Jump to content
gregwest

Aperture's Demise?

Recommended Posts

Many have noted that Aperture is the sole Pro App that Apple did not update during 2007. Now that MacWorld has come to an end with no mention of the program, it would seem that next week's PMA is the last chance to see Aperture revisited. I'd love to hear thoughts on this. Has Lightroom killed Aperture?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Aperture 2.0 a lot more then 1.5. I have been playing with it for one day and I will order it. In many ways it is superior then LR however LR is still better for edits. Of course for real power for edits you still need Photoshop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I downloaded the trial but wont be paying for the update, its still slow on my 2.16 C2D iMac with 3g's RAM.

 

I put my hard earned cash into Aperture the moment it was first released and had pain ever since, then I was given a copy of Light Room and having spent the past year with it I am impressed.

 

This is the last paid version of Aperture IMO.

 

Not this time Apple, stick to the stuff you are great at and stop trying to walk in Adobes shadow, its never going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took 3 raw images yesterday, imported them into aperture and lightroom.

found they where alot warmer in lightroom, and almost black and white looking in aperture.

Still hate the fact that if you want to sharpen in aperture you have to click on a tools drop

down to open it , and then when you move to the next pic its gone and has to be opened

again. Also am getting a lot of spinning balls especially with the loupe and can here my cooling

fans speed increase when using it. The one thing I do like is the full screen viewing and being

able to change pic's with the scroll wheel, and they load faster than in aperture 1.5.

I'll play with it for a while but think I'm sticking with lightroom.

Edited by neil_jo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feel the need to stick up for Aperture!

 

I love this program. I admit I have very simple needs. All I need a program to collect and tag pictures and do minor alterations (nothing too fancy!) and this program makes it really easy for me to do that.

 

The interface is well designed and provides plenty more room for the image and on dual monitors it is really awesome, with your image on one side and the thumbnails on the other.

 

I tried the trial of LR and didn't like it all, but hey horses for courses and we are lucky to have two products available to duke it out!

 

It works fine on my CD1 iMac. Granted it could be a lot speedier, but the new version is a great improvement, especially the quick preview mode which displays your images immediately albeit in a JPEG preview.

 

The best thing is that they are both available to try out as free downloads!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I took 3 raw images yesterday, imported them into aperture and lightroom.

found they where alot warmer in lightroom, and almost black and white looking in aperture.

Still hate the fact that if you want to sharpen in aperture you have to click on a tools drop

down to open it , and then when you move to the next pic its gone and has to be opened

again. Also am getting a lot of spinning balls especially with the loupe and can here my cooling

fans speed increase when using it. The one thing I do like is the full screen viewing and being

able to change pic's with the scroll wheel, and they load faster than in aperture 1.5.

I'll play with it for a while but think I'm sticking with lightroom.

 

Neil Jo,

 

In the Raw Fine Tuning Setting in the adjustment window you can create pre sets and camera defaults for raw settings. This would allow you to add sharpening to all your raw photos as you opened them. Also I open photos in Aperture, Photoshop and Nikon Capture NX. Almost no difference between Photoshop CS3 and Aperture. I did not like what Nikon Capture NX did. Go figure as I have a D300 and it comes with Capture NX. While there are some cool tools in Capture NX I was not happy with the RAW file performance. I do not get any spinning balls of death but I have a new Mac Pro.

 

Lightroom is a good program. The editing is still better then Aperture but Aperture allows me to get through my photos much fast and organize them. If I really like the photo I open the raw file in Photoshop and start there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been a Lightroom user since the beta was first announced. I love it! It's simple and straightforward to use, but it has the power to get the job done.

 

I gave Aperture 1 a chance when it came out, but found it very confusing and non-intuitive. Last week I gave Aperture 2 a chance and found the interface much better, but there is no feature there to draw me away from Lightroom. Most of the new features in Aperture 2 are copied straight from Lightroom.

 

If I were to start over and choose a product now, I might go with Aperture, but as a Lightroom user, I have no intention of switching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been a Lightroom user since the beta was first announced. I love it! It's simple and straightforward to use, but it has the power to get the job done............

If I were to start over and choose a product now, I might go with Aperture, but as a Lightroom user, I have no intention of switching.

You've made a good point there! You started off with Lightroom and have stuck with it and learnt how to use it properly. I've done exactly the same with Aperture - it's surprising what you can do with this if you take the trouble to learn how to use it to its full potential - practice makes perfect!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Neil Jo,

 

In the Raw Fine Tuning Setting in the adjustment window you can create pre sets and camera defaults for raw settings. This would allow you to add sharpening to all your raw photos as you opened them. Also I open photos in Aperture, Photoshop and Nikon Capture NX. Almost no difference between Photoshop CS3 and Aperture. I did not like what Nikon Capture NX did. Go figure as I have a D300 and it comes with Capture NX. While there are some cool tools in Capture NX I was not happy with the RAW file performance. I do not get any spinning balls of death but I have a new Mac Pro.

 

Lightroom is a good program. The editing is still better then Aperture but Aperture allows me to get through my photos much fast and organize them. If I really like the photo I open the raw file in Photoshop and start there.

 

True but I don't always need to sharpen every picture. I have tried Capture NX but found it very slow. As far as Lightroom is concerned I love it , find it fast

and use it for printing as well. the only down side for me is using it as an orginizer. I have it set up to import my I insert my card in the reader, do my edits then export to a folder. From there import them to iphoto for viewing , also to an external. How do you like your D300 , I have a D80 and am thinking of upgrading?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
True but I don't always need to sharpen every picture. I have tried Capture NX but found it very slow. As far as Lightroom is concerned I love it , find it fast

and use it for printing as well. the only down side for me is using it as an orginizer. I have it set up to import my I insert my card in the reader, do my edits then export to a folder. From there import them to iphoto for viewing , also to an external. How do you like your D300 , I have a D80 and am thinking of upgrading?

 

Love the D300. I did not want to pay $5000 for a D3 as I am not a professional and I have not won the lottery yet. The D300 is very close (98%) to the D3. I purchased the battery pack so I get 8 fps. Main diff. are

 

1) D3 is full frame and thus more sensentive in low light. I have taken nice pictures at 1600 and ok photos at 3200 with the D300. The D3 takes great photos at 6400. I have seen a great 16 x 20 print at 6400. Seen tests result at evenhigher ISO. Of course proper exposure is very important.

 

2) D300 drops down to 2.5 fps if taking raw at 14 bit. You can drop the camera down to 12 bit and you get back to 6 fps or 8 fps (w/ battery pack)

 

3) D3 takes multiple memory cards.

 

4) D3 focuses just a bit faster. I think this is due to more processing power and/or faster motor.

 

5) D3 records sounds

 

 

Those are the main ones imo. The metering, focusing and processing are the same. I have only shoot about 1000 photos so I am still getting use to it and trying out all the great things it can do.

 

It would be a great upgrade from a D80. My friend has a D200 and much hard to justify spending 1800 on a new body.

 

 

Ken Rockwell did a nice comparison

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3/vs-d300.htm

 

Also Dpreview also has a good review and Popular Photography named it camera of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Love the D300. I did not want to pay $5000 for a D3 as I am not a professional and I have not won the lottery yet. The D300 is very close (98%) to the D3. I purchased the battery pack so I get 8 fps. Main diff. are

 

1) D3 is full frame and thus more sensentive in low light. I have taken nice pictures at 1600 and ok photos at 3200 with the D300. The D3 takes great photos at 6400. I have seen a great 16 x 20 print at 6400. Seen tests result at evenhigher ISO. Of course proper exposure is very important.

 

2) D300 drops down to 2.5 fps if taking raw at 14 bit. You can drop the camera down to 12 bit and you get back to 6 fps or 8 fps (w/ battery pack)

 

3) D3 takes multiple memory cards.

 

4) D3 focuses just a bit faster. I think this is due to more processing power and/or faster motor.

 

5) D3 records sounds

I could'nt see upgrading from my D80 to the D200, they're basically the same except for the faster focusing and more frames per second on the D200.

But from the D80 to the D300 would be amazing. First though I want some better glass. I have an 18 / 200 VR and a 60mm 2.8 macro. Am trading in the 60mm for a 50mm 1.8 and using the rest of the credit towards the Sigma 150mm 2.8 macro. vAnd not really sure if I really like the 18 / 200 VR either.

 

Those are the main ones imo. The metering, focusing and processing are the same. I have only shoot about 1000 photos so I am still getting use to it and trying out all the great things it can do.

 

It would be a great upgrade from a D80. My friend has a D200 and much hard to justify spending 1800 on a new body.

 

 

Ken Rockwell did a nice comparison

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3/vs-d300.htm

 

Also Dpreview also has a good review and Popular Photography named it camera of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×