![]() Ever buy a car one year only to find out the next year’s model (or a competing model you looked at previously) has something really cool you wish you had? Do you go out and trade your car in for a huge loss and get the new model? Some of you do I’m sure. There’s always going to be features in one program that you like better than another. Your photography workflow shouldn’t be “sure, I’ll use Lightroom today but maybe Aperture tomorrow”. Your job is to pick the best tool for your job regardless of whether there’s 10 companies that do the same thing or none. It’s to support the best product out there and to reward that product by opening your wallet. I’m going to directly disagree with #5 from his list (supporting competition) and say ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, NO WAY! As a consumer, your (and my) job is not to support competition. Reason #5: This isn’t an “I’m in the mood for ” game I’m not so sure where it would rank with Apple. You’ve gotta realize that being the best at raw processing has to rank up pretty high in Adobe’s priority list. Two things I noticed when comparing them: 1) The noise removal (luminance and color) is noticeably better and the edges seem more crisp as opposed to blurred in Aperture and, 2) Lightroom photos retained more of their color even after cranking up the Color Noise removal setting pretty high.īasically, when it comes down to reading the raw data and doing something useful with it (demosaicing, sharpening, and noise removal), my money goes to Adobe. Aperture doesn’t even come close in my opinion. I ran quite a few images through the noise removal settings in both programs. If you look at Aperture 3’s feature list, it doesn’t even mention the word noise and as you know, noise removal is BIG. This one definitely goes in the win column for Lightroom. But it doesn’t so I have to make a choice. I can still print books elsewhere, but I can’t get Lightroom’s Print module anywhere else. Personally, I’ll take the Print module in Lightroom. Which is more important? That’s up to you. Some portrait and wedding pros swear by Lightroom’s Print module and some folks swear by the great looking books in Aperture. Lightroom has custom print templates (in LR 3 beta) and an entire Print module, that you have to admit, is one of the most robust in the industry. This is one of those areas where you can argue either way but I think Lightroom makes a stronger case. eh, its cool but is it worth switching for? And of course we do have Full Screen mode in Lightroom. Even though its different, it still does the same job. Books definitely go into the win column for Aperture (see #3 below). And in the article referenced above, he dings Lightroom for not having “Books, Loupe, Light Table and Full Screen Mode”. The History aspect of Lightroom is way better. Lightroom 2/3 beta has better effects when it comes to adding grain and vignetting. Lightroom has tighter integration with Photsoshop and the Graduated filter. It’s one of my favorite panels in Lightroom. Remember when Camera Calibration profiles came out for Lightroom? You should because everyone absolutely loved them. Reason #2: Camera Calibration, Effects, Collections, History panel, tighter Photoshop Integration, Vignettes and other stuff And the reason why LR has more modules than A3 has tabs, is because Adobe has located two key areas (slideshow and web) there instead of a menu up at the top. If its not a module I need to use then I simply just don’t click on it. Aside from wishing the Develop module had Folders and Collections in it (like I said, LR3 beta has Collections now), I don’t find myself cursing the modules in Lightroom. And when it comes down to it, the only difference is tabs in Aperture compared to modules in LR. One big reason is that in Lightroom (the LR3 beta) we have Collections in the Develop module which keeps me from bouncing back and forth (something I found myself doing a lot in Aperture). I’ll go head-to-head with this one because I think Lightroom is better here. Reason #1: Enjoying the Digital Darkroom (this was reason #1 from Marco’s article) I had a copy of Aperture 3 installed the day after it was announced and have been kicking the tires since then. However, as an expert in the industry I can’t just go around saying “my program is better than yours” without testing the other one. Will this article seem Lightroom biased? You betcha! Because I am Lightroom biased (you’re at a blog called Lightroom Killer Tips if you haven’t noticed). Let me just get one thing out from the start though. So I figured I’d take a stab at my own rendition of the “5 things” article (no offense to Marco) and write about 5 reasons to stay with Lightroom. I read an article yesterday titled “Five Reasons For Switching from Lightroom 2 to Aperture 3” by a gentleman named Marco. Obviously there’s been a lot of buzz around lately about Apple’s Aperture 3.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |