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

What can LR offer that is useful compared to Aperture?

F

Freida

Suspended
Original poster
Oct 22, 2010
4,077
5,874
Hello guys,

as per previous thread I think I'll switch to Lightroom as Aperture is no longer really supported but I was wondering. What has LR actually got to offer over Aperture? I mean things that are really useful and make a difference?

I know that I can download a trial and try but I wouldn't really know what to look for so I'm asking those who have switched to kinda tell me what real benefits would I actually gain.

I don't really do heavy editing but I do wanna improve so I wanna know before hand if there is actually enough incentive for me to do the switch or not.

Can someone advice, please?
 
Stability: files are never missing. With Aperture you frequently don't know a file is missing and reconnecting is hit and miss.

Some observations after 2+ years with LR:
Highlight/shadow/curves much better in LR.
The NR function is much stronger. It allows you to turn images into mush. After you back off, you find yourself in the same place Aperture would be.
Most of the adjustment sliders move to stronger impacts than Aperture. For over processed images go for LR.
Dehaze is superb for jpegs. Cleans up the image far better than a detail or contrast adjustment.
Color adjustment tool in LR is primitive.
Local Adjustments are more comprehensive in Aperture and easier to use.
For those that shoot adapted, LR's lens correction tools are excellent.
Having and album that relates to a project in a separate area is inefficient.
Changing modules could be a lot faster.
I used Definition in Aperture, I don't go near Clarity in LR.
Compare view is superb, makes narrowing down multiple shots of the same subject a breeze.
Quicker new camera support with LR. I waited over a year for Fuji XTrans support with Aperture.
LR initial renders are pretty flat (Fuji and Nikon here) = more work. Demosaicing for Fuji and Nikon are not as good.

Do LR for stability. If you want an improvement over Aperture in terms of image processing, look elsewhere. LR is my default -- stability and dam. Iridient for high rated images.
 
Interesting, thank you for your input. I kinda hope that LR would offer much more seeing that it had a version or two released after aperture but that doesn't look like something worth switching and learning for yet. So maybe I will try to bite the bullet and stick with Aperture for now and wait until it really is no longer working at all in macOs and then will see whats new out there. :)

I do use local adjustments with brushes etc. quite often so that would be a shame to have that reduced.
 
Ray2 said:
Stability: files are never missing. With Aperture you frequently don't know a file is missing and reconnecting is hit and miss.

Some observations after 2+ years with LR:
Highlight/shadow/curves much better in LR.
The NR function is much stronger. It allows you to turn images into mush. After you back off, you find yourself in the same place Aperture would be.
Most of the adjustment sliders move to stronger impacts than Aperture. For over processed images go for LR.
Dehaze is superb for jpegs. Cleans up the image far better than a detail or contrast adjustment.
Color adjustment tool in LR is primitive.
Local Adjustments are more comprehensive in Aperture and easier to use.
For those that shoot adapted, LR's lens correction tools are excellent.
Having and album that relates to a project in a separate area is inefficient.
Changing modules could be a lot faster.
I used Definition in Aperture, I don't go near Clarity in LR.
Compare view is superb, makes narrowing down multiple shots of the same subject a breeze.
Quicker new camera support with LR. I waited over a year for Fuji XTrans support with Aperture.
LR initial renders are pretty flat (Fuji and Nikon here) = more work. Demosaicing for Fuji and Nikon are not as good.

Do LR for stability. If you want an improvement over Aperture in terms of image processing, look elsewhere. LR is my default -- stability and dam. Iridient for high rated images.
Click to expand...

I note your comment on flat initial renders for Nikon images. I'd go beyond that to say that they actually look pretty poor, overly dark, etc. You can modify away from that starting place easily enough, but it's so off that I've often wondered if I'm doing something wrong, as I haven't seen much reference to it on the web for the prevalence of Nikon users using LR. I'm using LR 6 standalone, and the default raw decoder listed is Adobe 2012. The initial renders from my Sony mirrorless cameras look much better.

Thoughts from other Nikon shooters using LR? I've been meaning to modify one that seems generalizable (landscape, portrait, etc) and make a preset based upon it for importing, but haven't gotten around to it yet in the hopes that I'm just missing an even more obvious solution.
 
I believe it's pretty well accepted that for Nikon shooters looking for solid initial renders, you don't use Adobe products. Some put the time in to get there with Adobe, some don't know any better and some don't use it. But it's no secret.
 
Be aware that adjustments to the original image are not preserved in Lightroom. You have to export the modified versions from Aperture and import them into Lightroom. There are utilities to help with that. However the ones I tried just didn't work that well for me. And then you have two pictures instead of one. I can't remember if the creation date is preserved, or whether you have to manually change the metadata to keep the original and the modified copy side by side. Maybe someone else can comment about issues with having the two copies.

If you have a managed library there is always the risk of corruption. There are ways to fix a corrupted library, but having so much dependent on one very complex file made me nervous so I use a reference library.

Assuming that you are continuing to add photos to your library, in terms of your time the smaller the initial library and the fewer the adjustments the easier the conversion will be. The longer you wait the more difficult and problematic the conversion will be. For example, for how long is Adobe going to support their conversion plugin? And maybe they support it, but at some point they will likely not be fixing problems resulting from a new MacOS. As time passes resources to help with the conversion dwindle.

If you are comfortable just importing your pictures without edits into Lightroom (assuming they are referenced) when Aperture dies then save yourself the money. Otherwise I'd bite the bullet and convert while conversion utilities and support are available.
 
Just to add to the above.

Totally agree you want an approach to saving your Aperture adjustments. I initially used the functionality LR provided. It takes every Aperture adjusted file and creates a jpeg (perhaps tif as a choice, forget) and dumps them all into one folder. Leaving you with countless images you don't care about and all of them separate from the "project" folder. I trashed that catalog. I them went through every project in Aperture, filtered for 4 and 5 stars and exported those as tif's back to the same project folder. For the import to LR, I turned off its functionality.

LR's library import routine did a stellar job. Can't say the same for C1 where I was initially going.

LR did "find" over 1,000 (out of 33,000) images Aperture should have had a preview for but did not. Nor could it as I reprocessed the entire library prior to the import into LR. As I mentioned above, stability. It was never a solid database, nor was iPhoto, perhaps Photos as well -- I don't use it. The files were there, obviously the links were in Aperture as that's what LR picked up, no previews in Aperture. Nice to have them back.

I also did a major pruning and made sure my ratings and keywords were exactly what I wanted. Better to do those in an app I was very familiar with than something new.

Learn the LR shortcuts for functions you frequently use. They make getting around it far simpler.

If DAM is important to you, LR is the king of the hill. Limited to photography, it also trounces any standalone DAM apps I looked at. If DAM is not important, you have plenty of choices. Most with better demosaicing. Some free, Darktable being excellent in my view.

I had spent about 18 months with LR due to lack of camera support but went back once support for XTrans was available. The moment Apple announced the discontinuation of Aperture I bought the current versions of LR and C1. Played with both for over a year, ran 2,000 like images through all 3. In the end my conclusions were: Aperture is dead and it's only a matter of time irrespective of how much I like it. LR is solid, I gave up some excellence on the Develop side but DAM was superb and it just worked. C1 (v7 & 8) Develop side is superb other than the initial renders of color hue. At infrequent times almost comical with what it initially renders for color. Though not the simplest to get my hands around. The DAM side was little better than using a browser, very picky with jpegs and tifs. Sometimes it won't import them. As my better shots typically have jpeg or tif counterparts, this was a hassle. LR was the easy pick. No regrets.
 
Last edited:
so i tried LR yesterday and these were the things I noticed immediately:

- when brushing adjustment in I couldn't find visual representation (like colour overlay)
- the pictures when imported in NEF format look really dull (probably correct though) so when I apply the CMD+U to get the processed look (as Apertura does automatically) the images look a bit like from the new Trolls movie. Too colourful and candy like
- overall, the initial impression I got was that its not as powerful and advanced as I thought it would be and Aperture still appears to be better however it does keep crashing under newest macOs so not sure how to fix that one. :(
 
Freida said:
so i tried LR yesterday and these were the things I noticed immediately:

- when brushing adjustment in I couldn't find visual representation (like colour overlay)
- the pictures when imported in NEF format look really dull (probably correct though) so when I apply the CMD+U to get the processed look (as Apertura does automatically) the images look a bit like from the new Trolls movie. Too colourful and candy like
- overall, the initial impression I got was that its not as powerful and advanced as I thought it would be and Aperture still appears to be better however it does keep crashing under newest macOs so not sure how to fix that one. :(
Click to expand...

- when brushing adjustment in I couldn't find visual representation (like colour overlay)

Keyboard shortcut "o" toggles the colour overlay.

- the pictures when imported in NEF format look really dull (probably correct though) so when I apply the CMD+U to get the processed look (as Apertura does automatically) the images look a bit like from the new Trolls movie. Too colourful and candy like.

Don't worry about and focus on RAW rendering. If you've got the shot, you've got it Frieda. Lr will allow you to do what you need to do to process the shot. If you want to use functions like automatic toning perhaps Photos would be better suited to your needs.

- overall, the initial impression I got was that its not as powerful and advanced as I thought it would be and Aperture still appears to be better however it does keep crashing under newest macOs so not sure how to fix that one. :(

"Initial impression" after less than one day of use is nonsense. Whether it's Lr, Ps or any advanced application, take the time to learn...your photographs deserve that. How long did it take you to learn Aperture to the point where you were comfortable with it?

~ Peter
 
Cheese&Apple said:
- when brushing adjustment in I couldn't find visual representation (like colour overlay)

Keyboard shortcut "o" toggles the colour overlay.

- the pictures when imported in NEF format look really dull (probably correct though) so when I apply the CMD+U to get the processed look (as Apertura does automatically) the images look a bit like from the new Trolls movie. Too colourful and candy like.

Don't worry about and focus on RAW rendering. If you've got the shot, you've got it Frieda. Lr will allow you to do what you need to do to process the shot. If you want to use functions like automatic toning perhaps Photos would be better suited to your needs.

- overall, the initial impression I got was that its not as powerful and advanced as I thought it would be and Aperture still appears to be better however it does keep crashing under newest macOs so not sure how to fix that one. :(

"Initial impression" after less than one day of use is nonsense. Whether it's Lr, Ps or any advanced application, take the time to learn...your photographs deserve that. How long did it take you to learn Aperture to the point where you were comfortable with it?

~ Peter
Click to expand...

You are right of course, thats why i said initial. :)
Anyway, I will watch some tutorials to get better grasp and see where it takes me. Also, in few months there should be an update for LR so maybe that one will be loaded with more stuff :) (I don't want CC I wanna buy outright)
 
Freida said:
so i tried LR yesterday and these were the things I noticed immediately:

- when brushing adjustment in I couldn't find visual representation (like colour overlay)
- the pictures when imported in NEF format look really dull (probably correct though) so when I apply the CMD+U to get the processed look (as Apertura does automatically) the images look a bit like from the new Trolls movie. Too colourful and candy like
- overall, the initial impression I got was that its not as powerful and advanced as I thought it would be and Aperture still appears to be better however it does keep crashing under newest macOs so not sure how to fix that one. :(
Click to expand...
Yep...
 
Freida said:
You are right of course, thats why i said initial. :)
Anyway, I will watch some tutorials to get better grasp and see where it takes me. Also, in few months there should be an update for LR so maybe that one will be loaded with more stuff :) (I don't want CC I wanna buy outright)
Click to expand...
Rumour is you might not be able to buy another standalone version after 6 and it will be CC only.
 
Apple fanboy said:
Rumour is you might not be able to buy another standalone version after 6 and it will be CC only.
Click to expand...
That would be great, if that's the case.

I wonder how many units they've sold as stand alone vs. subscriptions.
 
Freida said:
Hello guys,

as per previous thread I think I'll switch to Lightroom as Aperture is no longer really supported but I was wondering. What has LR actually got to offer over Aperture? I mean things that are really useful and make a difference?

I know that I can download a trial and try but I wouldn't really know what to look for so I'm asking those who have switched to kinda tell me what real benefits would I actually gain.

I don't really do heavy editing but I do wanna improve so I wanna know before hand if there is actually enough incentive for me to do the switch or not.

Can someone advice, please?
Click to expand...
Well might not have anything compelling today, but ....
1) Updates
2) Future OS support
3) A company behing that makes a living with Pro user and does not drop a program like that
Those 3 reason alone (wich it actually is 1 but in 3 points) are worth the switch.

Myself i moved to Affinity Photo for editing pics, it lacks many "additional features", but for plain editing it is great (at least for my needs).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Freida
On1 Software today has Photo 10. Before Thanksgiving they will release Photo RAW to the Plus program members and those that preordered Photo RAW. The product releases to the general public in December. The app can be used as a standalone, plugin to Lr, PS...etc. It has its own raw converters and does all edits non-destructively in sidecars on top of the raw file.

Step one using Aperture....move from using the managed library catalog that is inside the database to a referenced library which stores the images as folders and subfolders in the file system. That will make migrating to most other programs much easier. In the case of Photo RAW, it simply browses the folders of images. https://www.on1.com/products/photo-raw/
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8692574
MCAsan said:
On1 Software today has Photo 10. Before Thanksgiving they will release Photo RAW to the Plus program members and those that preordered Photo RAW. The product releases to the general public in December. The app can be used as a standalone, plugin to Lr, PS...etc. It has its own raw converters and does all edits non-destructively in sidecars on top of the raw file.

Step one using Aperture....move from using the managed library catalog that is inside the database to a referenced library which stores the images as folders and subfolders in the file system. That will make migrating to most other programs much easier. In the case of Photo RAW, it simply browses the folders of images. https://www.on1.com/products/photo-raw/
Click to expand...
Have you tried the Photo RAW? How does it compare to Aperture and how powerful it is in terms of stability and features? I had a quick look and it does look interesting so maybe it might be a better option than LR. Can you share your personal experience if you had any, please?
 
Freida said:
Have you tried the Photo RAW? How does it compare to Aperture and how powerful it is in terms of stability and features? I had a quick look and it does look interesting so maybe it might be a better option than LR. Can you share your personal experience if you had any, please?
Click to expand...

It is not out yet. As I said, it is out to Plus program members and those that preordered on Thanksgiving week. So all my opinions are extrapolated from the previous version. The current version is stable as a rock and has lots of features. As for comparing to Aperture.......I would have to still have and use it to make such a comparison. Why not do the free trial and see if you like it? https://www.on1.com/dl/13/

Just remember that you first need to migrate from managed library to a referenced one using file system folders before you plan to migrate other DAM/editors.
 
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