Apple Aperture

[parisian]

When I picked up the Mac last week my intention was to load both 'Aperture' and Nik Efex to deal with monochrome conversion. I said at the time that I had seen these in action and was impressed. I have had Aperture for a few days now and spent a deal of time working through the differing tools and abilities. I have to say that to my mind this is far more friendly than Photoshop and it is unlikely that I will need Nik Efex. The monochrome conversion ability is very good indeed and the amount of available control is plenty for my needs.
So far, so very good indeed.

[Slartibartfast]

I was hoping to get a mac book (mainly for Aperture!) with my bonus from work - but it doesn't even come close!



Anyone I've spoken to loves Aperture!

[Scphoto]

Anyone I've spoken to loves Aperture!

I tried Aperture, but it was really poor on my Mac Mini. LightRoom on the other hand was great - so I stuck with that. I'm not a fan of the way Aperture handles files, much prefer LRs way of leaving the Raw alone and just using metadata for the changes.

[parisian]

I think the point is Stephen that Aperture now provides another alternative to the increasingly costly Photoshop. This allows people to develop their own workflow/software solution and is one of the few good things to come from the digital revolution. Of course there are areas where Photoshop excels but for the vast majority of my work then Aperture will do the job very nicely thank you.

[Graham_M]

It's taken me a while to get used to the completely different way Aperture works compared to ps but now I've (almost) got to grips with it I think it is superb. I couldn't at first get the way you don't 'save as' any more but make 'versions' of the images - as many versions as you like of one image, these versions are actually just small files where only the adjustments are on there - it does not permanently change an image - great stuff!

[parisian]

Ah, well, as you are in Wales Graham, then it is fairly obvious that you talk sense
"Almost got to grips with it"? - absolutely, it is only when you really begin to explore that you realise what a huge programme this is and the potential it has.

[TimF]

Mmmm. Maybe I should download the free trial version. Lightroom is great at image organisation, but I far prefer C1 for colour.

[parisian]

Good morning Tim, I believe that Nick is a great fan of Capture 1 also. I assume I will get the chance to examine it closely when the '8' arrives.
I wouldn't presume to suggest that anyone else either tried or bought 'Aperture', I am just happy to report on my findings within 'my' workflow.
Luckily there are enough image editors for all of us to find the one that suits.

[Scphoto]

Luckily there are enough image editors for all of us to find the one that suits.

Indeed, I hope personally the next versions of our preferred software will help us do away with Photoshop (CS bit anyway) completely. I also did like the look of Capture One when I had a play with it recently.

[TimF]

I believe that Nick is a great fan of Capture 1 also

Afternoon Peter. I had it in my head that Nick is a DXO user, but may be wrong of course. The choice for us all nowadays is terrific, as you say. Something for almost every taste.

[parisian]

Indeed Tim, Nick is, (I think) a user of DXO but I do remember him giving a high rating to Capture 1 (A fan if not a user).

[Benchista]

Er - Lightroom is currently my preferred way of operating, actually.

I think C1 produces the best quality conversions, DxO is very clever in what it does, but LR suits my way of working best for most of the time. I've not looked at the latest version of Aperture, but last time I looked, it didn't suit me anything like as much as LR. Personal preference, of course, I think it's a really good piece of software, just I didn't like the feel of it. LR feels like it was designed by a photographer, just about anything else feels designed by computer programmers, which is a nice illusion.
I'm unlikely to upgrade my version of C1 or DxO beyond where they are now, TBH, because Canon's free DPP is catching up on DxO fairly quickly, and can also produce better quality in some circumstances than ACR/LR produces, so I'll happily not spend any more on them.

[parisian]

Oh well that's both of us wrong then
I do like the comment about not upgrading further. I wonder how many more would say that?
As with cameras a lot of people seem to think that an upgrade will make them better snappers for some reason

[Scphoto]

I do like the comment about not upgrading further.

Problem for us Adobe users, a new Camera will often have to result in a new bit of software! (or update)

[Benchista]

I do like the comment about not upgrading further.

Problem for us Adobe users, a new Camera will often have to result in a new bit of software! (or update)

Yes, it may do. But not more than one!

[parisian]

I spent three hours last night working through the manual and the on-line video tuition. The programme is vast but as it is purely photographic in content (in contrast to Photoshop) it is well worth the effort. It may well take me a few more hours yet to be comfortable - old habits etc. - but it is getting easier.

[spinno]

I spent three hours last night working through the manual and the on-line video tuition. The programme is vast but as it is purely photographic in content (in contrast to Photoshop) it is well worth the effort. It may well take me a few more hours yet to be comfortable - old habits etc. - but it is getting easier.

takes yer mind off the fags...or does it drive you to them....

[parisian]

Confusingly David - both