Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-08-2012, 07:56 AM   #16
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 131
There is another consideration on Macs. I have been using Aperture for a couple of years, and am switching to LR 4. All of the previous postings on this thread I pretty much agree with. The Aperture user interface is really nice, but LR 4 has better tools. I also use the Nik software, and it runs great on both Aperture and LR 4.

The problem with Aperture is that I'm running Snow Leopard, and do not want to "upgrade" to Lion or Mountain Lion. Apple, in it's infinite wisdom, is only updating Aperture that runs on Lion or Mountain Lion. In other words, Apple is no longer supporting Aperture on Snow Leopard, even though (as of this date), I believe something like 50-60% of Macs still run Snow Leopard. And another way to put it - to get the latest updates and/or upgrades to Aperture, you may have to install a new operating system. And this is likely to continue in the future, as Apple just doesn't give a hoot about "old operating systems". Installing any new operating system is fraught with peril, like breaking other non-Apple applications.

Yes, I'm delaying the inevitable, and will eventually have to update my operating system to the latest and greatest. But at least Adobe and LR 4 don't blow off 50-60% of Mac users still on Snow Leopard.

Because of this, I'm switching to LR 4. Apple just seems behind in the game. Aperture 4 should have been out by now, and Apple doesn't acknowledge that it's even working on Aperture 4. Kind of hard to stay with Aperture, when all indications point to Apple just dropping it entirely, and focusing on all the other gadgets they make.

Another consideration - LR 4 runs on a PC too, so if Apple drops Aperture or even Macs entirely, you can probably just move the data over to a PC, including all the adjustments, metadata, etc, etc with essentially zero hassles. Aperture data is locked to a Mac, and there is no way to move all the images you've worked on, with adjustments, over to another platform.

By the way, from what I understand, all Macs make great Windows PC machines too, not that I ever want to go back to Windows...


Last edited by leadfoot; 09-08-2012 at 10:45 AM.
09-08-2012, 08:10 AM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Syracuse, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,469
QuoteOriginally posted by leadfoot Quote
There is another consideration on Macs. I have been using Aperture for a couple of years, and am switching to LR 4. All of the previous postings on this thread I pretty much agree with. The Aperture user interface is really nice, but LR 4 has better tools. I also use the Nik software, and it runs great on both Aperture and LR 4.

The problem is with Aperture is that I'm running Snow Leopard, and do not want to "upgrade" to Lion or Mountain Lion. Apple, in it's infinite wisdom, is only updating Aperture that runs on Lion or Mountain Lion. In other words, Apple is no longer supporting Aperture on Snow Leopard, even though (as of this date), I believe something like 50-60% of Macs still run Snow Leopard. And another way to put it - to get the latest updates and/or upgrades to Aperture, you may have to install a new operating system. And this is likely to continue in the future, as Apple just doesn't give a hoot about "old operating systems". Installing any new operating system is fraught with peril, like breaking other non-Apple applications.

Yes, I'm delaying the inevitable, and will eventually have to update my operating system to the latest and greatest. But at least Adobe and LR 4 don't blow off 50-60% of Mac users still on Snow Leopard.

Because of this, I'm switching to LR 4. Apple just seems behind in the game. Aperture 4 should have been out by now, and Apple doesn't acknowledge that it's even working on Aperture 4. Kind of hard to stay with Aperture, when all indications point to Apple just dropping it entirely, and focusing on all the other gadgets they make.

Another consideration - LR 4 runs on a PC too, so if Apple drops Aperture or even Macs entirely, you can probably just move the data over to a PC, including all the adjustments, metadata, etc, etc with essentially zero hassles. Aperture data is locked to a Mac, and there is no way to move all the images you've worked on, with adjustments, over to another platform.

By the way, from what I understand, all Macs make great Windows PC machines too, not that I ever want to go back to Windows...
Fraught with peril? I had exactly one app that was broken when upgrading from Lion to Mountain Lion. That was Parallels, and there was an upgrade to fix it. The only other apps that break on a regular basis are from Adobe and Micro$oft. That has nothing to do with Apple and everything to do with the fact that Adobe and Micro$oft use private and or depreciated APIs. So thanks for concern trolling...

As for Aperture, Apple just posted a job listing for software engineers to work on Aperture a few months ago...

Apple job posting suggests Aperture for iOS in development | Electronista

Last edited by boriscleto; 09-08-2012 at 08:44 AM.
09-08-2012, 09:02 AM   #18
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 36,671
QuoteQuote:
There is another consideration on Macs. I have been using Aperture for a couple of years, and am switching to LR 4. All of the previous postings on this thread I pretty much agree with. The Aperture user interface is really nice, but LR 4 has better tools. I also use the Nik software, and it runs great on both Aperture and LR 4.
My Photoshop CS2 no longer runs on either Mac or modern windows. One of my Macs is still running OS 3.8, just so I can use what I paid for. I once bought a copy of Adobe Contribute.. for minor adjustments of my website. Two years later when I tried to move it to a new computer Adobe told me they wouldn't allow it. it was two year old software and not supported. The latest upgrade to the OS is $20. I mean , really get real.

Your post offensive for two reasons... you imply Apple is some one worse than other players in the field. Well, I went the other way. I'm still running Windows 98 because I refuse to pay for an upgrade every time the software I paid the big bucks for in the window side of my Mac gets upgraded to a new version of Windows. I quite simply will not throw any money money at Adobe product. Their software is excellent. But their marketing techniques and practices are as predatory as anyone in the business. So lets not pretend Apple is some kind of rogue company/ Every software company that has had success is the same. I used to be able to play Diablo 2 on my computer with a network connection to my friends with the game hosted on the fastest computer. Now we all ahve to pay a monthly fee to play on their servers. The Home play and local network play have been eliminated. Used to be the cost of playing the game was the cost of the game. Now the eventual cost of the game will be that plus the monthly fee paid to Blizzard. That's just waht successful companies do.

Second, I have no idea what this statement "Lightroom has better tools." Means. All I know is that in the PP forum, Tess working on Aperture has frequently won the PP competition often working on the same image as guys using Adobe product. So the issue here is not who is better, but can you get it done in Aperture? I ask the same question with my Pentax gear. I don't ask does Pentax have as good auto-focus as Nikon or Canon, I ask, can I get it done on my Pentax. If the answer is yes then the rest is irrelevant. So far APerture hasn't given my pause to switch. And for those who claim lightroom has better tools, I'd have to evaluate that for myself. Not having a choice I find a way to get what I need to do in Aperture.. so when some says the tools are better in Lightroom that's fine. To get max shadow detail I use the sliders in Curves, set the black point different from the default and use shadows as a last resort. The shadow slider is simply not the best option for bringing up shadow detail. So you're talking about being better at what would be my third option. It sounds to me like some of you just want to use the shadow slider to correct your images. I'm not convinced that I can't get the same level of detail in Aperture you can with Lightroom. You just have to know how to do it.

SO just to be clear...

When I hear "the shadow slider is better in Lightroom is better than in Aperture, I just wonder, does this guy really know Aperture. I don't necessarily take the statement at face value. my first response is "show me". And after that, even if you show that the shadow slider is better, you'd have to show me that in any way relevant to my workflow. Because if I could correct with Curves and the blackpoint, I wouldn't have even used the shadow sliders.

So really the fact that people think some Lightroom controls are better in no way prejudices me to think the whole package is necessarily better. You guys need to get into the PP competition and make your point. The number of winning images done with Aperture would suggest maybe things aren't what you think.

Last edited by normhead; 09-09-2012 at 07:09 AM.
09-08-2012, 11:43 AM   #19
Veteran Member
tclausen's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,397
QuoteOriginally posted by boriscleto Quote
Fraught with peril? I had exactly one app that was broken when upgrading from Lion to Mountain Lion. That was Parallels, and there was an upgrade to fix it. The only other apps that break on a regular basis are from Adobe and Micro$oft. That has nothing to do with Apple and everything to do with the fact that Adobe and Micro$oft use private and or depreciated APIs. So thanks for concern trolling...

As for Aperture, Apple just posted a job listing for software engineers to work on Aperture a few months ago...

Apple job posting suggests Aperture for iOS in development | Electronista
That's been my experience also: upgrading from one version of MacOSX to the next is the most painless upgrade experience there is, really.

Adobe (PS, LR and Flash) being the exception, for some reason always managing to break when upgrading, or when looking a little too angry at the computer, or when the wind is blowing in the wrong direction - so I've found it more productive to use alternatives.

Aperture, PhotomatixHDR and Pixelmator are my tools of choice, and have been since.....well, since they each came out

09-11-2012, 07:39 PM   #20
Veteran Member
mysticcowboy's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: port townsend, wa
Photos: Albums
Posts: 968
QuoteOriginally posted by jrkeiser Quote
Thanks to everyone for their advice so far. I'd like to compare Lightroom and Aperture when I get my Mac, but I don't think Apple offers a free trial anymore. As far as dealing with files in these programs, I still have a lot to learn. However, this discussion has been very helpful.
Great idea. Both apps come with a 30 day free trial. Make your own decision. I chose Lightroom, but have friends who do great work with Aperture. One suggestion: stuff the new computer with as much RAM as you can. That will make everything faster, though I suggest third party RAM over Apple's, which is outrageously priced.
09-11-2012, 07:42 PM   #21
Veteran Member
mysticcowboy's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: port townsend, wa
Photos: Albums
Posts: 968
QuoteOriginally posted by jrkeiser Quote
A quick follow up question... Are tnoise reduction and smart sharpen tools the same in LR and PSE? I had kind of ruled out Aperture due to reported superiority of LR in these two functions in particular, but if the same tools are available in PSE then I may still want to consider Aperture. I kind of like the idea of Aperture's integration with iPhoto, iTunes, etc. Thanks again.
No, Photoshop's noise reduction features are nowhere near as good as Lightroom's. I can't speak to Aperture, though the Aperture user I asked uses a third party noise reduction plugin.
09-11-2012, 07:57 PM   #22
Veteran Member
deejjjaaaa's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: steel city / rust belt
Posts: 2,043
QuoteOriginally posted by mysticcowboy Quote
No, Photoshop's noise reduction features are nowhere near as good as Lightroom's.
except if you have PS means you have ACR by definition and you can do in ACR everything that you can in LR + more because you have PS too... ACR in PSE might be feature crippled vs PS though.
09-11-2012, 07:57 PM   #23
Veteran Member
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
A little OT maybe, but I'll add my voice to not being afraid of Mountain Lion. I too hung on to SL for a long time, but wanting to try Aperture 3.3 upgraded my least critical computer to ML. My experience was so positive on that I upgraded all my computers to ML within the week.

On topic, the Aperture in built noise reduction tool is horrible, simply unusable. I use Topaz Denoise from Aperture, but I'm migrating to Lightroom v4 and am loving the inbuilt NR tool.

09-19-2012, 09:06 AM   #24
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Albums
Posts: 46
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
On a Mac it is trivially easy to make an automator action so whenever you drop a jpeg into a certain folder, it automagically gets imported into a iPhoto or Aperture project and then removes the file from the directory afterwards. I use this function for my film scanning workflow so scans automatically turn up in Aperture (Aperture has better dust and scratch removal features than Lightroom for scans).
+1 on this.

I shoot DNG only and import into LR4. There I do almost all of my PP (I only use PSE10 on rare occasions). The best photos get exported to iPhoto so my wife can email, post to Facebook, and play them on the HDTV. Yes, you can do this in LR but she's WAY mor comfortable in iPhoto. I also resize the photos the go to iPhoto to take less HD space.

As Twitch said, you can easily create an App using Apple's included Automator which will import any files in a specified into iphoto. In LR you then set up an export preset that exports your files to that folder and 'voila' your done. My preset converts them to jpg, resizes to fit the TV, imports to iPhoto and then removes the duplicate that is inevitably created because iPhoto always COPIES items into its library.

Since this process also creates a jpg after you've done your edits I've never felt the need to shoot DNG+.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
copy, e.g, editor, file, folder, format, iphoto, mac, pc, photography, photoshop, pse
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lightroom 4: Beginner's questions regarding Jpeg quality, settings, and workflow etc. jepjepjep Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 8 03-10-2012 03:37 PM
Mini Mac or a Old Mac Pro. layfsphoto Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 48 12-06-2011 03:43 PM
migrating to Mac - some questions Bart Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 14 07-27-2011 03:29 PM
2 Questions for Mac Users RJL Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 25 02-11-2008 01:10 PM
A More Precise Workflow & Sharpening Workflow benjikan Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 2 06-01-2007 06:07 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:57 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top