Apple Aperture software

Started 9 months ago | Discussions thread
KAllen
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,743Gear list
Like?
Re: Still using Bibble 5... considering Aperture too
In reply to rwbaron, 8 months ago

rwbaron wrote:

Ed Halley wrote:

My biggest concern with newer software is that they like to dominate my files. I already have all my CR2s in its own filing system, with directories that I can navigate and archive easily. I don't want it to "Import" and suck everything into a hidden vortex I'll never find again.

I have a similar concern and this was something I never felt comfortable with regarding Light Room. My concerns may be unfounded but I did not like the import function as I rarely use LR for processing my RAW files and I wasn't comfortable with the way LR catalogs files. May just be ignorance though on my part but it didn't seem intuitive to me

I'm still using an old copy of Bibble 5, because it lets me just browse the file system and save the extra data as plain old files along with each CR2. It has lots of limitations, but it doesn't dominate my filing system.

That's why I still use Canon's Zoom Browser to download files because I can assign a folder that fits my structure and everything is easy to find regardless of what software I choose to work with to convert the RAW files. Again, I could be wrong and would love for someone to point out my misunderstanding but to me LR seems to take files captive in the program.

How is Aperture in this regard? I saw their "Import folder" stuff. Do they keep the Aperture stuff WITH the images, or do they create a whole parallel set of stuff in ~/Library or what?

From what I've seen in this tutorial Aperture appears to be quite benign (friendly) in this regard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rml6LadJ8L8

From other tutorials I also like the Aperture user interface compared to LR. I've never cared for the way ACR renders Canon CR2's either. I don't feel the colors are good and it's difficult to get any "pop" from images when printing. Canon's DPP is very basic and limited by comparison but IMO it does the absolute best job of Canon RAW file conversion regarding colors, contrast, etc.

Aperture is also like DPP in that changes you make to the file do not affect the master as they're only a set of instructions (xml) for a virtual file and doesn't change the master which I like. You don't have to "Save" with Aperture like LR or PS and convert your file to a different format after processing.

Bob

-- hide signature --

How I use Aperture.

I have dedicated HDs for Aperture, two 3TB drives and two backups of each. My Aperture library is stored on them and only my Aperture library is on them. No reason you can't store other stuff but I keep my library separate from other things. All stored as RAW.

I can access any raw, tiff or jpg in my library very easily, that's why I use Aperture. I can export that raw as a tiff, jpg or RAW at the click of a mouse. Aperture is your gateway to finding the file and then doing as you please with it, you can keyword search, date, exif or metadata search. You can organise the structure as you please.

The backup of the library is really safe and easy via the vault system so everything is kept nice and safe.

I have lots of smart folders set up so as I keyword everything gets sorted automatically. I spent a lot of money on DAM systems in the past, I've yet to see anything beat Aperture. It's worth the money just for sorting your images, it also does a good conversion. Nothing to stop you just storing your images in Aperture then exporting the RAW to Capture One for editing within Aperture if you so wish .

Your images do not get lost in a black hole , the point of Aperture is to make retrieval easy, very easy.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow