Aperture Vs Lightroom 4

Hi. No one can tell you who doesn't know your needs, your experience, your general preferences, etc.

They are each excellent programs. Since you are looking at Aperture, you must be on a Mac. Aperture offers significantly better integration with the OS and other Mac programs than Lightroom -- but that is not really a primary concern. They are so similar, you could chose from them like you would a clock-radio: look at each, and pick the one that you wouldn't mind seeing every day. Or you could do the hard work: list your specific needs in terms of your workflow, your storage, your processing, your output -- how you take digital photographs, with what equipment, and what do you do with them -- and then look up each program's specifications and see which matches up best.

The nice thing is, you cannot go wrong.

This does come up a bit -- look in the "More Like This" section in the right column for links to other threads on this topic.

Part of the reason there is more info about Lightroom out there is that it is available for both Windows and Mac. By itself, that virtually assures there will be many more LR users, therefore much more information being presented.

It is also true that LR4 has added some capabilities that would seem to offer much more than the current verson of Aperture, especially regarding RAW image processing. But these features come at a price...and that is performance. There are many LR users with serious performance issues using LR4...take a look at the LR forums if you haven't already done that. And be sure to take advantage of LR's 30-day free trial before you purchase to be sure your hardware is up to LR4's requirements.

I have heard good things about the Nik HDR plug-in.

Here are some resources for learning Aperture. This is one of the areas in which Lightroom far exceeds what is available for Aperture, for the reasons phosgraphis mentions in his/her post above.

I've been blogging about the differences, pros and cons between Aperture and Lightrrom a whole bunch here.

OK, I'll summarize what I've een talking about here below.

The similarities between Aperture and Lightroom;

• They both protect the color space
• They both preserve the RAW file
• allow area specifi editing
• interface with PS seamlessly
• allow external HDD support
• have advanced slideshow functionality
• have large user groups making presets
• have cut and paste adjustments.

Differences between Aperture and Lightroom are minor.

• Aperture has better Apple app workflow
• Aperturet has photostream support
• Aperture works inside iWeb, iPhoto, iMovie etc...
• Aperture has more complete retina support (as of right now)
• Lightroom has minor video editing capability (some photo edits can apply to video, easing workflow)
• Lightroom works better with PS if you are doing HDR or timelapse
• Lightroom's cummintity support is better. You'll get more free presets etc...
• Lightroom has customizable brushes
• Lightrooms brushes are additive and you can control flow

I'm glad I could help and I'm glad you decided. I think you'll enjoy LR. I've been a very loyal Aperture fan for years but have just switched to LR recenlty. Make sure to learn what catalogs, folders and collections are and I bet you'll be a super LR user in no time.

I don't really understand the question? What version of PS should you buy? If I was you I'd play with LR for a long time before deciding if you need PS. Most pro's find they are doing moe and more of thier work in LR completely. PS can sure do things that LR can't, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying LR (or Aperture) can do ALOT!

If PS is definitely on the plate then what's your budget?

If money is no object and you only will ever be interested in photography, then I'd say buy PS CS6.

If you are strapped for cash then find a previous version for sale. I wouldn't go before CS4, when they added 64 bit.

Make sure to take advantage of the education or teacher versions. Just know upgrading down the road may be hindered if you do.

Creative Cloud-

If you don't mind spending more in the long run, want to always have up to date software, and want to dabble in video, audio, web sites in the future then go for Creative Cloud. It the leasing service Adobe just invented. If you do the math it's highway robbery.

That being said I'm a creative cloud customer. I went from PS CS3 to now having access to all of CS6, and let me tell you I LOVE it. It's given me no excuse to not download a new software and totally be blown away by what thier other software can do. With the help of Lynda.com I've learnt Premiere Pro. Look what I did with my Canon 60D and a $30 mic, http://youtu.be/lPRgdNvIIPE

Then hearing my sister wanted some kind of logo I designed it in PS downloaded After Effects, learned how to use it and made an animated logo for her charity. Wow pretty neat skills to have access to all for the same price!

TreenM wrote:

Differences between Aperture and Lightroom are minor.

• Aperture has better Apple app workflow
• Aperturet has photostream support
• Aperture works inside iWeb, iPhoto, iMovie etc...
• Aperture has more complete retina support (as of right now)
• Lightroom has minor video editing capability (some photo edits can apply to video, easing workflow)
• Lightroom works better with PS if you are doing HDR or timelapse
• Lightroom's cummintity support is better. You'll get more free presets etc...
• Lightroom has customizable brushes
• Lightrooms brushes are additive and you can control flow

To this I would add Lightroom has built-in lens correction based on lens profiles, plus manual lens correction, and also noise reduction that many think is better than Aperture.

I agree with Treen that you should learn how to get the most out of Lightroom before you get Photoshop. There is a sentiment these days that you only need Photoshop when you couldn't do it all in Lightroom or Aperture first, because generally working in Lightroom and Aperture is faster and more properly tuned to a raw image workflow. If you are a pro then you would want Photoshop CS6. If your needs are light you could just get Photoshop Elements or Pixelmator, both of which are more powerful than earlier versions of Photoshop.

I have both, having purchased Aperture and got Lightroom free with a camera purchase. As much as I've tried to love Lightroom because I'm so fond of Photoshop Elements I just can't. Aperture is more intuitive and easier to learn and use, to me anyway. Also, I don't like Lightroom's dark interface. As for HDR being better with Lightroom, I use Photomatix's plugin for Aperture and it gives great results. And just like wiht Lightroom you can export your work from Aperture to Photoshop or Elements.

Network 23

Thanks, I added lens corrections to my list here.

Badrakumar

Glad to help.

Stockscalper

I agree. I recently switchted to LR but Aperture is easier and more intuitive for me. It has a more pleasing GUI. Yes choosing LR or Aperture based on how it does HDR is about the most silly thing I've ever heard. If HDR is important then don't try a multiple image workflow ona single image based software.

I'm writing an article about all the post processing techniques and will post is on my blog this Friday.

Badrakumar again

I went the adobe way too. I wrote about why I think it's better for photos here why it's better for video (for fusion videographers only) here, why I switched here, and how to switch here with this associated video tutorial for switching.

Thanks to all the posters here; this thread is very helpful as after several years with Aperture, I'm seriously considering LR4.

The key for me is RAW capabilities. I shoot almost all RAW images now, and the stories about LR4's superior RAW processing, sharpening, lens correction, etc. are really drawing me.

So my question is, is LR4 that much better for RAW images? Is that what motivated those who switched? Has it been worth it?