Talk to me about Aperture 3

[just eric]

I'm looking to upgrade from iPhoto and am looking at Aperture 3. What can you tell me about this software and its usefulness?

Also, is Aperture 3 compatible with iPad?

Thanks for your input.

[nwoods]

Ping "Chaz" and "Diplostrait" here on this forum. I might have their screen names missspelled, but you'll find them if you search. Both are experienced users of, and fans of, Aperture 3.
Edit: No, Aperture 3 is not for iPad, unless you are running a VPN/Remote Desktop program to your main Mac computer.

[Honu]

its not compatible with the iPad only the iPhoto thing is iPad and its not anywhere close to Aperture
curious what you are trying to figure out about it ?

I am a pro photographer and also have a post production company that does work for only pro photographers doing raw and PS work design layout etc..
so am pretty familiar with all of the raw programs

I use Capture one and LR myself but play with Aperture to keep my toes in the water

my quick take Capture one has a loyal following and is very good some say the best still on output quality alone and I would not argue that ! but LR4 is very solid and much improved and I feel is equal for C1

my personal stuff I use LR 4 and C1 for my commercial work !
I did use Aperture for my personal till LR3 I then switched for reasons I felt the DAM was better and the output was as good I did like Aperture for keeping it easy to update my mac account so my parents could see the grand kids etc..


Aperture is kinda out their on its own a bit so hard to say some pros use it love it ! it does have some of the best color control
LR4 is very easy to use as a DAM setup if you want

output Aperture I think is behind the others a bit in quality it was better than LR3 in highlight recovery
LR4 has the best shadow controls and recovery and highlight tools IMHO especially with the brush tools now
C1 has great ability to work with profiles etc.. making images look great with very little work if you are good at taking shots and they are usually good out of camera ! or not far off
some will argue and I tend to agree C1 has the best skin tones
and for architecture C1 has no rivals !!!! it is the best hands down
for speed of workflow working with large amounts of images per job LR is the leader
personal things such as faces and maps etc.. might be fun in Aperture though

I think any of them can do the job though and its all personal choices of what you like and what you feel is the output you like best !

i say download trials of all of them play with them a bunch

one thing I always say is look at the comunity around that uses it ! if you get stuck where can you get help the quickest etc..

hope this helps some

[just eric]

Thanks for the info guys. The amount of knowledge on this forum never ceases to amaze me. And to clarify, I'm a photo hack who is looking for software with basic tools for improving my photos, solid organization and stacking capability, and the ability to at least organize videos.

Honu, thanks again for the info you provided, you went above and beyond.

[nwoods]

Eric, if you have Photoshop CS5 or newer, it comes with Adobe Bridge that works remarkably well. I do not use LightRoom, I maintain and process my image library through Bridge. It does camera raw, batch processing, batch renaming, batch co-location copying/archiving, sorting, ranking, etc... and it comes with Photoshop. It's quite good.
http://www.adobe.com/content/dotcom/.../features.html

Here is a video about Bridge: http://tv.adobe.com/watch/learn-adob...e-bridge-cs5-/

Having said all that, I'd probably use Lightroom 4 if I had enough money to buy it :-)

[Honu]

Thanks for the info guys. The amount of knowledge on this forum never ceases to amaze me. And to clarify, I'm a photo hack who is looking for software with basic tools for improving my photos, solid organization and stacking capability, and the ability to at least organize videos.

Honu, thanks again for the info you provided, you went above and beyond.

no problem not much a wrencher so cant help out with engines and stuff but can help out with this kinda stuff


I think I would like I said download LR4 and Aperture and try those two out compare them give them a solid try on both sides ! skip C1 unless you dont mind paying the money ? the trial is free

if I had to tell someone ONE choice it would be LR4 purely cause it can do so much and do it quite well and never sell you short on output



nwoods has legit thought to use bridge with ACR if you have PS already ! both LR bridge use the same ACR engine to output raws so its more a matter of how the tools are laid out etc..

[nwoods]

More toys to consider if money is an issue (and isn't always?). There a free online photo editor much like Photoshop, called Pixlr (http://pixlr.com/editor/) that I really like.
Alternatively, Pixelmator has a really nice image editing program for Mac's, that is on sale TODAY ONLY for $15. Normally $30 I think. It's pretty cool looking, has rave reviews, but I've never used it
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pixel...ign-mpt=uo%3D4

website: http://www.pixelmator.com/

[DiploStrat]

Photo software splits grossly into three types:

-- Super browsers (e.g. PhotoMechanic) which focus on rapid renaming/sorting/culling.

-- Pixel editors (e.g. Photoshop) which focus on pixel peeping edits - everything from adjusting exposure to cutting out Aunt Mary to adding text.

-- Aperture, Lightroom, and, to a degree, iPhoto.

These latter are super browsers crossed with light editors. They are aimed at those who tend to shoot a lot, have large (10,000+ images) which have to be managed, and shoot RAW. Their great, secret weapon is what is called a "non-destructive" workflow. Basically, the original image file is never altered and all of your edits are stored in a separate file. (There are lots of geeky reasons why this is good, well beyond this discussion.)

So why Aperture over Lightroom? First of all, they are more alike than different. Lightroom has the edge today because it has been released at the "4" level while Aperture is still at "3." Lightroom 4 caught up to Aperture with things like soft proofing and fill light and moved ahead with superior noise reduction and lens profiles. I still much prefer Aperture's non modal workflow and consider that Aperture is much deeper in image cataloging and retrieval. Aperture 4 is considered to be overdue and there is some speculation that it will not be released before Mountain Lion.

Most serious photographers, who use Lightroom or Aperture, also use a pixel editor. (I use Photoshop Elements.) But most photographers find themselves using Lightoom or Aperture for some 90% of their work - exposure, crop, color adjust, sharpen, and only go to Photoshop for heavy duty work that requires levels, etc. Bottom line, Aperture and Lightroom are getting ever more powerful and most photographers (as opposed to graphic artists) have less and less use for pixel editors.

If you have a Mac iPhoto, I would start there. It is a great program, especially if you shoot JPEG. If/when you need more, then give Aperture or Lightroom a try. (Both usually have free trials.)

There are rumors that there is a form of Aperture for iPad in the works, but I have not paid much attention to this. NIK does have a program called Snapseed on the iPad, but I don't really see the iPad as more than a display tool, rather than an editing tool.

Bottom line, both are excellent programs and you can't go wrong with either.