hi all, i am a mac user getting tired of iphoto. thinkin about replacing with photoshop or aperture. what do you think? how is photoshop to stock pictures? thanks
At what size archive do you recommend going to these solutions, Buko? I’ve got a catchall folder with about 7000 jogs in it that ought to be catalogued in some way, these images will never be manipulated, just retrieved. Their filenames are for the most part self explanatory. Do either of these apps do a search on keyword or words and then make folders? I have Canto Cumulus but it’s not very intuitive and i haven’t used it in years.
I don’t have 7000 jogs, i have 7000 jpgs in that folder. Portfolio is 200 bucks, not worth it for non pro. iView is no longer available, Microsoft bought it and altered its DNA. It’s now something called Microsoft Media Expression and is lost in the giant amoeba.
i am a mac user getting tired of iphoto. thinkin about replacing with photoshop or aperture. what do you think? how is photoshop to stock pictures?
By all means, if your Mac hardware is strong enough give Aperture a trial. It absolutely rocks for the new killer-app category of DSLR image capture management. Lightroom is another choice, but IMO most appropriate only for folks with non-MacIntel hardware. Both are far superior to Photoshop for image capture management.
If you are not currently a Photoshop user I recommend the combination of Aperture for the all-important image capture management and RAW conversion, plus (inexpensive) Adobe Photoshop Elements for those few times when really heavy image editing, adding text, etc. is desired.
I find that Aperture indeed 100% replaces iPhoto; however some iPhoto-experienced folks do keep iPhoto partially involved in their Aperture workflow.
Step one with Aperture is to have at least 3-4 GB RAM. After adequate RAM is on board do the Aperture trial, and I strongly recommend that every digital photog with adequate computer hardware first spend $33 and work through the tutorial CD Apple Pro Training Series: Aperture 2 (Apple Pro Training Series) by Ben Long, Richard Harrington, and Orlando Luna (Paperback – May 8, 2008), Amazon.com.
Note that the value is in the tutorial, not in using the book as a manual. The time spent learning modern digital image capture workflow via the tutorial is invaluable.
IMO a cursory examination of Aperture usually turns out to be mostly a waste of time, or leads to bad workflow habits or folks simply do not get it. Carefully working the tutorial is by far the best way to learn this new killer app category.
Lightroom is another choice, but IMO most appropriate only for folks with non-MacIntel hardware.
What nonsense. The most important point in that statement is that it’s merely an opinion.
I have the hardware for Aperture but greatly prefer Lightroom. Each app has it’s pros and cons of course – both are polished with different shortcomings … but whatever Aperture had over LR, has been mostly eradicated and in some case leapfrogged by today’s release of Lightroom 2.0. Dual monitor support, localized corrections (without the need for a "plug in"), robust metadata filtering, 64-bit support (also in 1.xx), etc …
all without the need for a high-end machine and a steep learning curve requirement. (LR is MUCH more intuitive IMO and runs perfectly fine on my $1200 Macbook with 4GB of RAM)
I also worry how long Aperture will be around. LR is clearly dominating this relatively new application space in terms of users (even if you only factor Mac users). Apple hasn’t had nearly the same success with Aperture as they’ve had with Final Cut Pro. I’m not suggesting Aperture is going away any time soon, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it did.
yogininomad – I suggest you try the demos of BOTH Aperture and Lightroom and see what you’re more comfortable with.
Peter – I’m pretty sure Aperture can keep track of offline files, and know for a fact that Lightroom can.
