Home → Blog → Yet Another Aperture vs Lightroom Blog Post
Yet Another Aperture vs Lightroom Blog Post
Posted by:
Coby
on 04/13/2010
And perhaps the shortest.
Despite being a professed Apple Fan Boy I use Adobe Lightroom because it works better for ME. And for those of you who read my "Should I Switch to Apple?" post, yes this is another "It Depends" answer. Aperture and Lightroom are both pretty well made and getting better with each version (Yes, I have used them all). I settled on Lightroom because I prefer the way it handles my file structure and the user interface, but those are really personal preferences more than any performance metric.
Seriously, if you think you can read through blog posts and reviews to divine the answer to this one you are wrong. Sometimes you just need to roll up your sleeves and get your hands dirty to find the answer yourself. This is one of those times. And you are in luck, because last I checked they both offer free trial downloads:
Mostly because that's what I started with thanks to a free copy from Adobe for participating in a version 1.0 focus group!
Seriously though... I like LR, but there are still things about it that annoy me, such as the different adjustment panel between the Library and Develop Modules. It's a bit annoying that I can only add keywords in Library, and that I can only apply "Previous Settings" to an image in Develop. I also really long for the book layout ability in Aperture and I like how you can pull images from the Aperture library in other Apple applications like you can the iPhoto library. I find myself using both Lightroom and iPhoto right now, which is cumbersome and also a disk space hog.
Only rarely do I use the Print module and I've never used the Web module since I use things like SmugMug, Flickr and MobileMe rather than posting gallery pages to a separate web site. I think maybe I used the Slideshow module once just to try it.
I downloaded the Aperture trial, but it expired before I could really put it through its paces on one of my shoots. Because there was no Aperture to SmugMug plug-in until recently, I couldn't really use Aperture to process one of my jobs without having to export selected images as JPEGs and upload them to SmugMug via they're web interface. I didn't want to be bothered with that additional step so i just stuck with Lightroom.
I wish I could get a new trial version of Aperture to test drive since it's been updated recently, but I don't think it will work. I may just have to buy it to really give it a try.
Hi Erin!
You should be able to get a free trial download for Aperture 3. You might need to use another email address if you have used up your previous trial period. I Don't think that would be abusing the system since you never got to trial it. Version 3 is worth a spin.
And I think your comment also proves my point. There are some differences between the two, which have been exhaustively debated on other sites, but I think they are becoming harder to qualify as the products mature. At this point I think it would be quicker and more constructive for people to go out and actually try them both. And folks should not expect it to be an easy decision. I too like the tighter integration with the other iApps that Aperture provides. I also like the Places (geo-tag) concept and adjustment brushes in v3 but could care less about Faces since I don't do much people photography. But at the end of the day I feel my workflow is more efficient using Lightroom. So I give up a few things I would like to have for something I must have - a workflow I like.
BTW, I did use Aperture 1.0 as my primary because I thought it sucked less (both of them were just OK out of the gate), but started to like Lightroom better at v2 for the reasons I mentioned in the post. I am now using LR 3 Beta 2 and am looking forward to the stable release.
What new features or improvements have you observed in LR3? I haven't downloaded the beta... preferring to stick with v2 until the final version is released... nor have I read much about it.
Right now I am most interested in their integration with Flickr. It makes it pretty easy to keep images in your Sets synced with your LR Library. I can make all my edits, including metadata, and it allows me to publish/republish easily. There are claims about speed improvements etc, but I have not really noticed much at this point. I do like the local adjustment brushes a bunch and hope they make them better in 3 - Ability to link them to any of the adjustment options would be nice.
Aperture 3 has Flickr integration and local adjustment brushes too, so again not a clear winner for LR. I just do not care for the interface and file handling in Aperture. I prefer the modal tabs and transparent file structure that LR uses. And again, it's still going to be more of a personal choice.
Forward
Twitter
Comments
I use Lightroom, too...
Mostly because that's what I started with thanks to a free copy from Adobe for participating in a version 1.0 focus group!
Seriously though... I like LR, but there are still things about it that annoy me, such as the different adjustment panel between the Library and Develop Modules. It's a bit annoying that I can only add keywords in Library, and that I can only apply "Previous Settings" to an image in Develop. I also really long for the book layout ability in Aperture and I like how you can pull images from the Aperture library in other Apple applications like you can the iPhoto library. I find myself using both Lightroom and iPhoto right now, which is cumbersome and also a disk space hog.
Only rarely do I use the Print module and I've never used the Web module since I use things like SmugMug, Flickr and MobileMe rather than posting gallery pages to a separate web site. I think maybe I used the Slideshow module once just to try it.
I downloaded the Aperture trial, but it expired before I could really put it through its paces on one of my shoots. Because there was no Aperture to SmugMug plug-in until recently, I couldn't really use Aperture to process one of my jobs without having to export selected images as JPEGs and upload them to SmugMug via they're web interface. I didn't want to be bothered with that additional step so i just stuck with Lightroom.
I wish I could get a new trial version of Aperture to test drive since it's been updated recently, but I don't think it will work. I may just have to buy it to really give it a try.
-Erin (@eschrad)
Good Points
Hi Erin!
You should be able to get a free trial download for Aperture 3. You might need to use another email address if you have used up your previous trial period. I Don't think that would be abusing the system since you never got to trial it. Version 3 is worth a spin.
And I think your comment also proves my point. There are some differences between the two, which have been exhaustively debated on other sites, but I think they are becoming harder to qualify as the products mature. At this point I think it would be quicker and more constructive for people to go out and actually try them both. And folks should not expect it to be an easy decision. I too like the tighter integration with the other iApps that Aperture provides. I also like the Places (geo-tag) concept and adjustment brushes in v3 but could care less about Faces since I don't do much people photography. But at the end of the day I feel my workflow is more efficient using Lightroom. So I give up a few things I would like to have for something I must have - a workflow I like.
BTW, I did use Aperture 1.0 as my primary because I thought it sucked less (both of them were just OK out of the gate), but started to like Lightroom better at v2 for the reasons I mentioned in the post. I am now using LR 3 Beta 2 and am looking forward to the stable release.
LR3
What new features or improvements have you observed in LR3? I haven't downloaded the beta... preferring to stick with v2 until the final version is released... nor have I read much about it.
-Erin
Mostly Flickr Integration
Right now I am most interested in their integration with Flickr. It makes it pretty easy to keep images in your Sets synced with your LR Library. I can make all my edits, including metadata, and it allows me to publish/republish easily. There are claims about speed improvements etc, but I have not really noticed much at this point. I do like the local adjustment brushes a bunch and hope they make them better in 3 - Ability to link them to any of the adjustment options would be nice.
Aperture 3 has Flickr integration and local adjustment brushes too, so again not a clear winner for LR. I just do not care for the interface and file handling in Aperture. I prefer the modal tabs and transparent file structure that LR uses. And again, it's still going to be more of a personal choice.
Post new comment