Happily switched from Aperture to Lightroom?

Started Apr 17, 2013 | Discussions
graybalanced Veteran Member • Posts: 5,666
Re: Happily switched from Aperture to Lightroom?

bravozulu wrote:

Hell, I see today that the new Leica saves images in the camera in DNG format.

Leica, Ricoh, Pentax, and Hasselblad all have cameras that can save straight to DNG, and none of this is new.

bravozulu Contributing Member • Posts: 897
Re: Happily switched from Aperture to Lightroom?

My window into DSLR is just one year old. Between dropping film photography '95 and now, I've never looked at camera magazine. The first time I did, was the occasion of buying my first digital last year.

 bravozulu's gear list:bravozulu's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED +5 more
Andy Hewitt Veteran Member • Posts: 3,367
Not for me

I finally got LightRoom to install properly here, but only after manually deleting all traces of Adobe software from my Mac, then reinstalling everything from scratch.

I have to say that I really don't understand how LR got so popular. As far as I'm concerned the UI is simply awful, and seems to have no real flow to it. Adjustments were OK, but on my Mac Mini, not any faster than with Aperture.

For sure Aperture isn't perfect, but I feel the workflow it offers is far more efficient - like others have said, it's far easier to go back and forth between adjustments, or add a rating/keywords etc., and go back to tweaking again.

Of course I didn't spend a lot of time with LR, and I'm sure if it came to be the only option as a DAM, then I'd get used to it. Right now though, I'm really hoping we do get an Aperture 4, as LR does not make me want to migrate, and re-edit 40,000 photos.

FWIW, has anybody with modest needs had a look at 'darktable'? It's an open source DAM, which seems to work very similarly to LR, but is free (it even has camera and lens profiles). Again, the UI wouldn't make me switch over right now, but should Aperture actually become obsolete, it's certainly worth considering.

-- hide signature --

Andy Hewitt
Using Olympus E-420 and Apple Mac Mini '09.

 Andy Hewitt's gear list:Andy Hewitt's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Topaz Adjust Apple iPhone 5c +3 more
Daniel Lauring
Daniel Lauring Veteran Member • Posts: 9,263
Re: Happily switched from Aperture to Lightroom?

Andy Hewitt wrote:

I couldn't even get LR to work. I downloaded the trial only a few days ago, as I'd spotted the price seems to have dropped a lot lately.

It just runs with a 'couldn't switch module' error, and then you can't seem to do anything, there's not even an obvious way to import images.

Same problem and I had he purchased version.  There is a permissions problem with the way LR installs.

The fix is HERE.

Daniel Lauring
Daniel Lauring Veteran Member • Posts: 9,263
Re: Not for me

Andy Hewitt wrote:

I have to say that I really don't understand how LR got so popular. As far as I'm concerned the UI is simply awful, and seems to have no real flow to it. Adjustments were OK, but on my Mac Mini, not any faster than with Aperture.

The biggest thing with LR, IMHO, is the ease of applying effects with brushes and then adjusting them afterwards.  It is similar to masking and layers in PS, but much faster.  For example you can quickly lighten part of the exposure while leaving the rest where it is.  You can sharpen just the eyes.  Watch some tutorials.

Andy Hewitt Veteran Member • Posts: 3,367
Re: Not for me

Daniel Lauring wrote:

Andy Hewitt wrote:

I have to say that I really don't understand how LR got so popular. As far as I'm concerned the UI is simply awful, and seems to have no real flow to it. Adjustments were OK, but on my Mac Mini, not any faster than with Aperture.

The biggest thing with LR, IMHO, is the ease of applying effects with brushes and then adjusting them afterwards.  It is similar to masking and layers in PS, but much faster.  For example you can quickly lighten part of the exposure while leaving the rest where it is.  You can sharpen just the eyes.  Watch some tutorials.

Yeah, you can brush in those with Aperture too. However, they're not tools I use much myself.

I didn't get as far as trying out too many individual tools, the initial feeling of the UI just felt too wrong to start with, I didn't really get any further than that.

-- hide signature --

Andy Hewitt
Using Olympus E-420 and Apple Mac Mini '09.

 Andy Hewitt's gear list:Andy Hewitt's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Topaz Adjust Apple iPhone 5c +3 more
Jack Frazier Senior Member • Posts: 1,801
Re: Not for me

Andy Hewitt wrote:

I have to say that I really don't understand how LR got so popular. As far as I'm concerned the UI is simply awful, and seems to have no real flow to it. Adjustments were OK, but on my Mac Mini, not any faster than with Aperture.

And I can't see why anyone wouldn't like LR. The UI is well designed and has a logical flow. I tried Aperture and to me it was clunky and unintuitive.

I'll never understand why people bash LR because of the different Modules? Has anyone ever heard of a Context Sensitive menu? Of course you have so what's the difference?

I absolutely love LR and it just keeps getting better and better.

But to each his own.

-- hide signature --

jack
pbase & dpreview supporter
For my latest pics, click the link below
www.pbase.com/jackfrazier
'You never get a second chance to make a first impression'
http://i.pbase.com/o6/39/12739/1/74893183.i7HMkLwR.WebAvatarsSunsetClingmansDomeRightco.jpg

 Jack Frazier's gear list:Jack Frazier's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED +1 more
Jacques Cornell
Jacques Cornell Veteran Member • Posts: 8,901
Non-linear workflow
2

Jack Frazier wrote:

Andy Hewitt wrote:

I have to say that I really don't understand how LR got so popular. As far as I'm concerned the UI is simply awful, and seems to have no real flow to it. Adjustments were OK, but on my Mac Mini, not any faster than with Aperture.

And I can't see why anyone wouldn't like LR. The UI is well designed and has a logical flow. I tried Aperture and to me it was clunky and unintuitive.

I'll never understand why people bash LR because of the different Modules? Has anyone ever heard of a Context Sensitive menu? Of course you have so what's the difference?

I like to retouch as I edit. After a job, first thing I do is click through and reject the duds and star the keepers. Thing is, sometimes I need to tweak an image before I can rank it, and I hate having to switch back and forth between modules. With Aperture, all tools are available at all times. If I'm laying out a book and one of the images doesn't match the others, I have access to all my adjustments right there. Or, if I'm making a slideshow and I realize that one image is missing a caption, click and type right there. And the loupe is a real loupe, not a misnamed zoom, that I can park off to the size to check focus under the cursor without leaving the full-image view.

For new users, this may seem less intuitive, because Aperture's not pushing you down a linear path by imposing a particular workflow. But, the flip side is that you can use it the way you want to work.

-- hide signature --

'No matter where you go, there you are.'

 Jacques Cornell's gear list:Jacques Cornell's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 +29 more
Andy Hewitt Veteran Member • Posts: 3,367
Re: Not for me

Jack Frazier wrote:

Andy Hewitt wrote:

I have to say that I really don't understand how LR got so popular. As far as I'm concerned the UI is simply awful, and seems to have no real flow to it. Adjustments were OK, but on my Mac Mini, not any faster than with Aperture.

And I can't see why anyone wouldn't like LR. The UI is well designed and has a logical flow. I tried Aperture and to me it was clunky and unintuitive.

They certainly have different approaches, and given some time, I know that each can be used to great effect.

However, as I see it, LR has a more rigid workflow, which forces the user along a path to the final image. Aperture has a more open workflow, where the user can choose the path more freely. There are of course pros and cons for each. In a non-destructive workflow though, it shouldn't matter much either way.

Personally I prefer the Aperture system, as it allows me to take control over how I want to edit and organise my photos. It still has a suggested workflow, as I understand it the adjustment bricks are placed in the order in which you should be applying them, and do make sense - such as placing the crop and rotate adjustments first, and so on.

I'll never understand why people bash LR because of the different Modules? Has anyone ever heard of a Context Sensitive menu? Of course you have so what's the difference?

I'm not sure how that relates really. A context sensitive menu removes and adds functions according the tasks being used at that time. If there's no need to remove functions, why bother?

It's certainly possible to create a more fixed workflow in Aperture, as you can hide or show various modules as you desire, and only leave showing the ones you want to work with. But, it's not possible to create a less rigid workflow in LR.

I appreciate that the LR way may well work better for pros, as they'd more likely want a rigid workflow with less distractions at each stage.

I absolutely love LR and it just keeps getting better and better.

That's nice.

But to each his own.

Indeed so.

Of course the other part of this is investment. I spent a lot on Aperture over the years (the original purchase price when it was at its highest, plus a couple of upgrades), and find it hard to justify the cost of dumping it and moving to LR. I suspect that applies the other way round. Certainly as a 'hobbyist' that applies to a great extent. And either way round, you have to think about whether you need the aggravation of re-organising and re-editing your photo collection - which at best could be a few thousand, to many hundreds of thousands (I have 40,000).

So, even if you did have a change of heart, there's much to consider besides just the UI. I could live with LR if I had to, but for what difference it's going to make to me, it's simply not worth it.

-- hide signature --

Andy Hewitt
Using Olympus E-420 and Apple Mac Mini '09.

 Andy Hewitt's gear list:Andy Hewitt's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Topaz Adjust Apple iPhone 5c +3 more
Andy Hewitt Veteran Member • Posts: 3,367
Re: Happily switched from Aperture to Lightroom?

Daniel Lauring wrote:

Andy Hewitt wrote:

I couldn't even get LR to work. I downloaded the trial only a few days ago, as I'd spotted the price seems to have dropped a lot lately.

It just runs with a 'couldn't switch module' error, and then you can't seem to do anything, there's not even an obvious way to import images.

Same problem and I had he purchased version.  There is a permissions problem with the way LR installs.

The fix is HERE.

Thanks, I managed to fix it anyway, by removing everything Adobe and reinstalling. As it happens I didn't like LR anyway.

Cheers.

-- hide signature --

Andy Hewitt
Using Olympus E-420 and Apple Mac Mini '09.

 Andy Hewitt's gear list:Andy Hewitt's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Topaz Adjust Apple iPhone 5c +3 more
Daniel Lauring
Daniel Lauring Veteran Member • Posts: 9,263
Re: Happily switched from Aperture to Lightroom?

Andy Hewitt wrote:

Daniel Lauring wrote:

There is a permissions problem with the way LR installs.

The fix is HERE.

Thanks, I managed to fix it anyway, by removing everything Adobe and reinstalling. As it happens I didn't like LR anyway.

The initial fixes I read all involved uninstalling everything.  I have a lot of plug-ins, in PS, quite a few I don't even remember where I got.  I did not want to go through the hassle of uninstalling them and finding and reinstalling them.

I hate when lazy programmers give you the advice to uninstall and reinstall.  It is like having a lung transplant to fix a cold.

Of course the other part of this is investment. I spent a lot on Aperture over the years (the original purchase price when it was at its highest, plus a couple of upgrades), and find it hard to justify the cost of dumping it and moving to LR. I suspect that applies the other way round. Certainly as a 'hobbyist' that applies to a great extent. And either way round, you have to think about whether you need the aggravation of re-organising and re-editing your photo collection - which at best could be a few thousand, to many hundreds of thousands (I have 40,000).

I have both Aperture and Lightroom.  I bought Aperture when it was on sale in the new App store.  I would use neither for organizing photos.  For that I use Google's Picasa.  I prefer it's interface for the speed and simplicity.  I only use the libraries in Aperture and Lightroom for the purpose of editing photos.  If you let the libraries get to big it really slows LR down so I have several...instead of one that covers everything.

Andy Hewitt Veteran Member • Posts: 3,367
Re: Happily switched from Aperture to Lightroom?

Daniel Lauring wrote:

Andy Hewitt wrote:

Daniel Lauring wrote:

There is a permissions problem with the way LR installs.

The fix is HERE.

Thanks, I managed to fix it anyway, by removing everything Adobe and reinstalling. As it happens I didn't like LR anyway.

The initial fixes I read all involved uninstalling everything.  I have a lot of plug-ins, in PS, quite a few I don't even remember where I got.  I did not want to go through the hassle of uninstalling them and finding and reinstalling them.

I hate when lazy programmers give you the advice to uninstall and reinstall.  It is like having a lung transplant to fix a cold.

I agree, although other factors have made me try to eradicate as much Adobe software from my system as I can - such as, a dreadful upgrade pricing policy, and the way it's files are installed on a system like a rash.

Of course the other part of this is investment. I spent a lot on Aperture over the years (the original purchase price when it was at its highest, plus a couple of upgrades), and find it hard to justify the cost of dumping it and moving to LR. I suspect that applies the other way round. Certainly as a 'hobbyist' that applies to a great extent. And either way round, you have to think about whether you need the aggravation of re-organising and re-editing your photo collection - which at best could be a few thousand, to many hundreds of thousands (I have 40,000).

I have both Aperture and Lightroom.  I bought Aperture when it was on sale in the new App store.  I would use neither for organizing photos.  For that I use Google's Picasa.  I prefer it's interface for the speed and simplicity.  I only use the libraries in Aperture and Lightroom for the purpose of editing photos.  If you let the libraries get to big it really slows LR down so I have several...instead of one that covers everything.

Interesting. Google software is another one I have eradicated from my system because of poor design. I hated the way it insists on installing the auto updater, which is no problem in itself, but it has caused my Mac to wake itself up in the night.

FWIW, I actually prefer the organisation in iPhoto, but that's a real pig to actually use nowadays.

I found the speed in Aperture isn't affected by the size of the library so much, but the size of projects. If you keep them small it seems OK - I have no speed issues at all on my old 2009 MacMini anyway.

-- hide signature --

Andy Hewitt
Using Olympus E-420 and Apple Mac Mini '09.

 Andy Hewitt's gear list:Andy Hewitt's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Topaz Adjust Apple iPhone 5c +3 more
historianx
historianx Senior Member • Posts: 2,873
Re: Happily switched from Aperture to Lightroom?

IMO here, I have both, and your results may vary...

Working in Aperture: Like having a career you enjoy.

Working in Lightroom:  Like dealing with a job you hate.

I have both, and while Aperture has its weaknesses, like noise reduction, Lightroom is a disorganized module-based black interfaced mess. I have the free LR 4 trial, and it's doubtful I will continue with it.

I'm already a slave to one "A", and have no desire to be a slave to the other "A."

 historianx's gear list:historianx's gear list
Sigma dp0 Quattro Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon D810 Nikon D750 Fujifilm X100S +1 more
Andy Hewitt Veteran Member • Posts: 3,367
Re: Happily switched from Aperture to Lightroom?

historianx wrote:

IMO here, I have both, and your results may vary...

Working in Aperture: Like having a career you enjoy.

Working in Lightroom:  Like dealing with a job you hate.

I have both, and while Aperture has its weaknesses, like noise reduction, Lightroom is a disorganized module-based black interfaced mess. I have the free LR 4 trial, and it's doubtful I will continue with it.

I'm already a slave to one "A", and have no desire to be a slave to the other "A."

I am 100% with you on that.

-- hide signature --

Andy Hewitt
Using Olympus E-420 and Apple Mac Mini '09.

 Andy Hewitt's gear list:Andy Hewitt's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Topaz Adjust Apple iPhone 5c +3 more
GiovanniB Contributing Member • Posts: 985
Re: Non-linear workflow

Jacques Cornell wrote:

With Aperture, all tools are available at all times.

For new users, this may seem less intuitive, because Aperture's not pushing you down a linear path by imposing a particular workflow. But, the flip side is that you can use it the way you want to work.

Couldn't agree more. I just switched to LR because of RAW conversion quality on Canon files, camera calibration capability with ColorChecker Passport, and sharpening/de-noising/lens corrections. However, the interface is way too restricting compared to Aperture. I feel like having been chained up. Terrible.

In fact despite I also paid some amount for an additional plug-in I'm still daily looking for news regarding a possible upcoming new Aperture version. With the UI of Lightroom remaining essentially unchanged in version 5, I'd switch back to Aperture any day if only the above issues would be fixed/implemented and one could know that development continues.

Btw. Capture One 7 deserves to be mentioned. Its interface is more similar to Aperture than to LR. However, the lack of hierarchical keywording inside the program kept me from further considering it, although it could be used together with Media Pro that has very robust hierarchical keywording and other DAM functionality.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads