Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Decided to use Aperture!

R

Razeus

macrumors 603
Original poster
Jul 11, 2008
5,363
2,070
:D

At least for my photos of my family and friends. I usually do this in LR because I always shoot RAW, then process, then export the final jpeg to iPhoto for syncing to my iDevices and sharing.

But in my 2014 new workflow, family shots will be shot jpeg (these types of snaps don't need RAW after all) and imported directly to iPhoto with Aperture doing further enhancements since the two can share the same library.

What I like most is that I know longer have to export a final jpeg since I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) iPhoto/Aperture shows the latest version of a photo and uses that latest version as the actual photo.
 
Razeus said:
:D

At least for my photos of my family and friends. I usually do this in LR because I always shoot RAW, then process, then export the final jpeg to iPhoto for syncing to my iDevices and sharing.

But in my 2014 new workflow, family shots will be shot jpeg (these types of snaps don't need RAW after all) and imported directly to iPhoto with Aperture doing further enhancements since the two can share the same library.

What I like most is that I know longer have to export a final jpeg since I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) iPhoto/Aperture shows the latest version of a photo and uses that latest version as the actual photo.
Click to expand...

you can still continue to shoot in raw and use iphoto/aperture. From what I have seen, RAW files gives you more details. You can use jpegs if disk space is an issue.

If you still want to consider Lightroom, you can sync LR with any iphone/ipad using this method

Cheers
 
Shooting jpg only for snaps makes sense because it saves a lot of disk space and edits faster. The only problem is that sometimes snaps become Photographs and you never know when that's going to happen. Can you shoot jpg+raw and selectively import raw files of good shots?

----------------------------------------------

fa8362: Aperture isn't designed with you in mind, so don't worry.

Dale
 
For me my family snaps are my real photos, while my other shots (landscape / architecture / travel etc) are my snapshots. Those other shots I took just a couple of years ago, some decent enough to be "explored" and fav'ed a lot on flickr and what not, well I couldn't care less if they disappeared forever. Shots of my kids from a few years ago are much more valuable.

Go back and look at the photos you took in say 2010 and see which you care about and wouldn't want to lose.
 
twitch31 said:
For me my family snaps are my real photos, while my other shots (landscape / architecture / travel etc) are my snapshots. Those other shots I took just a couple of years ago, some decent enough to be "explored" and fav'ed a lot on flickr and what not, well I couldn't care less if they disappeared forever. Shots of my kids from a few years ago are much more valuable.

Go back and look at the photos you took in say 2010 and see which you care about and wouldn't want to lose.
Click to expand...

True and well said, but it assumes we all have children. Some of us don't.

Dale
 
Wow. Serious learning curve here. Again, just using it for family photos and outing with friends and integration with iPhoto, but geez, the editing options are all over the place. :eek:
 
To be honest, if you've paid for Lightroom and the methods to integrating Lightroom with your iOS devices work well enough, I can't see why you'd want to go back to using iPhoto even for working with JPEGs. It's certainly simpler but the interface just drives me batty. Periodically I help out my father with his pictures in iPhoto and it makes me appreciate how much better Lightroom is. At the very least I'd rather use Aperture than iPhoto for everything.

My problem with Lightroom for years was the price but that has come down so much (which probably has a lot to do with Apple's aggressive price reductions in Aperture over the same period) and I certainly wouldn't go back to iPhoto. I absolutely understand the point of considering the family pictures as the "real" pictures, which is why I have a hard time considering them less worthy of investing in them.
 
I keep wanting to use it, but I find myself just not using it. I want to be able to open a picture, edit it, and save it. I don't want to import it and make a library and all that.

I know, not designed for that but when I bought it, it sounded that way.
 
Well, I gave it a good try. Sticking to LR. Aperture is way too cumbersome to get stuff done (too many "blocks") and the tools just work better in LR (Recovery, brightness, exposure for example). I get much better results in LR and much faster.
 
fa8362 said:
I don't see the point of aperture.
Click to expand...

That's like saying you don't see the point in LR. It's just another software to do the same type of thing. Personally I don't care for LR and use Aperture for my RAW processing.
 
Sick of Adobe

I have both but use Aperture. I am pretty sick of Adobe's bloat. I have a CC sub, but will be canceling it when the year's up. I have Aperture and FCPX. I no longer use Dreamweaver and Acrobat gets worse with every update until it is a mess for most average users. I never really cared about the rest. As a long time Aperture user, Lightroom was nice, but so much more convoluted than Aperture with all the modules.
 
Sorry I'm a bit late with this, but I too have LR5 and Aperture 3.whatever it is now.

I cannot criticise whoever uses either, because I have managed to produce excellent results with both.

I am however primarily an Aperture user, it suits me better.

Anyone else could equally successfully argue the opposite.
 
robert davies said:
sorry i'm a bit late with this, but i too have lr5 and aperture 3.whatever it is now.

I cannot criticise whoever uses either, because i have managed to produce excellent results with both.

I am however primarily an aperture user, it suits me better.

Anyone else could equally successfully argue the opposite.
Click to expand...

+1
 
Robert Davies said:
Sorry I'm a bit late with this, but I too have LR5 and Aperture 3.whatever it is now.

I cannot criticise whoever uses either, because I have managed to produce excellent results with both.

I am however primarily an Aperture user, it suits me better.

Anyone else could equally successfully argue the opposite.
Click to expand...

+2

I suspect that the 'better' program is the one that you learn how to use. Personally I don't see why you would need both LR5 and Aperture as they seem to do much the same thing.

Aperture suits me and I'll look again when an update get released and see if it is time to move to LR - but I doubt I will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back