Adobe Lightroom Vs Apple Aperture 2.0


Status
Not open for further replies.
Apr 17, 2008
252
0
16
30
#2
I believe LightRoom is better compare to Aperture2
 

Jan 12, 2007
1,139
0
0
Woodlands
#3
ive been using LR for quite sometime now and its really good expecially shooting on RAW...
 

#4
I'm also using LR & CS3. Anyone know why the exposure of the photos looks o.k in my camera but under exposure when I opened using LR or CS3? now I'm really dunno which exposure is correct, my camera or LR/CS3? Something has been set wringly in LR/CS3?
 

Apr 15, 2007
419
0
0
#5
You could always d/l AP2.1 and test trial it for 30 days. Like it, buy it!

Using CS3 + Aperture 2.1. Excellent Workflow. :)
 

siron

Senior Member
Mar 18, 2002
2,115
0
0
38
somewhere near...
www.geocities.com
#6
I just got an iMac thats why! hahaha. been a Windows user all my life! Finally tried a Mac and I am like divorcing my Windows!! haha. Anyway I tried Apertue 2.0 as compared to Lightroom. My conclusion.

LIGHTROOM is the winner ( To me at least ) But yes I like the Photo Book service by Aperture 2.0! But there are online books making service. I believe there is one burb?? Something like that??
 

Apr 15, 2007
419
0
0
#7
Agreed. The Photo Book/Album Feature is truly useful, BUT most places where you develop Photo Books already have their own proprietary software. In fact, they prefer that you use theirs! Thats from experience when I wanted to make my client's Album/Book.

Anyway, my MBP is getting old (First Intel Model), and though I have to say that Macs are nice, their Hardware just doesn't cut it for the price. And if I do sneak back half a foot back into the Windows Camp, I guess I have to go with Lightroom. :) No choice.
 

Apr 15, 2007
419
0
0
#8
And just to add, if you're processing RAW or working RAW, and if you store your files offline, say on a Portable HDD, I find Aperture Churning the pictures back and forth into the computer pretty slow. Its in fact driving me a little nuts sometimes.

:|
 

#9
I guess I'm the only one here using Aperture, eh?

I like Aperture because it saved my wallet off ~S$200, for essentially the [more or less] same function as Lightroom, which is to edit photos. Aperture seems a bit limited, and I do like Lightroom for its intergration with Photoshop, but hey, you get what you pay for, right?
 

siron

Senior Member
Mar 18, 2002
2,115
0
0
38
somewhere near...
www.geocities.com
#10
I guess I'm the only one here using Aperture, eh?

I like Aperture because it saved my wallet off ~S$200, for essentially the [more or less] same function as Lightroom, which is to edit photos. Aperture seems a bit limited, and I do like Lightroom for its intergration with Photoshop, but hey, you get what you pay for, right?
So far been using LR . Like it! ;)
 

ellery

New Member
Jan 29, 2002
1,188
2
0
57
Visit site
#11
If you are doing more than editing - aperture v2.1 is draggy when you are doing adjustments - yeah they place the sharpen function in some strange place when compared to LR.

If you are going to have large libraries Aperture has some issues in speed and stablity. From Aperture forum, corrupted libraries can be wiped out on a rebuild.

As a pure editing platform - Aperture is more friendly to the eye than LR. You can do full screen editing in Aperture with a one keystroke command LR requires a couple of key strokes and its still not full screen...only in slide show mode. Yeah do this on a 24" imac it can be addictive.
 

MontoyaSG

Senior Member
May 16, 2004
1,396
0
36
#13
I'm also using LR & CS3. Anyone know why the exposure of the photos looks o.k in my camera but under exposure when I opened using LR or CS3? now I'm really dunno which exposure is correct, my camera or LR/CS3? Something has been set wringly in LR/CS3?
your ICM profile is incorrect
 

Mar 7, 2002
217
0
16
46
#14
If you are doing more than editing - aperture v2.1 is draggy when you are doing adjustments - yeah they place the sharpen function in some strange place when compared to LR.

If you are going to have large libraries Aperture has some issues in speed and stablity. From Aperture forum, corrupted libraries can be wiped out on a rebuild.

As a pure editing platform - Aperture is more friendly to the eye than LR. You can do full screen editing in Aperture with a one keystroke command LR requires a couple of key strokes and its still not full screen...only in slide show mode. Yeah do this on a 24" imac it can be addictive.

Where can i buy Aperture 2 with the best deal? Seems like it is >300 in Apple Store online.
 

Mar 7, 2002
217
0
16
46
#15
If you are doing more than editing - aperture v2.1 is draggy when you are doing adjustments - yeah they place the sharpen function in some strange place when compared to LR.

If you are going to have large libraries Aperture has some issues in speed and stablity. From Aperture forum, corrupted libraries can be wiped out on a rebuild.

As a pure editing platform - Aperture is more friendly to the eye than LR. You can do full screen editing in Aperture with a one keystroke command LR requires a couple of key strokes and its still not full screen...only in slide show mode. Yeah do this on a 24" imac it can be addictive.

Where can i buy Aperture 2 with the best deal? Seems like it is >300 in Apple Store online.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom