idan
Full Member
Posts: 77
|
Post by idan on Feb 9, 2010 15:27:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wierdostomps on Feb 9, 2010 21:08:15 GMT
And will that convert my brother-in-law from Lightroom?
Or is it more aimed at me - the semi serious hobbyist? £169 seems a lot to save me having to get to grips with Photoshop. But I will have a look at the demo - especially if there is an iPad version!
|
|
idan
Full Member
Posts: 77
|
Post by idan on Feb 10, 2010 11:51:41 GMT
Well its still not a patch on Photoshop or even Photoshop Elements.
|
|
|
Post by HeatherKay on Feb 11, 2010 10:53:05 GMT
Well its still not a patch on Photoshop or even Photoshop Elements. Which is quite true, but misses the point. Aperture is designed manage your photo library (so you can find images very quickly) and process your images (without adding bulk to the file sizes if you work in RAW). You can do relatively simple retouching, like taking out the odd dust spot or cloning out an errant bird from the sky. For the full retouching works - like clipping subjects out from backgrounds or compositing several images into one - then it's out to Photoshop or similar, and begin all the hassles with multiple versions of the same file filling up your hard drive. I've been using Aperture for a couple of years, and to be honest I only rarely need to leave to do something the app can't do. I upload to Flickr and Facebook (currently with third party plugins), I export to different formats when I need to share physical copies, and I've imported my current iPhoto library too. I've even published a small photo book directly from inside Aperture. It's a very different animal to Photoshop. Even as Lightroom is different to Photoshop.
|
|
|
Post by wierdostomps on Feb 13, 2010 15:32:30 GMT
How does it compare to Lightroom? Both seem to combine cataloguing with better editing than iPhoto, but less than Photoshop. Is it a case of paying your money and taking your choice? A3 now seems a bit more consumer oriented, where Lightroom has the Photoshop pedigree. Is that fair?
|
|
idan
Full Member
Posts: 77
|
Post by idan on Feb 13, 2010 20:39:50 GMT
I have Aperture demo running at the moment and i have to say its just a more pro version of iPhoto - in fact I prefer iPhoto.
|
|
|
Post by HeatherKay on Feb 14, 2010 10:01:13 GMT
I have Aperture demo running at the moment and i have to say its just a more pro version of iPhoto - in fact I prefer iPhoto. That's your choice. Bear in mind, though, the fundamental difference between iPhoto and Aperture. On the surface they appear similar, but Aperture is a non-destructive editor. Let me explain. I'm only a minnow, but I've got close to 8000 images in my library. Each one may have been tweaked or adjusted to some degree. Now, in an iPhoto world, each one of those images would have been duplicated by iPhoto each time I saved a change. I could have nearly 16000 images in my library at various stages of editing. They'd also be in one huge library file. In an Aperture world, each change is written to an XML sidecar file. It's a text file that gives Aperture the instructions to repeat the editing recipe when I view the image. It never duplicates the master image - even if I make a proper dupe of one, it's still just an instruction in a text file. At any time, I could have five or six variants of the master image, but not have five or six extra copies of that master. Yet, at any time, I could undo one of those edits, or remove them all. It's non-destructive editing. My master "negative", if you like, is still intact and I can return to it whenever it suits me. I can also have as many library files as I think I need - one for each project if that's what suited me. (In iPhoto, all you can do is revert to the original image, which essentially throws away the changed versions and dumps the original photo at the top of the pile again. In older versions of the app you can actually go into the library using the Finder and see the labyrinthine structure of copies and copies of copies. Scary stuff.) I work in RAW format, so saving that disk space is a big deal. If you don't understand why Aperture or Lightroom works this way, then stick with iPhoto. For me, the extra power Aperture gives me in keywording, descriptions, captioning, creating projects, slide shows, printing, and the non-destructive editing, is well worth paying for.
|
|