together again will prove too much of a Rube Goldberg / Heath Robinson exercise for the mass of Aperture/LR users.

Well, I may not have to decide right now, but I might need to.

It's been reported that I'll be able to transfer metadata and organizational structure (projects, folders, albums) from Aperture into Photos. And I think I've read that Apple said adjustments would transfer as well. So no information would be lost. But the time spent on adjustments could be lost if Photos' doesn't have the adjustment tools required moving ahead.

But what Photos will provide is simply not known. You speculate that there may be a need for a "barking pack of plugins" and an "Rube Goldberg / Heath Robinson exercise" from no basis of fact. I can as easily speculate that plug-ins will be easily installed as Aperture-style adjustment bricks, so I might be free to install a brick for my favorite noise reductions plug-in (like DeNoise or Neat Image), another for lens corrections (perhaps DxO Optics), and so on. If Photos started with the same bricks as Aperture has today, there would only need to be a couple plug-ins to be "complete" enough for me. Also said from no basis in fact.

My "problem" is that Aperture was my first end-to-end tool and it fits my approach very well (or I learned my approach from Aperture). Neither Lightroom nor Capture One Pro suit me nearly as well (even though both programs are arguably excellent tools).
Logged

Bob
-----------------
Robert J. Rockefeller
Richmond Hill, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 188


« Reply #122 on: July 11, 2014, 08:14:17 AM »
ReplyReply

And that was my point in asking "Well, you (in the sense "one") don't have to make a decision right now, do you? And seriously why would you?"

I would probably wait and see, but I'd be hugely unsettled and maybe I might be upping sticks. But even if I wanted control of my pictures/workflow to be limited to one brand of computer, it's wishful thinking to imagine that Photos is going to provide an equivalent experience without a barking pack of plugins. Today's "monolithic" (your word) Aperture/LR give most users a coherent "pro" workflow with no need for plugins, and while some of these Photos apps will be little diamonds, I suspect putting Humpty Dumpty back together again will prove too much of a Rube Goldberg / Heath Robinson exercise for the mass of Aperture/LR users.

Your premise is all speculation. Mine too. As I offered earlier ... even the Apple engineers coding the new Photos app for OS X don't likely know exactly what the specific feature set v1 will ship with or at what pace further development will follow. This belief that a multitude of plugins will be necessary may be unfounded ... or that plugins for this paradigm will be as disjointed, convoluted or incoherent as we know plugins to be today. We simply don't have enough information to make an informed appraisal ... yet. Everything shared by Apple thus far is just a few sentences of generalities that Aperture and iPhotos will be replaced ... and a single image showing some aspects of the new applications interface. I would think we would have better luck winning the lottery than guessing correctly what the new offering will include or be capable of.

It is also a bit unfair to claim that "pro" Aperture and even Lightroom users can use either app without requiring the addition of plugins. While it may be true that either have eliminated the need for such options over their existence, neither is totally "complete" after many years in the marketplace. It is quite rare not to have supplemental plugins in a professional workflow with these apps ... I would estimate those users earning at least a partial income employing Aperture or Lr, who do not make use of such options are in the extreme minority.

Since I have already trusted my photo workflow for over 22 years to a single brand of computer ... I think I can manage a little bit longer to see what Apple actually offers before making a decision.
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2889



WWW
« Reply #123 on: July 11, 2014, 08:27:21 AM »
ReplyReply

But what Photos will provide is simply not known. You speculate that there may be a need for a "barking pack of plugins" and an "Rube Goldberg / Heath Robinson exercise" from no basis of fact.

We'll see. But thinking it will satisfy the typical Aperture/Lr user is wishful thinking too, and unlike Aperture in its early days Photos won't be recovering the investment by shifting more Apple boxes, so why would they invest in it to the level required by that type of user? Follow the money is usually a pretty good principle.
Logged

Bob Rockefeller
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 160



WWW
« Reply #124 on: July 16, 2014, 02:30:47 PM »
ReplyReply

We'll see. But thinking it will satisfy the typical Aperture/Lr user is wishful thinking too, and unlike Aperture in its early days Photos won't be recovering the investment by shifting more Apple boxes, so why would they invest in it to the level required by that type of user? Follow the money is usually a pretty good principle.

I haven't suggested that Apple will be able to replace Aperture for my needs. But I haven't suggested that they won't. No one, outside of Apple at least, knows.

What I do know is that I don't feel comfortable in Lightroom. It's a great program, has a ton of features, is the workhorse of many photographers, enjoys wide-spread support and is an solid Adobe product. I've own it, I've used it, and I have v5.5 installed now with a bunch of images in its catalog. Still...

I'm still pounding away trying to get into Capture One Pro 7. I can arguably beat Lightroom at the quality of its raw conversions. But its DAM features are behind Lightroom's and WAY behind Aperture's. Sad
Logged

Bob
-----------------
Robert J. Rockefeller
Richmond Hill, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
ppmax2
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 40


« Reply #125 on: July 17, 2014, 10:10:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Agreed with all of the above. I bought C1 recently and feel its RAW processing is top notch. And while I like it better than LR, it is substantially behind in DAM...so it's a difficult choice:
Go with something that is good in many areas (LR);
Go with something that is great in some but poor in others (C1);
Stick with something that is great in many areas but is EOL'd (Aperture) and pray for the next great thing?

I've also spent substantial time with RawTherapee lately and with the help of a board member here am discovering that this is a serious tool with some excellent features...but also no DAM.

I'm a bit surprised there aren't more DAM solutions out there on par with Aperture. Anyone who claims LR is that tool doesn't know what they are missing Wink

<runs for cover!>

pp

Logged
mj-perini
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #126 on: July 17, 2014, 11:29:39 PM »
ReplyReply

[quote author=Paul Perreault

I'm a bit surprised there aren't more DAM solutions out there on par with Aperture. Anyone who claims LR is that tool doesn't know what they are missing Wink


Paul and Bob hit on something that mystifies me as well. Aperture invented the integrated the non destructive DAM / Converter / Editor /Print workflow App which was a brilliant invention. It's analog like workflow (Inviolet Masters = negatives, Versions =print recipe (s) Projects = Job Jacket etc. It made perfect sense to me.
So Like Bob, I learned my approach from Aperture.  Apple announced it with great fanfare, and then dragged their feet ever since.
V1 was roundly criticized of the Managed library only design , It was modified to allow Referenced Libraries. I for one think the managed library approach is brilliant.
I keep a main library for personal work, and annual libraries for commercial work, and never lose anything. I love it
It mystifies me also that no one else has offered anything similar as a front end.
My daughter uses lightroom I use Aperture. I own lightroom and have had to use it several times when Aperture became unusable during certain version upgrades.
I really hate using it.  I realize it is partly that I learned Aperture first, because many more folks use lightroom than Aperture.
I've upgraded Lightroom continually and have purchased v5.5  but pointing lightroom to a catalog you have to design and maintain yourself seems like a huge step backwards. As does the the module system.
So I'm going forward with Aperture, Lightroom and Capture 1 and waiting to see what Apple does with Photos though it is doubtful that Apple would have felt it necessary to announce a cesation of development of Aperture if their intent was to duplicate all of it's functionality in Photos.
I wish they would sell the Aperture DAM to Capture1 and we might have something.



Logged
Bob Rockefeller
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 160



WWW
« Reply #127 on: July 18, 2014, 06:42:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Paul Perreault
I wish they would sell the Aperture DAM to Capture1 and we might have something.
[/quote

Wouldn't that be great! The best of both.
Logged

Bob
-----------------
Robert J. Rockefeller
Richmond Hill, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 188


« Reply #128 on: July 18, 2014, 09:51:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Paul Perreault
I wish they would sell the Aperture DAM to Capture1 and we might have something.


Phase One already has a damn fine DAM ... Media Pro (formerly Expression Media; formerly iView Media Pro) ... been using it for my long term archive for years ... does a great job.
Logged
trichardlin
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51


« Reply #129 on: July 20, 2014, 08:15:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Phase One already has a damn fine DAM ... Media Pro (formerly Expression Media; formerly iView Media Pro) ... been using it for my long term archive for years ... does a great job.

Butch, I am seriously considering giving C1 a try.  My question is, how well do C1 and Media Pro work together.    Thanks.
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3637



WWW
« Reply #130 on: July 24, 2014, 04:08:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Aperture's analog like workflow (Inviolet Masters = negatives, Versions =print recipe (s) Projects = Job Jacket etc. It made perfect sense to me.
LR does basically the same, a project is simply a folder by another name. Depending on your workflow, collections [dumb or smart] could also do the same thing as projects.

Quote
V1 was roundly criticized of the Managed library only design , It was modified to allow Referenced Libraries. I for one think the managed library approach is brilliant.
I keep a main library for personal work, and annual libraries for commercial work, and never lose anything. I love it
It mystifies me also that no one else has offered anything similar as a front end.
Maybe it's because it isn't a very good system. Tongue

Quote
My daughter uses lightroom I use Aperture. I own lightroom and have had to use it several times when Aperture became unusable during certain version upgrades.
And you kept using a flakey programme?  Huh

Quote
I really hate using it [LR].  I realize it is partly that I learned Aperture first, because many more folks use lightroom than Aperture.
I've upgraded Lightroom continually and have purchased v5.5  but pointing lightroom to a catalog you have to design and maintain yourself seems like a huge step backwards. As does the the module system.
Funny as I've never had to design[??] and maintain any catalogues in LR.
I simply have the single catalogue with everything in, which LR opens when it starts and backs up when it closes. Job done.
Having multiple libraries or catalogues cripples one of the biggest strengths of a DAM app, i.e. being able to organise and access all your work in a single place.
Sounds like you are using LR incorrectly and blaming LR for the issues.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2014, 04:13:27 PM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Daniel Salazar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


« Reply #131 on: July 28, 2014, 11:59:28 AM »
ReplyReply

hi ButchM, I already tried C1 with Media Pro, and the system is really complicate and doe not give you the effect we are use to in Aperture, neither Lightroom has it even jjj saids the opposite, however, makes me ask what is the best for me, in this case, might be Lightroom, even though is not natural and forces you to have several modules with different shortcuts. Anyhow, is an all-rounder that makes you have almost everything we are used to.
Logged
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 188


« Reply #132 on: July 28, 2014, 03:03:42 PM »
ReplyReply

hi ButchM, I already tried C1 with Media Pro, and the system is really complicate and doe not give you the effect we are use to in Aperture, neither Lightroom has it even jjj saids the opposite, however, makes me ask what is the best for me, in this case, might be Lightroom, even though is not natural and forces you to have several modules with different shortcuts. Anyhow, is an all-rounder that makes you have almost everything we are used to.

Well ..... two points ... 1) I have not worked with Media Pro and C1 together as a unified workflow, you may be correct that it is not as ideal as Lr or Aperture. 2) I don't think there is any other option that closely replicates the form and function that is Aperture ... other than Lightroom.

My point was, and still is, Media Pro is an outstanding DAM. It is not a One-Stop-Shop for workflow needs ... but if you need to search, sort and otherwise put your hands on assets quickly, easily and efficiently ... it does the job very we'll and was doing that job long before Aperture or Lightroom were ever conceived. If Phase One can ever meld C1 and MP ... then they may have an ideal direct competitor for Lr ... something that would be beneficial to everyone. Competition is good in the marketplace.

The plus of Media Pro I have always appreciated is it can catalog and reference almost any digital file you can store on your computer. It may not always be able to properly allow you to view or easily open or edit the file's content ...but it will enable you to identify and locate the file quickly for use elsewhere.
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3637



WWW
« Reply #133 on: July 29, 2014, 06:40:28 AM »
ReplyReply

hi ButchM, I already tried C1 with Media Pro, and the system is really complicate and doe not give you the effect we are use to in Aperture, neither Lightroom has it even jjj saids the opposite, however, makes me ask what is the best for me, in this case, might be Lightroom, even though is not natural and forces you to have several modules with different shortcuts. Anyhow, is an all-rounder that makes you have almost everything we are used to.
The different modules are simply not the issue that people make out. In use there's very little difference between them and clicking on an alternative tab in Ap. Shortcuts are as far as I recall consistent in their meaning in LR, though some are specific to the module they apply to. Though by say invoking a Dev module shortcut in Library you can go straight to the dev module and the tool in question.
Almost every single criticism I have heard about LR from those used to Ap is solved by them learning to use the programme properly. It's worth remembering that there's a very simple reason why LR had such a big uptake amongst photographers over Ap - ease of use. LR decided to start afresh with it's user interface and not cling onto old UIs like Ap has done with its messy 20th century look and feel.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2014, 06:43:04 AM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3637



WWW
« Reply #134 on: July 29, 2014, 06:46:04 AM »
ReplyReply

The plus of Media Pro I have always appreciated is it can catalog and reference almost any digital file you can store on your computer.
Which I wish LR could also do.

Quote
It may not always be able to properly allow you to view or easily open or edit the file's content
Which is a serious gotcha though.  Undecided
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 188


« Reply #135 on: July 29, 2014, 09:36:59 AM »
ReplyReply


Which is a serious gotcha though.  Undecided

Not really, the list of what MP can't handle is very short and the files relatively obscure.

As photographers, it's nice that Lightroom can handle our images. (Though I don't understand what it took until v5 in order to catalog png files.) Media Pro is for our other files what Aperture/Lr is for photos. (Minus the RAW processor)

We create, use and depend on much more than just photos. Utilizing a DAM that is not limited to only image files is a true asset in itself.

I know I have a mountain of pdf, Word, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, InDesign documents for contracts, estimates, proposals, designs, presentations, wedding and portrait albums etc. As well as tons of audio, video and miscellaneous other digital files that come in handy or need to be located quickly. Many of these files, I would not want in my image library as there is enough strain on resources already without the additional data that would need to be cataloged.

Sure, the OS can pick up some of this task for searching out items ... though Media Pro can get the job done even when the files you are seeking are not live on your system ... There are days I would be lost without it.
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3637



WWW
« Reply #136 on: July 29, 2014, 09:59:11 AM »
ReplyReply

I still wish LR catalogued more, it doesn't have to be able to edit the files or anything [just pass them onto whatever programme is appropriate] but a limited range of images types are not the only assets related to photography. Even some text files with things like subject's names or location info could be handy for keywording. But all image files should be supported, again no editing support needed, just like with say PSDs which get passed on to PS.
Ideally it would be the only DAM you need as having several DAMs to organise things is like having many LR catalogues for your work, it kind of defeats the purpose of what the programmes are meant do.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 188


« Reply #137 on: July 29, 2014, 04:44:30 PM »
ReplyReply


Ideally it would be the only DAM you need as having several DAMs to organise things is like having many LR catalogues for your work, it kind of defeats the purpose of what the programmes are meant do.

That's why I use Media Pro for my main DAM. I have EVERYTHING in one large library (actually 2) I have one for commercial, weddings and portraits then another that is strictly sports (which is about 70% of my work) along with all the other associated other files I mentioned earlier. There are limits as to what you can keep in a single library. Just my DSLR image files date back to 2000 and I have 25 years of negs, chromes and prints I am slowly adding to the archive as I have the time and inclination to scan, process and archive them.

I don't consider Aperture or Lightroom as my sole DAM solution, they are my workflow solutions for current/recent projects that also offer some DAM options ... my long-term DAM has always been Media Pro. Which is why I followed the app along from iView/Expressions/Media Pro evolution (or de-evolution  Wink )
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3637



WWW
« Reply #138 on: July 29, 2014, 05:32:33 PM »
ReplyReply

I played with Media Pro quite a few years back, but for some reason I now cannot recall it didn't do it for me.
The seamless integration of catalogue and the other modules in LR is what I particularly like about the LR workflow, Phase should try and do that with Phase One as that would give LR some really serious competition.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Bob Rockefeller
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 160



WWW
« Reply #139 on: July 29, 2014, 06:04:16 PM »
ReplyReply

The different modules are simply not the issue that people make out. In use there's very little difference between them and clicking on an alternative tab in Ap. Shortcuts are as far as I recall consistent in their meaning in LR, though some are specific to the module they apply to. Though by say invoking a Dev module shortcut in Library you can go straight to the dev module and the tool in question.
Almost every single criticism I have heard about LR from those used to Ap is solved by them learning to use the programme properly. It's worth remembering that there's a very simple reason why LR had such a big uptake amongst photographers over Ap - ease of use. LR decided to start afresh with it's user interface and not cling onto old UIs like Ap has done with its messy 20th century look and feel.

The modal switch is not just between the Library and Develop modules. If you're making a book in Aperture, you can make adjustments to the image by changing tabs, not going back to a module.

And Lightroom's acceptance advantage probably has more to do with the fact that it's cross-platform than any perceived ease of use.
Logged

Bob
-----------------
Robert J. Rockefeller
Richmond Hill, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad