# LightRoom or Aperture on Mac?



## thaiphotos

Anyone give me advice on whether to go with LightRoom or Aperture? Preferably someone that has used both


----------



## jdag

I am very much an amateur. But I recently bought my 1st Mac and decided to go with Aperture after trying it along side LR3 for several days. I had used LR2 for about 2 years on my PC.

I am very pleased with Aperture. I now have a much faster computer with 12gb of RAM, so I really cannot accurately compare speed differences between Aperture on my Mac and LR on my PC.

But I prefer just about everything about the Aperture interface over the LR interface. I also prefer Aperture's output options over those in LR (books, prints, slideshows, etc.).

I am learning more about Aperture every day, and like it more every day. Add in the fact that it was only $80 for all Macs in my household (mine, my son's), it was a steal.


----------



## thaiphotos

jdag said:


> I am very much an amateur. But I recently bought my 1st Mac and decided to go with Aperture after trying it along side LR3 for several days. I had used LR2 for about 2 years on my PC.
> 
> I am very pleased with Aperture. I now have a much faster computer with 12gb of RAM, so I really cannot accurately compare speed differences between Aperture on my Mac and LR on my PC.
> 
> But I prefer just about everything about the Aperture interface over the LR interface. I also prefer Aperture's output options over those in LR (books, prints, slideshows, etc.).
> 
> I am learning more about Aperture every day, and like it more every day. Add in the fact that it was only $80 for all Macs in my household (mine, my son's), it was a steal.



Many thanks jdag. I'll give Aperture a go!!


----------



## rich a

I've used both, but I definitely enjoy Aperture's interface and ease of use a little more. For me, it's made things an awful lot easier to organize and keep together.


----------



## will-jum

Lightroom!


----------



## TheEugeneKam

lightroom is better technically but i love apertures UI


----------



## Will Chao

Both have pros and cons

Aperture is a much better DAM, such as geotagging/face tagging features, better integration with facebook and flickr etc. it's more social overall. And I prefer the interface over lightroom's

Aperture produces better colors by default

Aperture has a better brush than lightroom's for local adjustment


On Lightroom's side, it has lens correction, camera calibration , better integration with Photoshop, better printing module, far superior noise reduction etc.


----------



## Will Chao

Just found this article on Google, may help you decide:


RAW Processors &#8211; an extensive review of Aperture, Bibble, Capture One, DxO and Lightroom


----------



## JohnMF

I purchased Aperture yesterday, chose it over LR because it was way cheaper. Have to say I'm very happy with it so far (which surprises me because i thought i was going to hate it).

Running it on a 5 year old macbook pro with 2gb memory. It gets a little bogged down at times, but nothing i can't put up with.


----------



## Adams

try both see which you like better, they are both very capable and pros use both


http://www.adamsilversmith.com


----------



## tfa8rva

Getting Apeture for $80 through the App Store is tough to pass up. But after using both for awhile I find it rare, if ever that I use Aperture.  I just prefer LR 3 much more over Aperture......however, I've using it since 1.3...so I'm sure familiarity plays into that a lot.  You can get demos of both to try out.


----------



## asal

I use Lightroom


----------



## DrDavid

Honestly, I've used both and I'm a big fan of Lightroom. But, aperture is nice too! In my opinion, here's the benefits of both:

1) Lightroom has way more ability to integrate with sites like Zenfolio, SmugMug, flickr, and more. Its "Publish" feature has no comparison in Aperture.
2) Aperture is integrated way nicer into MacOS; and it's $80 price tag on the Mac App Store is just insanely cheap. (You have read the license terms on the MAS, right?   )

But, Aperture just doesn't have the same publish functionality. Also, I find that while it's great for 'Event' photography, I personally like how Lightroom just organizes the photos by date. It's easier for me in many ways; but, if you're an event photographer, it's probably not a hugely big deal for you. 

One other deal-killer may be that while neither will allow network sharing of the database, only Aperture can have the library stored on an external network drive. Lightroom won't even let a single user use the library on a network share.

Anyways, hope that helps?


----------



## SunnyHours

Am I really the only one having my Mac crash numerous times while using Aperture 3? I've been using Photoshop since CS2 and recently made the switch to Aperture from CS5 even though I do most of my photo editing still in Photoshop but started using the all of the adjustment tool in Aperture. The only drawback is the slowness of the program and all the (full system) crashes that comes along. I'm starting to think LR might be the easiest way to go with the PS Plugin...


----------



## usayit

I chose lightroom and been happy with it for a few years now.   The decision process was simply  I downloading the  trial versions of each giving myself time to learn.   IIRC, one of the things I liked was LR's database and management.  At least back then, there also seemed to be more LR discussion and resource available online.  It might be due to the fact that Aperture is only available to Mac while LR is available to Windows and Mac os x


----------



## Vautrin

Your best bet is to try software.  Apereture might have a free demo but it's definitely available to play with in your local mac store.  Lightroom has a free demo.  You'll probably just like one over the other -- personally I use lightroom but see what is best for you


----------



## bishwo

It depends upon your requirements and everyone judge by their own experience. You might have different preferences. So my advice is to go through some reviews materials on both softwares. You can find couple of videos in youtube.


----------



## HoboSyke

Why use Lightroom instead of Adobes Photoshop CS5?


----------



## usayit

HoboSyke said:


> Why use Lightroom instead of Adobes Photoshop CS5?


 
Its not a this or that decision... both are different tools for different jobs.


----------



## HoboSyke

usayit said:


> HoboSyke said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why use Lightroom instead of Adobes Photoshop CS5?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its not a this or that decision... both are different tools for different jobs.
Click to expand...

 
Aperture and Lightroom are crap compared to CS5 in my opinion. Would not use them ever!


----------



## usayit

HoboSyke said:


> Aperture and Lightroom are crap compared to CS5 in my opinion. Would not use them ever!



Then you don't  understand the differences nor how to leverage the tools.....    I use LR (and a lot of people here as well) far more than PS.

Workflow management versus photo editing; Many professionals will most likely require both not one or the other.


----------



## msuggs

Thanks for posting this. Very helpful.



Will Chao said:


> Just found this article on Google, may help you decide:
> 
> 
> RAW Processors  an extensive review of Aperture, Bibble, Capture One, DxO and Lightroom


----------



## conquistador

SunnyHours said:


> Am I really the only one having my Mac crash numerous times while using Aperture 3? I've been using Photoshop since CS2 and recently made the switch to Aperture from CS5 even though I do most of my photo editing still in Photoshop but started using the all of the adjustment tool in Aperture. The only drawback is the slowness of the program and all the (full system) crashes that comes along. I'm starting to think LR might be the easiest way to go with the PS Plugin...



do you use both aperture and photoshop. I use aperture and am considering buying Photoshop CS5 for the better editing capability. Is there any disadvantage to using aperture instead of Lightroom?


----------



## pmpfx

I have one thing to say regarding all Apple software:  Final Cut Pro.

If you do a little research on the recent Final Cut Pro X "upgrade" you will find how Apple treats those who buy Apple software.  Apple is a hardware company.  Adobe is a software company.  I don't buy software from a hardware company.


----------



## ojphoto

> I have one thing to say regarding all Apple software: Final [FONT=inherit !important][FONT=inherit !important]Cut [/FONT][FONT=inherit !important]Pro[/FONT][/FONT].
> 
> If you do a little research on the recent [FONT=inherit !important][FONT=inherit !important]Final [/FONT][FONT=inherit !important]Cut [/FONT][FONT=inherit !important]Pro[/FONT][/FONT] X "upgrade" you will find how Apple treats those who buy Apple software. Apple is a hardware company. Adobe is a software company. I don't buy software from a hardware company.



I have been using Final Cut Pro and Aperture for years. I also have and use LR and Premier. I think the issue with FCP is a overblown one. I don't see any degradation of the software but a simplification. In other words it make doing things easier. The people I see complaining the most have the mentality that if they learned to do something the hard way why should software ment for profesional be easy to use. 

For my part I don't see an issue with the tools been easier to use even if we learned the hard way.

With Aperture is the same. It just easier to use and faster to get use to it. Its true that are more support and plugins for Lightroom and the publishing capabilities are more robust. Thats why I will advise anyone to try both and maybe alternate between them depending the projects and intended use.


----------



## pokopelo

excellent thread people... i've just made my mind, i use iphoto heavily and integration with aperture is what i'm looking for, i got a copy of LR2 as a steal, but the fact that it does not integrate with iphoto has me not using it much... just when i need some detailed corrections or PP that will require the technical capabilities of LR.... so getting home tonight will get me directly to the app store and get it... the review posted was also very helpful.


----------



## nicosiy

I've been struggling with the same decision. I'm leaning more toward Aperture though, since I see myself using it more which I guess means that it works better for me.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

Lightroom FTW


----------



## LensLens

pmpfx said:


> I have one thing to say regarding all Apple software:  Final Cut Pro.
> 
> If you do a little research on the recent Final Cut Pro X "upgrade" you will find how Apple treats those who buy Apple software.  Apple is a hardware company.  Adobe is a software company.  I don't buy software from a hardware company.



I agree but I think this comment deserves expansion. 

As background, there was a time a few years ago when Apple had two superb products Aperture and FCP, both targeted at pro use. Then along came the iPhone and Apple had to pull many of its internal resources over to work on iOS. Since then features added to Aperture have largely been ports of new iPhoto functions, like face detection and geotagging, badly done, slow and buggy (in Aperture at least). Very little has been changed in Aperture to improve it for workflow use or RAW file processing. Meanwhile Adobe has executed catchup on Aperture features with Lightroom for workflow and CS5/Lightroom for image editing and RAW processing. 

Consequently, today I find I prefer the images I can quickly produce with RAW processing with Adobe over Apple - better noise reduction, exposure and contrast decisions, and just more accurate for new camera models from Canon that I have purchased. I just get the impression that Apple has not worked on its RAW processor for several years. The link to RAW processor comparisons in another post is worth looking at.

As to FCP, Apple has essentially dropped evolving pro support for video editing, both hardware and software, so that video shops that based their workflow on Apple software and hardware are really hurting right now, especially as Apple moves its OS forward and not it's workstation and server hardware. There are plenty of places on the WEB you can read about this debacle.

So, Apple is a dubious pro choice moving forward unless you like the consumer/prosumer versions of software, namely iPhoto and FCPX. They've just not been focused on pro photo/video users for several years now and there is not indication that they are going to restart any time soon.

I'd add, as other have said that, bang for buck, Apple and Adobe are on different planets. Apple has really good pricing for Aperture. Now, one of the reasons I originally started using Apple was that I had grown tired of the way Adobe "upgraded" its products and charged for the upgrades. It was amazingly expensive when added up over several years, not to mention time wasting. Adobe tended to ship product with bugs in features that I needed and then bundle the "fixes" into the next version, a paid upgrade, that also introduced new bugs in the same features. Put another way, in my opinion, Adobe gives me the impression that it is more concerned about getting my money, than giving me a final, high quality, product that I can actually use. Quite understandable when done by a company that is tight on profit, I guess.

So, bottom line is there is no easy answer to this comparison that can is not a short snapshot in time. Not nice if you want your workflow and media library investment to last the next decade.

I'd not advise anyone to invest in a media library layout that relies upon a company's application.

Use a RAW processor and image editor that gives you the results you want with a time investment you are happy with.
Both the Adobe and Apple products can do this for most people in photography right now.

The decision process Apple made for FCP, if applied to Aperture will hurt IMHO. Their recent iCloud/MobileMe decisions... but that is a whole other subject/can of worms.


----------



## TheArtofRetouching

Given the choice, I would go with Aperture, I have never been a fan of Lightroom. However, if given the choice of any RAW processor on the market, I would suggest Corel Aftershot Pro, or Capture One. the Corel Aftershot Pro is under $99, and includes a solid RAW processor, as well as a Digital Asset Manager (Image Catalog). Capture One is for professionals, with a $399 pricetag, but you get what you pay for.

*Corel Aftershot Pro Review*

*Capture One WebSite*


----------



## KmH

I believe Aftershot Pro used to be known as Bibble 5, before Corel bought Bibble.


----------

