A discussion between iphoto and aperture editing abilities

[duncanapple]

Hi all -

I recently downloaded the aperture trial to check it out vs iphoto 09 which I was currently using. Does anyone have an opinion of the editing abilities between the two? I seems to me (and I am just a casual user) that apertures real value lies in the work flow - that is to say the stacks, and how to deal with perhaps thousands of photos in a single shoot.

When dealing with family pictures, vacation pictures, and even integration with imovie (some of my aperture library wasn't even showing up???) it seemed a little cumbersome. I watched all of apples tutorial videos and understand how aperture works, I am just not sure its well suited to general use. If the quality of the RAW editing ability is just as good, I don't think I will be purchasing. Before I delete the trial version, am I missing anything here? I know there are some features that are likely suited to a professional - just sort of curious?

- Chris

 

[zachsilvey]

If you are just organizing and editing family pictures in mostly jpeg iPhoto is the best and even has some better features like face detection. On the other hand if you consider yourself an enthusiast or professional photographer the organizational, metadata, editing and publishing features in Aperture are well worth it. I have been using Aperture for a while now and I enjoy the added amount of control when editing images.

Just a thought: 95% of the pro market uses Adobe Lightroom and many think that Aperture is being phased out. I am making the switch to Lightroom 3 (currently using the beta).

 

[toxic]

in addition to workflow, Aperture has much better metadata and publishing tools, and is designed as a RAW editor. if you don't shoot in RAW, iPhoto is probably better.

Just a thought: 95% of the pro market uses Adobe Lightroom and many think that Aperture is being phased out.

source?

 

[soLoredd]

Hate to wreck the topic but where is the info that Aperture is being phased out? I think the major advantage to Lightroom is it's cross-platform ability. People can go from Windows to Mac in Lightroom and know pretty much how to use the application. Not so with Aperture, being a Mac-only app.

I really, really enjoy Aperture. Not only do I hope it stays around to compete with LR but I think we are all better for it.

 

[FrankieTDouglas]

Just a thought: 95% of the pro market uses Adobe Lightroom and many think that Aperture is being phased out. I am making the switch to Lightroom 3 (currently using the beta).

I think you mean 95% of the professional market that would either use Lightroom or Aperture, use Lightroom (by the way, where is this statistic from?). I see very few people using Aperture. Lightroom dominates in the amateur and enthusiast market. As for the professional world, I see MANY, MANY more people only using Bridge and Photoshop to deal with their files.

 

[zachsilvey]

in addition to workflow, Aperture has much better metadata and publishing tools, and is designed as a RAW editor. if you don't shoot in RAW, iPhoto is probably better.



source?

Sorry, this was a little of an exaggeration this blog post by Adobe shows that about 7.5% of the pros use Aperture primarily.

Hate to wreck the topic but where is the info that Aperture is being phased out? I think the major advantage to Lightroom is it's cross-platform ability. People can go from Windows to Mac in Lightroom and know pretty much how to use the application. Not so with Aperture, being a Mac-only app.

I really, really enjoy Aperture. Not only do I hope it stays around to compete with LR but I think we are all better for it.

This topic was discussed by Scott Bourne on both the Photofocus podcast and blog, he is a well connected (with apple) and well established professional photographer who recently moved to Lightroom after using Aperture religiously for years. One of his major concerns with Aperture going forward was it perceived lack of support and development.