egibaud Posted March 10, 2007 Share #1 Â Posted March 10, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, Â I am very new to raw development. When I got my M8 I installed CaptureOne... read instructions etc. Did not really understand the whole thing but at least I got the pics with the look I wanted. Then I decided to remove the pics from the list so I could have a new clean space to work.... very nice feature THAT ERASE THE PICS from captureone AND FROM HARD DISK TOO !!!!!! luckyly even that I liked the pics they were test pictures (no back up) Â So I read about lightroom, installed trial version, and I am very very surprised by the way it works. Its very straight forward, the video tutorial at Abobe's site is perfect to understand how it works. I find it so EASY that Adios to CaptureOne. Â I recommend people who like me are not familiar to raw or to CaptureOne to give a try with Lightroom Photoshop. Â Among the experts here, who is using it? have they made some special profiles / setting for the M8? Â Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 Hi egibaud, Take a look here Impressed with light room. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
footnoteblog Posted March 10, 2007 Share #2 Â Posted March 10, 2007 I'm guessing you've not tried Aperture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted March 10, 2007 Share #3 Â Posted March 10, 2007 Why do you guess that? That sounds very condescending, to be honest. I have tried Aperture for months and got very frustrated with it. It has some nice workflow ideas, but the implementation is still quite flawed, IMO. Additionally, although I am generally an Apple fan, I have to say that they have been spectacularly unresponsive with respect to getting the Leicas supported. Have you tried Lightroom? Very easy to use, much faster than Aperture, and Adobe (a company I don't generally like much) has been very good about fixing problem areas and adding missing features. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted March 10, 2007 Share #4 Â Posted March 10, 2007 I'm guessing you've not tried Aperture. Since it doesn't support RAW files from the M8 probably not ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cboudier Posted March 10, 2007 Share #5 Â Posted March 10, 2007 ... very nice feature THAT ERASE THE PICS from captureone AND FROM HARD DISK TOO !!!!!! Welcome to the club... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cboudier Posted March 10, 2007 Share #6 Â Posted March 10, 2007 ... the video tutorial at Abobe's site is perfect to understand how it works. You may also have a look here : http://www.lightroomkillertips.com/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
footnoteblog Posted March 10, 2007 Share #7  Posted March 10, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sigh.  Why do you say that? That sounds very presumptuous, to be honest.  Don't take it that way; Lightroom is fine, but not great. I should add smilies and crap, so I don't get misinterpreted   Anyway, if you manage thousands of images, Aperture wins, hands down. It sucks that it doesn't work with the M8, but it can read files from all kinds of cameras, like the D200, 5D, 1DsMark II...  and very well.  Honestly, apologies if I sounded that way, I was simply pointing out from a workflow standpoint, Aperture trumps all. But yes, it sucks because it doesn't read DNGs natively. Yet.  Anyway, there are so many different lighting/scene scenarios, it's pointless to make a preset. It's all about the capture, if you want to start with accuracy. In my opinion.  Chuck it if you want.      Why do you guess that? That sounds very condescending, to be honest. I have tried Aperture for months and got very frustrated with it. It has some nice workflow ideas, but the implementation is still quite flawed, IMO. Additionally, although I am generally an Apple fan, I have to say that they have been spectacularly unresponsive with respect to getting the Leicas supported. Have you tried Lightroom? Very easy to use, much faster than Aperture, and Adobe (a company I don't generally like much) has been very good about fixing problem areas and adding missing features. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted March 10, 2007 Share #8 Â Posted March 10, 2007 I would prefer Aperture due to a better workflow, and database interface (for me). Â However, I am using Lightroom due to two reasons: 1) Aperture doesn't support Leica M8 files (there exist a trick for use them); 2) it is too slow and it cannot be installed in one of my computers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted March 10, 2007 Share #9  Posted March 10, 2007 Don't take it that way; Lightroom is fine, but not great. I should add smilies and crap, so I don't get misinterpreted  Okay, let's reboot this thread  Anyway, if you manage thousands of images, Aperture wins, hands down. It sucks that it doesn't work with the M8, but it can read files from all kinds of cameras, like the D200, 5D, 1DsMark II...  I am curious why you find Aperture's workflow superior. Have you tried Lightroom v1? It has closed the gap with the addition of both versions, backup, and other features. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
atufte Posted March 10, 2007 Share #10 Â Posted March 10, 2007 I have used C1, Adobe ACR, and Aperture, and i think LR is by far the best raw converter out there, is the most intuitive, quicker, and does not make a mess of your files like C1 (drowe me nuts, making previews which are bigger and takes up more space than the RAW file itself, and double copies of everything, why...?) Â Something good came out of Adobe "Ripping off" Apple's idea and making it even better... and that's something microsoft system devolopers been trying for years, with not much luck and a total disaster with the release of Vista which actually should be called MS X "big trouble edition" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchell Posted March 10, 2007 Share #11 Â Posted March 10, 2007 I'm very glad to read this. I've really hated C1, found it's workflow extremely confusing, but been concerned that LR doesn't match C1's quality in the conversions. Â Do you find the image quality in the LR conversions as good as C1? Â Do you use presets for the M8, and DMR? Â Thanks, Â Mitchell Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 10, 2007 Share #12 Â Posted March 10, 2007 For those who have experience with both, could tell me what are the major differences between PS/CS2 and LR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Sievers Posted March 10, 2007 Share #13 Â Posted March 10, 2007 I have been using Aperature for one year and switched to LR last month at the suggestion of a member of this forum. As much as I like Aperature, it is slow as a pig and sucks up memory. I agree that it has great design features for managing thousands of photos. But for the time being I am very very happy with LR. I particularly like the Preset feature. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 10, 2007 Share #14 Â Posted March 10, 2007 Aperture aside, it seems like LR is an Adobe Bridge on steroid. What a smart business move: carve out the software module, enhance it and call it another product. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 10, 2007 Share #15 Â Posted March 10, 2007 One question: is there a customized profile for the M8 RAW converter? And, if yes, are they going to upgrade it for the new firmware and IR-cut filters? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted March 10, 2007 Share #16 Â Posted March 10, 2007 Another vote for Lightroom. I'm an avid Apple fan - Leica and Apple being the two companies I most like, respect, and support. But in the Aperture vs. Lightroom battle, I think LR is currently the better product, without even considering that Aperture doesn't yet even support the M8. Apple's decision to imbed OS dependencies in Aperture was a seriously flawed one, IMHO. Â I also have Capture One Pro and think the output from that is outstanding. It would be the raw converter to use were it not for one big problem - its atrocious user interface. Maybe Phase One will surprise us with the release this June. Â Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sirvine Posted March 10, 2007 Share #17 Â Posted March 10, 2007 I can't possibly imagine why anyone would prefer Aperture from a workflow perspective. From the wonky import dialogue box (hello alternative file browsing interface!) to the project/folder/vault metaphor that makes zero sense whatsoever, I can't see any reason to prefer it. Add to this the fact that it can't read Leica DNGs (or my Epson R-D1 files), it bogs down on the same hardware made by the company that sells it (and yes my Mac and gfx card are plenty quick otherwise), and the problems are really mounting. Then you consider that you lose the suite of development tools that adobe offers (fill light, recovery, the greatest tone curve interface ever devised) and the case is closed. Oh yeah, and the final nail in the coffin: Aperture's closed database structure that requires you to manually extract hidden files if your library ever crashes (which mine has). Complete nightmare. Â The worst part is that I want Apple to win, but they seem not to be up for competing seriously with adobe in this case. I wouldn't be remotely surprised if Apple throws in the towel in the next few years. They've done it before with more successful products than Aperture.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted March 10, 2007 Share #18 Â Posted March 10, 2007 I am curious why you find Aperture's workflow superior. Have you tried Lightroom v1? It has closed the gap with the addition of both versions, backup, and other features. Â Carsten, I am curious as to how you think Lightroom's V1 workflow and organization features are superior to Aperture's. Â I'm running side-by-side trials of both programs now, working in both Aperture and Lightroom importing, picking, stacking, rating, tagging, organizing, developing, and soon, printing the same images. I've been an iView Media Pro user since V1 and really want to move my whole library to a more integrated program. That library is over 30k images, so easy tagging, organization and backup is a must, and that aspect takes me much, much longer with many more keystrokes in Lightroom than it does in Aperture. Collections are not smart albums, LR backup is not backup, it's duplication on import, Lightroom stacks don't hold a candle to Aperture stacks, Â In no way am I sticking up for Aperture asking this... I myself am trying to decide between the two. I do think that Lightroom has a much more intuitive develop module, but I'm getting better results out of Aperture and Eoin's hack. And as everyone points out, LR is a thoroughbred whereas Aperture is more of a mule (though I must confess I just purchased a Mac Pro quad which certainly evens out the difference ). Â I find myself wishing that I could have the organization and RAW conversion quality of Aperture with the responsiveness and simplicity of Lightroom's develop module. Apple's no slouch, and as a user of their other pro programs (Logic Audio Pro and Final Cut Pro), I suspect that Apple will counter Lightroom with a very impressive Aperture 2.0. I just hope it happens before my 30-day trial ends Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sirvine Posted March 10, 2007 Share #19 Â Posted March 10, 2007 Ether, Â As part of your test, do a drill where Aperture just stops loading your library or the backup altogether. Maybe you'll have better luck than I did, but extracting the managed files from that database was a major pain for me. Â Also, how is the vault more of a true backup than LR's automated duplication to a remote directory? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted March 10, 2007 Share #20 Â Posted March 10, 2007 Sirvine, I agree that LR's development controls are really fantastic, but one of Aperture 1.5's most highly anticipated features is referenced file support. I find it hard to believe anyone seriously comparing current versions of the program could overlook this. I think you should check that you're putting nails in the right coffins. Â Both programs feature alternative file browsing interfaces, and quite frankly, I prefer Aperture's. I don't want to think of the things I'm importing as files, I want to think of them as photos, and Aperture uses metaphors and methods which makes sense...I cull in Aperture the same way (and much faster) than I used to cull in the lab. Lightroom makes me think of photos as files, which I think is the wrong approach, at least for me. Â I don't really care who "wins"--the competition will be healthy for all of us. But I also don't know why you would say that Apple isn't serious about competing with Adobe on this front. Apple hasn't yet countered Lightroom's official release. Both programs have their strengths. Notwithstanding the performance problems with Aperture, I think at this point it mostly comes down to what you're most comfortable with. Â Wow. Two Aperture-biased posts in a row for me. Funny--I'm actually leaning towards Lightroom. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.