Is Aperture worth it?

rojaba · 07-17-2010, 04:05 AM

I'm thinking of getting Apple's Aperture. Is it worth it? Or should I save up some more and get Photoshop or something else? Feedback appreciated!

twitch · 07-17-2010, 04:21 AM

Yes it is worth it.

Derridale · 07-17-2010, 05:16 AM

Aperture and Photoshop are two entirely different programs, with different functions.

Aperture is a cataloguing, tagging, organising tool, while Photoshop is a bitmap pixel processing tool.

Of course, that is a big generalisation, and they can both do much more. But they come from two opposite sides of the equation.

Aperture has, in fact, now got very powerful in the image editing department, including the fact that many plugins, previously available as Photoshop plugins, are now written as native Aperture plugins as well.

As a result, I'd say that unless you're really into the creative use of Photoshop to generate "images" as opposed to photographs, then Aperture will do over 90% of what you're likely to need. And it is still improving. And you don't need to buy the full Photoshop to look after the other 10% - Elements will do just fine for pixel peeping and tweaking.

I was a dedicated Photoshop user, for everyday image adjusting. I shoot in RAW, and used Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) to convert to a bitmap format, then tweaked the rest in Photoshop.

Now I use Aperture, and although I do have the latest Photoshop CS5 upgrade, I'm finding that I rarely need to flip out to Photoshop at all. The round trip involves converting to TIFF or JPG then out to Photoshop then back again. I hardly do that now. So Aperture keeps all my original digital masters untouched, and I just work with what Aperture calls versions. The final export to JPG or whatever is the first time that the edits and tweaks have been saved into the image, so compression artifacts are basically non-existent, and my masters remain untouched.

Bottom line: Aperture, for about $300-odd, will do pretty well most of what you're likely to need. I'd recommend getting it.

rojaba · 07-17-2010, 07:33 AM

thanks a lot guys

VaughnA · 07-21-2010, 09:52 AM

Originally posted by Derridale

Bottom line: Aperture, for about $300-odd, will do pretty well most of what you're likely to need. I'd recommend getting it.

Agreed, I'm like Derridale, I rarely go out to photoshop. My current setup is Aperture for my basic photo editing and cataloging and then Nik Software tools for more elaborate fixes. Unless I'm adding something to a photo like changing the sky I rarely if ever use photoshop any more. And when I do, I use elements.

**jmschrei** · 07-21-2010, 12:49 PM - **1 Like**

I find Aperture to be an incredibly intuitive and user friendly program. I have Photoshop Elements but can't quite warm to it although I am working on it. I don't imagine ever being more than an external editor for very specific functions. With Aperture and some dedicated plug-ins you can probably accomplish most of what you might want to do as well as organizing your files.
-Joe

a a i b · 07-21-2010, 01:35 PM

I love Aperture. It's a powerful program that's relatively easy to use.

It does have its quirks, though -- I'd say "faces" is still not ready for prime-time yet.

philbaum · 07-25-2010, 10:24 AM - **1 Like**

As i understand it, we windows operators have Aperture to thank for the creation of Lightroom. Adobe perceived a real threat to their dominance in the photography world and created their own database style photo processing tool. A professor told me that Photoshop is now targeted for the graphic artist while Lightroom is the tool intended for photographers. Seems about right.

I switched to Lightroom from my first software, Corel's paintshop pro, because the local club was using Lightroom and it seemed so much more intuitive to me. with corel's PSP, i was always having to look up how to do things, with LR, i could enjoy photo processing with the feeling of not having to work at it. without having to relearn it everytime. what a joy.

From the comments above, it sounds like Aperture is intuitive as well. I can't compare the two, but since Aperture set the trend, its probably at least LR's equal. I would always go for an intuitive program over one that's a challenge to use, IMO.

lurchlarson · 07-28-2010, 07:06 PM - **1 Like**

I do 99% of everything that I need to do in PP in Aperture. All the photos on my website were processed in Aperture. I only go into PS when there is some hardcore/wonky/crazy stuff that needs to be done. Aperture is great.

noahpurdy · 07-28-2010, 07:46 PM

YES YES YES YES YES!

Aperture is fantastic! After the 3.0 update I've found I almost NEVER go into Photoshop anymore unless I'm doing composites.

the swede · 08-01-2010, 01:11 PM

Is there an option to bulk rezise images in Aperture 3?

Also wonder if i can rezise, add watermark and add some sharpness to compensate the rezise inside Aperture.

Enigmaticca · 10-07-2010, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by the swede

Is there an option to bulk rezise images in Aperture 3?

Also wonder if i can rezise, add watermark and add some sharpness to compensate the rezise inside Aperture.

Absolutely you can do that via the Export function (Expect for adding sharpness however, AP3's size reduction algorithm does a great job of it so you may not need too)

Tim

debbie · 10-09-2010, 12:41 PM

yes, its really a great program. But it is demands a lot of your computer. It easily gets sloooow. You need lots of RAM and one of the newer processors.

**rm2** · 10-11-2010, 06:53 AM

If you are savvy enough with computers to be able to learn how to add a new partition, and you are not afraid to try Linux, then I think your need for Aperture would be greatly diminished. In Linux you can use digiKam which can pretty much take care of 99% of your needs, for free! And the next upgrade of digiKam is going to be free as well, and the next one, and the next one, and... And all of them will have new and more powerful features.

Come on people, its time to free yourselves from the proprietary lock and costly upgrade treadmill!

paperbag846 · 10-11-2010, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by rm2

Come on people, its time to free yourselves from the proprietary lock and costly upgrade treadmill!

As well as free yourself of compatible drivers, coherent documentation, and updates that, for the most part, improve things

.

I have nothing against Linux, but only the technologically brave should really venture there. It's easy to spend more time configuring your computer than actually using it in Lunix

.

I love aperture, and if I still had a mac, I would use it.

07-17-2010, 04:05 AM	#1
rojaba Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Herzogenaurach Photos: Albums Posts: 226	Is Aperture worth it? I'm thinking of getting Apple's Aperture. Is it worth it? Or should I save up some more and get Photoshop or something else? Feedback appreciated!

10-11-2010, 06:53 AM	#14
rm2 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2007 Location: Hudson Valley - NY Posts: 778	It depends... If you are savvy enough with computers to be able to learn how to add a new partition, and you are not afraid to try Linux, then I think your need for Aperture would be greatly diminished. In Linux you can use digiKam which can pretty much take care of 99% of your needs, for free! And the next upgrade of digiKam is going to be free as well, and the next one, and the next one, and... And all of them will have new and more powerful features. Come on people, its time to free yourselves from the proprietary lock and costly upgrade treadmill!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax SDM lenses, how much they are really worth or are they worth it?	Pentaxor	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	01-17-2015 11:32 PM
Constant Aperture vs Variable Aperture	Netsoft	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	01-11-2010 07:29 AM
Aperture - Worth Buying?	PeteyJ	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	9	07-18-2009 09:47 AM
Use of Aperture-Ring 43mm/1.9 -> no aperture data	Deimo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	06-24-2009 03:25 PM
Is 1.4 really worth it?	straightshooter	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	39	09-29-2008 11:44 AM

07-17-2010, 04:21 AM	#2
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Yes it is worth it.

07-17-2010, 05:16 AM	#3
Derridale Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 412	Aperture and Photoshop are two entirely different programs, with different functions. Aperture is a cataloguing, tagging, organising tool, while Photoshop is a bitmap pixel processing tool. Of course, that is a big generalisation, and they can both do much more. But they come from two opposite sides of the equation. Aperture has, in fact, now got very powerful in the image editing department, including the fact that many plugins, previously available as Photoshop plugins, are now written as native Aperture plugins as well. As a result, I'd say that unless you're really into the creative use of Photoshop to generate "images" as opposed to photographs, then Aperture will do over 90% of what you're likely to need. And it is still improving. And you don't need to buy the full Photoshop to look after the other 10% - Elements will do just fine for pixel peeping and tweaking. I was a dedicated Photoshop user, for everyday image adjusting. I shoot in RAW, and used Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) to convert to a bitmap format, then tweaked the rest in Photoshop. Now I use Aperture, and although I do have the latest Photoshop CS5 upgrade, I'm finding that I rarely need to flip out to Photoshop at all. The round trip involves converting to TIFF or JPG then out to Photoshop then back again. I hardly do that now. So Aperture keeps all my original digital masters untouched, and I just work with what Aperture calls versions. The final export to JPG or whatever is the first time that the edits and tweaks have been saved into the image, so compression artifacts are basically non-existent, and my masters remain untouched. Bottom line: Aperture, for about $300-odd, will do pretty well most of what you're likely to need. I'd recommend getting it.

07-17-2010, 07:33 AM	#4
rojaba Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Herzogenaurach Photos: Albums Posts: 226 Original Poster	thanks a lot guys

07-21-2010, 09:52 AM	#5
VaughnA Banned Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Virginia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,363	Originally posted by Derridale Bottom line: Aperture, for about $300-odd, will do pretty well most of what you're likely to need. I'd recommend getting it. Agreed, I'm like Derridale, I rarely go out to photoshop. My current setup is Aperture for my basic photo editing and cataloging and then Nik Software tools for more elaborate fixes. Unless I'm adding something to a photo like changing the sky I rarely if ever use photoshop any more. And when I do, I use elements.

07-21-2010, 12:49 PM - 1 Like	#6
jmschrei Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Calgary, AB Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,884	I find Aperture to be an incredibly intuitive and user friendly program. I have Photoshop Elements but can't quite warm to it although I am working on it. I don't imagine ever being more than an external editor for very specific functions. With Aperture and some dedicated plug-ins you can probably accomplish most of what you might want to do as well as organizing your files. -Joe

07-21-2010, 01:35 PM	#7
a a i b Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Brooklyn Photos: Gallery Posts: 315	I love Aperture. It's a powerful program that's relatively easy to use. It does have its quirks, though -- I'd say "faces" is still not ready for prime-time yet.

07-25-2010, 10:24 AM - 1 Like	#8
philbaum Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA Posts: 3,659	As i understand it, we windows operators have Aperture to thank for the creation of Lightroom. Adobe perceived a real threat to their dominance in the photography world and created their own database style photo processing tool. A professor told me that Photoshop is now targeted for the graphic artist while Lightroom is the tool intended for photographers. Seems about right. I switched to Lightroom from my first software, Corel's paintshop pro, because the local club was using Lightroom and it seemed so much more intuitive to me. with corel's PSP, i was always having to look up how to do things, with LR, i could enjoy photo processing with the feeling of not having to work at it. without having to relearn it everytime. what a joy. From the comments above, it sounds like Aperture is intuitive as well. I can't compare the two, but since Aperture set the trend, its probably at least LR's equal. I would always go for an intuitive program over one that's a challenge to use, IMO.

07-28-2010, 07:06 PM - 1 Like	#9
lurchlarson Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Oregon, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 681	I do 99% of everything that I need to do in PP in Aperture. All the photos on my website were processed in Aperture. I only go into PS when there is some hardcore/wonky/crazy stuff that needs to be done. Aperture is great.

07-28-2010, 07:46 PM	#10
noahpurdy Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 479	YES YES YES YES YES! Aperture is fantastic! After the 3.0 update I've found I almost NEVER go into Photoshop anymore unless I'm doing composites.

08-01-2010, 01:11 PM	#11
the swede Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 2,310	Is there an option to bulk rezise images in Aperture 3? Also wonder if i can rezise, add watermark and add some sharpness to compensate the rezise inside Aperture.

10-07-2010, 07:12 PM	#12
Enigmaticca Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 311	Originally posted by the swede Is there an option to bulk rezise images in Aperture 3? Also wonder if i can rezise, add watermark and add some sharpness to compensate the rezise inside Aperture. Absolutely you can do that via the Export function (Expect for adding sharpness however, AP3's size reduction algorithm does a great job of it so you may not need too) Tim

10-09-2010, 12:41 PM	#13
debbie Senior Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: stockholm Photos: Albums Posts: 111	yes, its really a great program. But it is demands a lot of your computer. It easily gets sloooow. You need lots of RAM and one of the newer processors.

10-11-2010, 03:17 PM	#15
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by rm2 Come on people, its time to free yourselves from the proprietary lock and costly upgrade treadmill! As well as free yourself of compatible drivers, coherent documentation, and updates that, for the most part, improve things . I have nothing against Linux, but only the technologically brave should really venture there. It's easy to spend more time configuring your computer than actually using it in Lunix . I love aperture, and if I still had a mac, I would use it.