Aperture vs. Lightroom vs. ?

Question

Aperture vs. Lightroom vs. ?

I have been following the development of Aperture and Adobe Lightroom as closely as possible with great interest since the inception of each program. I have not been able to preview Aperture as I have Lightroom and therefore don't know as much about Aperture, but despite a lot of research I'm still unable to figure out which application is/will be best for my organization's workflow. Furthermore, I'm not even sure if either of them are really the best solutions. Ironically, I think iPhoto seems to be better than both for most of what we need apart from the lack of support for standard IPTC metadata and ftp export options.

If anyone could possibly offer some advice regarding which app would be better or recommend some other app based on our workflow, I would really appreciate it because I am at a loss.

We run a quarterly print magazine and a website and our workflow and needs currently consist of the following (we are currently using Photo Mechanic).

Workflow:

1. Add recently scanned or submitted photos to Photo Mechanic and tag them with all available metadata.
2. Export via FTP to a webserver that syndicates our photo content
3. Export the photos from Photo Mechanic to Photoshop
4. Export for web from Photoshop
5. Upload to our website (in the future I hope to develop our backend database so that it automatically reads the IPTC metadata and displays it online instead of needed to re-enter the caption, etc in the online database)

Needs:

1. A complete, consolidated database of all of our photography
2. Non-destructive editing
3. Easy searching/browsing of all photo content by metadata
4. Export via ftp
5. Library sharing over a network so that other users can find/edit/select/use photos from the database
6. Smart album functionality
7. Export for web and export for print options

There is probably a lot more, but those are the major points. So far Lightroom seems promising and I've enjoyed being able to use a Beta, but it is also disappointing on account of the lack of sharing, the lack of ftp export, lack of smart albums and numerous other little things. Then again, Aperture's hardware requirements are fairly extreme and I haven't been able to preview it.

Two things I haven't been able to figure out about Aperture, which would help me make this decision are:

1. Is it possible to share the Aperture library or particular albums like you can in iPhoto? Secondly, beyond simply sharing them with other users on the network (or beyond the network), can mutliple users access the photos in order to make edits and export them, etc?

2. Does Aperture support ftp export to a webserver?

I'm sorry that this is long and not terribly precise, but hopefully this post will help clarify things for me.

Thank you!

Mac OS X (10.4.7)

Posted on Sep 16, 2006 5:24 PM

Reply

Answer 1

Sep 16, 2006 5:45 PM in response to Nicholas Fitzhugh

Aperture doesn't have native ftp export abilities but I think you could tie it in with automator and a ftp program like transit.

Reply

Answer 2

Sep 16, 2006 5:52 PM in response to Gavin Cato

That's a good point. Thanks for the suggestion.

Reply

Answer 3

jorgus

Level 1

60 points

Sep 16, 2006 6:13 PM in response to Nicholas Fitzhugh

"Library sharing over a network..."

Aperture doesn't fix that. That's more like Extensis Portfolio and the kind.

Reply

Answer 4

Sep 17, 2006 8:38 PM in response to jorgus

"Library sharing over a network so that other users can find/edit/select/use photos from the database"

Niether product currently has a database architecture that provides the multiuser record-locking required for more than one user editing the images.

PowerBook G4 1.67 2GB RAM 128MB ATI Video, External FW Drives for library Mac OS X (10.4.7)

Reply

Answer 5

Sep 18, 2006 4:49 AM in response to Kevin J. Doyle

Ok. Good to know. Thank you. But can you share your photo library or albums in it in Aperture as you can in iPhoto? iPhoto doesn't let other users edit photos, but you can share them with others on the network so that they can be viewed by those users.

Reply

Answer 6

Sep 18, 2006 6:16 AM in response to Nicholas Fitzhugh

No, Aperture has no inherent sharing capability like iPhoto.

Since Aperture stores the Master Images in its library, and then stores a virtual "recipe" for any adjustments you have applied to the master image, it does not have the adjusted images readily available on disk to be read by other users. When you pull up an adjusted image in Aperture, it is creating the display on the fly by applying the virtual recipe of your changes to the original master image.

Conversely, when you edit an image in iPhoto, iPhoto actually stores a complete, adjusted copy of the image on disk, and these copies with all changes incorporated are therefore available complete on the disk for simple viewing or sharing.

Hope this helps,

Kevin

PowerBook G4 1.67 2GB RAM 128MB ATI Video, External FW Drives for library Mac OS X (10.4.7)

Reply

Answer 7

Sep 18, 2006 7:16 AM in response to Kevin J. Doyle

Thanks, Kevin. That is helpful, though it's not what I wanted to hear 🙂 It really seems like Aperture should be built with multi-user support, no?

Reply

Answer 8

Sep 18, 2006 4:00 PM in response to Nicholas Fitzhugh

It really seems like Aperture should be built with multi-user support, no?

Correct. It has been requested several times through this forum, along with a partitionable library (logical library that spans multiple physical drives).

There is no "read-only" access in Aperture either, which would make it useful for reviewers vs. editors. And since we need Aperture to rebuild any edited version from the Master and adjustment changes rules ("recipe" as referred to above), a cheap read-only version would be appropriate.

Reply

Answer 9

Sep 18, 2006 4:06 PM in response to David G Chapman

Thanks, David. Glad to know others are on the same page and I'm not alone (even if I'm not yet even an active Aperture user).

Reply

Answer 10

Sep 18, 2006 6:43 PM in response to Nicholas Fitzhugh

I won't repeat items that have already been discussed ie. sharing the library,etc.
It is probably not reasonable to compare a Beta with Aperture, but IMO, Lightroom is not in the same league as Aperture. Maybe once its a full release, but I wouldn't spend resources learning a program that is still in the planning stages. From what I have seen, Lightroom has a fair distance to go before it can compete with Aperture.

Reply

Answer 11

Sep 18, 2006 8:02 PM in response to Scott Fairbairn

Interesting. I certainly understand the logic of not really being able to compare a beta app with a full release, but are there are a couple main things that stand out about Aperture that make you believe that it is a long way ahead of Lightroom?

Thanks!

Reply

Answer 12

Sep 19, 2006 5:28 AM in response to Nicholas Fitzhugh

There are a few things that stand out immediately. The use of versions is a big reason why I switched to Aperture over my previous program. For example, if I have a 12 meg raw file I can have several different interpretations of this image(versions), without having to use up more HD space.
The library and metadata are another huge advantage of Aperture. I have dozens of "smart albums" setup. As soon as I import images, I rename(if not already done), and viola, they appear in my smart albums automatically. This is a huge time saver as I don't have to drag and drop the images to categories. Some users don't like the fact that the images in the Aperture library can only be accessed through Aperture. I however, like that so-called limitation. The reason why I like it is you cannot alter a file or move it without your program knowing about it. A problem I have had with dbase programs in the past was that I would alter something in the file structure , or an image externally, and then when I ran the dbase program, it would have lost track of the changes because a different program had done it(I realize that is user related, but it still happened).
The compare functions, picks, stacks, once again are real time savers as well. It really helps weed through the images.
The user interface of Aperture initially put me off, but once I put the time in to it, it is very easy to use.

Reply

Answer 13

Sep 19, 2006 8:27 PM in response to Nicholas Fitzhugh

I have been using Lightroom while the Mac I run Aperture on is being repaired. Without getting into specifics, as a long time Photoshop user I can categorically state that even though Lightroom is usable and addresses the exact same market space as Aperture, it is not in the same league with Aperture.

It sounds like you are primarily inquiring into Digital Asset Management ("DAM") rather that DSLR capture review/edit processing. Note that multi-user networked library sharing is a huge issue, limiting the capable apps and driving you into expensive "multi user" category which usually involves the high end of DAM software rather than the relatively cheap single user versions.

Many of the DAM issues you mention currently are better addressed by Extensis Portfolio, iView Media Pro or Canto Cumulus. Version 1.2 of Aperture is likely to be announced at Photokina next week so you probably should check out whether any new capabilities in the DAM area help meet your needs.

At this point in time IMO your shop's needs may be best fulfilled by Extensis Portfolio, iView Media Pro or Canto Cumulus. Aperture excels (and IMO it owns the market space, the killer app for DSLR photogs) at managing review/edit of hundreds of DSLR image captures, fast. Complex long term multi user DAM definitely is not (currently) its strength.

iPhoto is a consumer app, definitely not up to professional usage such as you describe. And for sure do not even consider Lightroom.

-Allen Wicks

Reply

Answer 14

Sep 20, 2006 12:20 AM in response to SierraDragon

I am waiting to see v2 of Aperture as well. Plus, Beta 4 of Lightroom is due out then too. A great time for photographers!

Reply

Answer 15

Sep 20, 2006 5:49 AM in response to SierraDragon

Thanks for the great advice, Allen. I think you're mostly right that most of the functionality I am looking for would be covered by DAM. The only issue is that: a) from what I've seen of Aperture in the tour videos it seems preferable for virtually all of the DAM-esque features that are available in iView Media Pro or Portolio, and b) ideally I'd like to be able to use a single program to manage our digital assetts (which at the moment is really just photography) and edit them via a nondestructive technique and maintain different versions. Aperture seems to be the only program that facilitates this, though I admit that I am not hugely familiar with the DAM solutions you mentioned and will therefore look into them further.

One additional feature that will be important that Portfolio may address is the ability to export or upload photos out of the database to a webserver in a way that would allow the system to automatically read and display certain IPTC metadata included in the file on the website (i.e. captions). I had expected this to be a custom web development job, but if a program like Portfolio supports it already (not sure whether it does but they do mention SQL integration), then chalk one up for Portfolio.

The lack of multi-user support in Aperture, on the other hand, is still a problem. All in all, there does not seem to be one clear solution, but I will definitely take a look at the DAM programs you mentioned more and thanks for the opinion regarding iPhoto and Lightroom!

Reply