moxie13 Posted January 7, 2009 Share #1 Posted January 7, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I know this topic has come up before but I am a new to the forum and thinking about switching from Aperture to Lightroom. I would appreciate all comments. Thanks so much! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 7, 2009 Posted January 7, 2009 Hi moxie13, Take a look here Aperture or Lightroom?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
andybarton Posted January 7, 2009 Share #2 Posted January 7, 2009 Use the search facility Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
croweatr Posted January 7, 2009 Share #3 Posted January 7, 2009 Hi there My experience is this: Aperture gives a slightly better final result (with the M8 at least) but takes longer to get there. Lightroom is faster and less clunky to use, and suits high volume use (I use it for weddings). Obviously, the results from LR are not bad, they're just not as good as Aperture, C1, Raw Developer et al. When Doing big enlargements, I deal with files on an individual basis through Capture 1. This way, I get the best of both worlds: Lightroom's superb workflow and C1's output quality when I need it most. Hope this helps. Kevin Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tashley Posted January 7, 2009 Share #4 Posted January 7, 2009 Capture 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
offshore Posted January 7, 2009 Share #5 Posted January 7, 2009 Hi there My experience is this: Aperture gives a slightly better final result (with the M8 at least) but takes longer to get there. Lightroom is faster and less clunky to use, and suits high volume use (I use it for weddings). Obviously, the results from LR are not bad, they're just not as good as Aperture, C1, Raw Developer et al. When Doing big enlargements, I deal with files on an individual basis through Capture 1. This way, I get the best of both worlds: Lightroom's superb workflow and C1's output quality when I need it most. Hope this helps. Kevin Hi Kevin, I'm curious about what you see in C1 as better results. I've used both C1 and the CS3 convertor and prefer the Adobe result over C1. I primarily shoot in B&W mode with an M8 and convert the color image and see a broader tonal range in CS3 with better detail in blacks and less loss of data in highlights. Maybe I'm missing something but what is it that you do (color or B&W) and what are you seeing in C1 that differs from other programs? Thanks, Ron Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arminw Posted January 7, 2009 Share #6 Posted January 7, 2009 The answer is, you'll find pros and coons in every application! Get used to how you can use it and you'll be happy. I personally like Aperture because it fit's perfectly into my workflow and does what I want it to do .. plus you can add some plug ins , which can be pretty helpful when needed ... I tried LR and didn't like it at all ... Armin Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
t024484 Posted January 7, 2009 Share #7 Posted January 7, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I just switched from LR 1.4 to LR 2.2, and I must say, it is a delight to use. Functions that are quite complicated to use in Photoshop, are extremely easy in LR 2.2. I have spent quite some time in comparing LR against C1, but at the end I prefer the ease of use of the current LR 2.2. I do not think that one delivers superior results over the other, it just depends on the picture. The biggest difference that I could find is in the demosaicing. C1 is probably better in this area, but with "normal" pictures this is not a big deal. Hans Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted January 7, 2009 Share #8 Posted January 7, 2009 Lightroom is faster and less clunky to use, and suits high volume use (I use it for weddings). I've used both. In the end, it comes down to your preferences. I find Lightroom much more clunky to use than Aperture, but Aperture has a slightly higher learning curve. Lightroom requires you to think modally, Aperture does not. The trick with Aperture is to find/create a workflow which works for you. In Lightroom, your choices for workflow are more or less constrained/guided by the program's modal approach. Also, I think Aperture really excels at file organization. LR is catching up. Also, LR does not integrate at all into other Apple programs; Aperture does. I stopped a parallel LR/Aperture approach once Aperture's M8 support was possible without a hack. In general, I think that Aperture makes for a much better library manager and LR has slightly better image development features. But in the end at this point it's probably a wash and you're best off using both for a trial period and seeing which meets your needs better. Both programs will leapfrog each other with each version. I have no interest in switching; a library software program for me is a long-term decision. As was said at an Aperture/Lightroom "shootout" in SF a few years ago, it's a great time to be a digital photographer...on a Mac. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.