Just curious to hear about Aperture from a real user rather than a salesperson at the Apple Store. On the surface it looks a lot like Adobe Bridge. Is here more that I am not seeing? I wonder how it compares to Adobe Lightroom.
I went to a seminar about Aperture that was put on by Vincent LaForet of the NY Times. The program seems really nice, better than the Bridge. The main thing that sets it apart from bridge is that you can make non-destructive adjustments to RAW files anywhere in the program (ie thumbnails or previews) without ever converting, opening the file, or opening a new window. There is also a "loupe" feature that lets you view a section of the photo or thumbnail at 100% by simply rolling over it with the cursor; a great feature to check quickly for focus. Overall it has a lot more usabilty than Bridge. As far as Lightroom, I heard that was Adobe's answer to Aperture but I haven't used it.
As far as anyone using Aperture, I don't know anyone. I know one draw back is that the program is a RAM hog. Minimum requirements call for at 1G, with 2G being ideal. The version I saw was running on beefy Mac using 4G of RAM.
What makes the application so special, is that it's so well though out. The best part to me is the printing presets. With one flick of a button, I can have a print with all correct settings for papertype, colorprofile, printer type and print size. All these are set in a preset, and it creates the same quality prints, over an over. It still could use some more speed, and needs some minor tweaks here and there. But hey, for a 1.1 Application, the thing is damn good.
while i dont think either aperture or lightroom are ready yet (2.0 should be great!), i do see their benefits...
IMO, they are Pro apps aimed directly at pro/serious amateurs... they are also not meant to be end all be alls... you'll still need PS in my cases, but they are a great way to
- import/catalog
- group/sift/pair down/etc
- print proofs
- do non destructive editing in the RAW
a complete workflow (for the most part) for digital photographers...
i am using both ATM, and look forward to updates that will make each better.
Discussion
3 repliesThanks!
Kelly
I went to a seminar about Aperture that was put on by Vincent LaForet of the NY Times. The program seems really nice, better than the Bridge. The main thing that sets it apart from bridge is that you can make non-destructive adjustments to RAW files anywhere in the program (ie thumbnails or previews) without ever converting, opening the file, or opening a new window. There is also a "loupe" feature that lets you view a section of the photo or thumbnail at 100% by simply rolling over it with the cursor; a great feature to check quickly for focus. Overall it has a lot more usabilty than Bridge. As far as Lightroom, I heard that was Adobe's answer to Aperture but I haven't used it.
As far as anyone using Aperture, I don't know anyone. I know one draw back is that the program is a RAM hog. Minimum requirements call for at 1G, with 2G being ideal. The version I saw was running on beefy Mac using 4G of RAM.
What makes the application so special, is that it's so well though out. The best part to me is the printing presets. With one flick of a button, I can have a print with all correct settings for papertype, colorprofile, printer type and print size. All these are set in a preset, and it creates the same quality prints, over an over. It still could use some more speed, and needs some minor tweaks here and there. But hey, for a 1.1 Application, the thing is damn good.
-jacco
IMO, they are Pro apps aimed directly at pro/serious amateurs... they are also not meant to be end all be alls... you'll still need PS in my cases, but they are a great way to
- import/catalog
- group/sift/pair down/etc
- print proofs
- do non destructive editing in the RAW
a complete workflow (for the most part) for digital photographers...
i am using both ATM, and look forward to updates that will make each better.