Aperture vs Lightroom
- Started
- Last post
- 22 Responses
- Arild0
As far as I've experienced Lightroom seems faster, plus I don't like Aperture's file handling (archiving). In mine opinion the two programs are only good for quick editing of large amount of files.
99% of the time I combine Bridge for image selecting and Photoshop for editing.
- mediumcontrol0
Using LR 1.4 right now and love it. However, it does not work w/ my 7D raw photos, frustrating. The LR 3 beta does accept them, but the quality is not up to par yet.
- version30
is not aperture os discriminatory? i would believe if this were a job based discussion lightroom would be the tool as it is mac pc compatible. also as lightroom has the presets so easily made stored and shared you'll notice a rice of lightroom discussion boards where sharing these presets exist. haven't seen that for aperture.
and don't forget it adds to your adobe monopoly money pit
- dibec0
Lightroom hands down. I have used both. Aperture is great program, but I really love the control in Lightroom.
- Ravdyk0
It's still beta right?
- graphiknature0
Any try Light Room 3 yet?
- Ravdyk0
It seems lightroom gets more bullshit functions everytime. Who gives his photo's stars?
- leocavallini0
I confess I never used Aperture but Lightroom 3 promises a lot. I even installed the beta version to see what's new but downgraded to 2.5 again. I use it since early 2007 and it goes amazing for my workflow.
- pauli0
Aperture is to Lightroom to what Lightroom is to iPhoto
- Tungsten0
Lightroom for cataloging and light editing, Capture One for raw processing and tethered shooting.
- nb0
I use Aperture for tethered shooting. As far as I know, Lightroom can't do tethered on it's own.
- colin_s0
lightroom is far superior
both do relatively the same thing but i've noticed the brightness / contrast controls push a little more in lightroom, and i just like the way it navigates. aperture, well, like most apple things, seems a little dumbed down.
- sky2x0
I've used Aperture 2 for a while now and I'm completely happy with it. Like anything else you get used to a workflow. Aperture does everything I need it to with a handful of plugins. And it's pretty snappy on both machines. I test drove Lightroom (I think it was 2 at the time?) and the interface seemed clumsy by comparison. Besides for any heavy editing you can roundtrip out to Photoshop (or any other package).
Oh. And I pay enough money to Adobe already.
However, if Apple doesn't upgrade soon or get faster at supporting new versions of RAW I may have to switch to LR.
- xcarlx0
i have only used older versions of aperture, and use lightroom everyday, and it is just faster, full stop. Tried aperture, gave up.
on top of that, aperture can't do much that picasa (which is free) can't do.- I had similar experience... but I heard apple completely rewrote Aperture since then...vaxorcist
- ninjasavant0
I chose Aperture over Lightroom because it was $100 cheaper.
- Meeklo0
would love to hear from people that have actually used both, why is one better than the other one, not just pick one name over the other, that would be neat :)
- vaxorcist0
Lightroom, but I have to admit I haven't used recent versions of Aperture.... Last time I tried, Aperture was slower, less easy to segment large image libraries across multiple hard drives and I didn't like the way it handled presets as much as the way Aperture did...
I'm sure the Filter shows a similar question in the past... but LR 3.0 vs current Aperture may be different
and don't forget to download Capture 1 Pro's latest version, I didn't like the workflow as much, but the skintones from Canon RAW files looked great in Capture 1