Aperture for cheap...

[Michael73]

For the better part of 4 months I have been torn - Aperture vs. Lightroom and now the decision has come to a head.

I WAS leaning towards Aperture but now there's all this talk about lack of RAW support for the latest cameras and whether Apple is really committed to this app all with the delay in coming out with v2.0. So, then I started to lean towards Lightroom. Either way, I was going to purchase this app using a student discount.

Yesterday at lunch I walked into my local CompUSA (which is closing) and find Aperture 1.5 (Retail, not student edition) for 40% off - $179.99 which has made me reconsider my Lightroom decision.

What to do? For $179.99 would you buy Aperture over Lightroom? Someone please help me make up my mind.

A bit of background - I'm purely an amateur photographer shooting the normal family, events and vacations type things. At this point there are just certain limitations to iPhoto such as management of the 8-10,000 photos, meta-data analysis, keyword tagging, etc. which seem could benefit from a more pro app.

 

[yeroen]

There was a semi-official announcement on the Apple boards from the Apple product manager in charge of Aperture Development that a major update was in the works, although as usual, we're left to guess the timeline of the release.

I use and much prefer Aperture to Lightroom. But if I absolutely had to purchase one today, I'd go with Lightroom, and then get Aperture 2.0 as soon as it was released. It's a bit extravagant, but I'd be getting the best of both worlds.

 

[John Purple]

I'm an amateur like you and I am using Aperture 1.5.6 for all the pics I shoot with my Canon 5d. I am quite happy with Aperture and tried Lightroom for the same reasons you are considering to buy it. Maybe it's because I am used to Aperture but I like Apperture better than LR. But it is a really difficult decision because it's not possible to transfer the photos from Aperture to Lighroom or viceversa without loosing nearly all information, sorting and editing. Of course you allways can move the original raw-file from one to the other.
On the other hand the responsible officer at Apple just stated on the Apple site that they are working hard on Aperture and that a new release with a lot of new features and support for the new cameras will be delivered soon.
If your camera(s) is (are) supported now, you might buy Aperture. Amateurs don't tend to buy new cameras as frequently as professionals do
A cousin of mine is professional (movie sets and portraits) and he is totally happy with Aperture. He even stopped to shoot pictures in raw format as Aperture allows him to do the same editing on jpg (white balance, contrast etc) and in the same way as he did on raw (which you can't do with e.g. PS). He says that he doesn't need raw anymore which enables him to shoot hundreds of photos more with one single chip at a shooting and saves a lot of space and time while editing after the shootings. (BTW if you use jpg, Aperture supports any camera).

 

[compuwar]

Aperture allows him to do the same editing on jpg (white balance, contrast etc) and in the same way as he did on raw (which you can't do with e.g. PS).

You most certainly can run your JPEGs through the raw interface in Photoshop.

 

[compuwar]

What to do? For $179.99 would you buy Aperture over Lightroom? Someone please help me make up my mind.

I _really_ like Aperture's workflow. It's slow as a dog, and I'm _very_ worried by Apple's lack of timely support for the newer Nikon bodies. I don't yet have a D3, and for my non-Fine Art commercial work, I really don't need the organization at this point in time or I'd ditch Aperture for Lightroom or something else now. Eventually, I think I'll just end up trying to export out the metadata and saving the files in something like PhotoOrganizer as a long-term solution, then I'll just need a way to import into whatever tool I want to use (or maybe it's time to look at working on a client to hook into PO.)

If you're not stressed about raw files, then I think Aperture's a good idea, if you are, then I think there are better solutions, though I'm considering just running all my raw files through NX and planting TIFFs in Aperture anyway- just to get the best conversion possible.

 

[nutmac]

A cousin of mine is professional (movie sets and portraits) and he is totally happy with Aperture. He even stopped to shoot pictures in raw format as Aperture allows him to do the same editing on jpg (white balance, contrast etc) and in the same way as he did on raw (which you can't do with e.g. PS). He says that he doesn't need raw anymore which enables him to shoot hundreds of photos more with one single chip at a shooting and saves a lot of space and time while editing after the shootings. (BTW if you use jpg, Aperture supports any camera).

Well, I am not a professional photographer by any stretch of the imagination, but JPEG is far more limited than RAW on Aperture. Lot of it has to do with JPEG's smaller color depth (8-bit vs. 12-bit or more with RAW), so for instance, you can't perform "miracle" over/underexposure fixes that you can with RAW.

Aperture's RAW arrives slower than Adobe, but in most cases, Apple adds support within two point OS releases following the release of new Canon/Nikon SLR models. 10.5.2 might add support for Nikon D3 and D300 (10.5.3 certainly should), but as for Canon EOS 450D (aka Digital Rebel XSi), probably 10.5.3 at the earliest.

As for picking up Aperture 1.5 at $179, I would wait for 2.0, particularly if you can get Aperture at educational discount ($149).

 

[ChrisA]

JPEG is far more limited than RAW on Aperture. Lot of it has to do with JPEG's smaller color depth (8-bit vs. 12-bit or more with RAW), so for instance, you can't perform "miracle" over/underexposure fixes that you can with RAW.

That guy who went to shooting JPJ is a professional and I bet he gets just about every shot "dead on" in camera.

I've heard from others who shoot events. They do JPJ because it saves them a ton of time in post processing.

 

[Grimace]

Just to be fair, I don't think anyone at Apple ever said anything about a major update. It was an "update" that will fix the problem of supported cameras, especially the new ones like the D3, D300, 1Ds mkIII.

 

[hakuryuu]

I use Lightroom myself. I tried out Aperture before buying Lightroom(got it for $100 through UCLA) and didn't really like the workflow and organization of the UI. I do shoot raw though and I find it to be just as fast in it's handling of raw files as it does jpegs whereas I felt raw wasn't as quick in Aperture.

 

[yeroen]

Just to be fair, I don't think anyone at Apple ever said anything about a major update. It was an "update" that will fix the problem of supported cameras, especially the new ones like the D3, D300, 1Ds mkIII.

Joe Schorr, Sr. Product Manager for Photo Applications, did make mention of an upgrade that featured, aside from extended RAW support, 'exciting new features'.

Watch "exciting new features" be something completely lame like 'export photos wirelessly to your iPhone'

 

[Michael73]

But it is a really difficult decision because it's not possible to transfer the photos from Aperture to Lighroom or viceversa without loosing nearly all information, sorting and editing.

I've got quite a bit of time and effort invested in keyword and event tagging and I'd hate to lose it. Since Aperture is an Apple app, will it pick up this information for iPhoto? Since LR isn't would I lose all that data?

I _really_ like Aperture's workflow. It's slow as a dog,

I'm not too concerned with this although I have read quite a bit about people having performance issues with Aperture. As I explained in another thread on the MP forum, after months and months of having real issues with my machine, Apple has really come through with flying colors and agreed to replace my machine with a brand new MacPro 2.8 Octo, 4GB RAM and nVidia 8800GT. If this hoss of a machine can't handle Aperture, I don't know what can!

As for picking up Aperture 1.5 at $179, I would wait for 2.0, particularly if you can get Aperture at educational discount ($149).

I always understood that purchasing Apple software under a student discount didn't entitle you to upgrades; that is why the $179 price for a full retail copy piqued my interest. I figured when v2.0 came out I could get it for a $99 upgrade price (or something like that) whereas I'd have to go out and drop another $149 if I bought the edu version.

 

[nutmac]

I always understood that purchasing Apple software under a student discount didn't entitle you to upgrades; that is why the $179 price for a full retail copy piqued my interest. I figured when v2.0 came out I could get it for a $99 upgrade price (or something like that) whereas I'd have to go out and drop another $149 if I bought the edu version.

True, but my original point is that 2.0 is around the corner (as suggested by their manager's post at Apple's discussion board). So if you can, I would wait for 2.0 and purchase it at educational discount. Who knows? It might be released before 30-day trial runs out (although my guess is slightly later than that).

 

[tersono]

I have to say that I use both (Aperture for my own purpose and Lightroom at work), and MUCH prefer Aperture, despite its limitations.

I'd go for Aperture - especially at that price - provided it supports your camera.