MagMan1979,
leave it alone. take the high road. If the fact that Aperture being the #5 highest paid App in the Mac store is not evidence enough to show people are using it, then nothing will be. Don't know why we keep going on about this. Use what works for you and what you like. Not because you think you need to be in the mainstream. Just because people use Windows more than Mac does not mean I'm gonna switch to Windows. If you think about it, many of us switch from the mainstream to to the minority with Windows-->Mac. Saying its not reasonable or possible to do the same with LR to Aperture is hypocritical frankly.
I did a comparison between Aperture and LR when they both came to market. I picked the best tool. I made my bed and now I'm goona sleep it in. The software and my workflow has been been refined over the years. I can use it in my sleep. I see no reason to switch. Same reason people don't from Mac to Windows or Windows to Mac. It works for them and they are comfortable with it. At the end of the day its what ever gets your job done with the least amount of hassle. For me and many others like you its Aperture. If others can't live with that fact, its their own personal problem that I don't tend to pyscho analyze.
enough said.
The ranking of Aperture in the Mac App Store tells us little about who is using this, so it can't be used to promote any idea as to that.
When it first came out, Apple presented it at the Photo Expo, here in NYC. It cost $299. It was very much being placed as a pro app. But Apple made many mistakes with it. A lot of pros were calling it the anti-pro app because of all the choices Apple was making with automatic correction of people's files. The primitive controls didn't help either. While Apple did rush to correct many of the problems, it was too late. They lost the round. Today, aperture is considered to be a prosumer app. And it's great for that. If you don't need a lot of sophisticated editing that has to tie into Photoshop directly, and much work does, then you're fine. The app has bee much improved from its shaky start.
I have no doubt that there are a fair number of pros who find this to be adequate, but that's a small minority. As for people switching over because of CC, which many of us aren't happy about, well, some will, of course, if they don't need the power of Adobe's software.
As for MagMan taking the high road, he certainly isn't doing that.
The ranking of Aperture in the Mac App Store tells us little about who is using this, so it can't be used to promote any idea as to that.
When it first came out, Apple presented it at the Photo Expo, here in NYC. It cost $299. It was very much being placed as a pro app. But Apple made many mistakes with it. A lot of pros were calling it the anti-pro app because of all the choices Apple was making with automatic correction of people's files. The primitive controls didn't help either. While Apple did rush to correct many of the problems, it was too late. They lost the round. Today, aperture is considered to be a prosumer app. And it's great for that. If you don't need a lot of sophisticated editing that has to tie into Photoshop directly, and much work does, then you're fine. The app has bee much improved from its shaky start.
I have no doubt that there are a fair number of pros who find this to be adequate, but that's a small minority. As for people switching over because of CC, which many of us aren't happy about, well, some will, of course, if they don't need the power of Adobe's software.
As for MagMan taking the high road, he certainly isn't doing that.
And you're taking the high road for making jabs like that at me, as I've bolded? Get off your high horse...
I've done support for marketing firms and photography studios, and also worked with them on projects, and I can tell you many of them have dumped Adobe in favour of other alternatives, so they don't get robbed blindly by subscription fees.
You really do sound like a bit of a snob from NYC based on the long rant you posted just previously, posting what amounts to your CV. You think that doing so gives you any more credibility, or merit to your arguments? No it doesn't, it just makes you look arrogant and trying to push home the false point that it's Adobe or bust in the pro world.
And you're taking the high road for making jabs like that at me, as I've bolded? Get off your high horse...
I've done support for marketing firms and photography studios, and also worked with them on projects, and I can tell you many of them have dumped Adobe in favour of other alternatives, so they don't get robbed blindly by subscription fees.
You really do sound like a bit of a snob from NYC based on the long rant you posted just previously, posting what amounts to your CV. You think that doing so gives you any more credibility, or merit to your arguments? No it doesn't, it just makes you look arrogant and trying to push home the false point that it's Adobe or bust in the pro world.
You're new here, so I'm going to give you sip one time. But use it wisely. Continually insulting a mod gets you kicked off sites very quickly, no matter what you may think. You are pushing it.
I hope you agree that I have been very civil with you and have been trying to keep things civil on all sides. I ask that please you review how many people in this thread have stated that they use Aperture and try to keep an open mind. As I stated earlier, I believe Aperture is a popular app. I frankly don't care to qualify people as pro vs non-pro. Doing so can get insulting and I think is what lead to some unpleasantness in this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by igamogam
I try Lightroom every time there is a new version and so far I have stuck with Aperture because LR seems so clunky and counter-intuitive
Quote:
Originally Posted by dav
I'm just a hobbiest photographer and like Apple's Aperture
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
But how to migrate to LR?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd
I far prefer the Aperture way I've been working for so long that I haven't gotten up to speed on it, so whenever getting a lot done in the proper amount of time looms, which is nearly always, I just fire up Aperture and get it done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Aperture isn't that popular.
I respectfully disagree. Aperture is currently #5 in top grossing paid Mac apps in the Mac App store
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova
lets just leave this as a religious debate.
No, it's not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
You're new here, so I'm going to give you sip one time. But use it wisely. Continually insulting a mod gets you kicked off sites very quickly, no matter what you may think. You are pushing it.
I hope you can see why I said that this was going to be a religious debate and why it would be better to take the high road. Nothing good can come from this except getting people upset or worse, banned, when in fact they should be "blocked" from your view.
no offense intended to anyone. Just trying to calm things down. If you feel I need to be banned for stating this, then feel free to ban away.
religion causes too much fighting and upset people. peace.
if you would like entertain productive conversation about pro features in LR, I'd like to know what pro features in LR, don't exist in Aperture, that you feel pros can not live without. I honestly never felt anything lacking for myself in Aperture. What am I missing?
As far as having a strong link between LR and Photoshop, I am not sure that this necessary. Most good photographers try to take shots with the right composition, filters, camera settings and emotion (when possible) to avoid need post as much as possible. Its all in the prep and hard work ahead of the shot; not after. There are very talented people out there who use Photoshop. I am not one of them. More often than not, the pro photographer and the pro Photoshop expert are two different people. Its a different mind set. So for me, instant tie in between quick post tool (like LR or Aperture) and serious image manipulation tool like Photoshop is not very important. I avoid getting into a tool like Photoshop when ever possible, and I would be surprised if many photographer were not in the same boat.
if you would like entertain productive conversation about pro features in LR, I'd like to know what pro features in LR, don't exist in Aperture, that you feel pros can not live without. I honestly never felt anything lacking for myself in Aperture. What am I missing?
As far as having a strong link between LR and Photoshop, I am not sure that this necessary. Most good photographers try to take shots with the right composition, filters, camera settings and emotion (when possible) to avoid need post as much as possible. Its all in the prep and hard work ahead of the shot; not after. There are very talented people out there who use Photoshop. I am not one of them. More often than not, the pro photographer and the pro Photoshop expert are two different people. Its a different mind set. So for me, instant tie in between quick post tool (like LR or Aperture) and serious image manipulation tool like Photoshop is not very important. I avoid getting into a tool like Photoshop when ever possible, and I would be surprised if many photographer were not in the same boat.
This is a rough comparison, and I haven't used the most recent versions of either. I haven't used Aperture in years. The newest one looks better. Early versions of it stored a lot of extra data to a proprietary library, which I always found odd. Lightroom is very lightweight in that regard, storing everything in compact xml. Adobe makes some poor choices when it comes to things like working spaces, but I still found processing results to be somewhat superior with little adjustment. I think they could both be way better than they are, and prophoto was the worst working space ever designed. They should have started from scratch there. If I had to use one, it would be Lightroom, although there are a lot of areas where Adobe could have improved years ago. Video compositing apps had the right idea with input profiles and linear workflow on everything.
I saw and love above mentioned app. Its very good and must have. I feel there should be one more app in this list. This app has many unique features like photoshop and its free as well. Lets try and it will not cost you any thing:
Comments
The ranking of Aperture in the Mac App Store tells us little about who is using this, so it can't be used to promote any idea as to that.
When it first came out, Apple presented it at the Photo Expo, here in NYC. It cost $299. It was very much being placed as a pro app. But Apple made many mistakes with it. A lot of pros were calling it the anti-pro app because of all the choices Apple was making with automatic correction of people's files. The primitive controls didn't help either. While Apple did rush to correct many of the problems, it was too late. They lost the round. Today, aperture is considered to be a prosumer app. And it's great for that. If you don't need a lot of sophisticated editing that has to tie into Photoshop directly, and much work does, then you're fine. The app has bee much improved from its shaky start.
I have no doubt that there are a fair number of pros who find this to be adequate, but that's a small minority. As for people switching over because of CC, which many of us aren't happy about, well, some will, of course, if they don't need the power of Adobe's software.
As for MagMan taking the high road, he certainly isn't doing that.
The ranking of Aperture in the Mac App Store tells us little about who is using this, so it can't be used to promote any idea as to that.
When it first came out, Apple presented it at the Photo Expo, here in NYC. It cost $299. It was very much being placed as a pro app. But Apple made many mistakes with it. A lot of pros were calling it the anti-pro app because of all the choices Apple was making with automatic correction of people's files. The primitive controls didn't help either. While Apple did rush to correct many of the problems, it was too late. They lost the round. Today, aperture is considered to be a prosumer app. And it's great for that. If you don't need a lot of sophisticated editing that has to tie into Photoshop directly, and much work does, then you're fine. The app has bee much improved from its shaky start.
I have no doubt that there are a fair number of pros who find this to be adequate, but that's a small minority. As for people switching over because of CC, which many of us aren't happy about, well, some will, of course, if they don't need the power of Adobe's software.
As for MagMan taking the high road, he certainly isn't doing that.
And you're taking the high road for making jabs like that at me, as I've bolded? Get off your high horse...
I've done support for marketing firms and photography studios, and also worked with them on projects, and I can tell you many of them have dumped Adobe in favour of other alternatives, so they don't get robbed blindly by subscription fees.
You really do sound like a bit of a snob from NYC based on the long rant you posted just previously, posting what amounts to your CV. You think that doing so gives you any more credibility, or merit to your arguments? No it doesn't, it just makes you look arrogant and trying to push home the false point that it's Adobe or bust in the pro world.
You're new here, so I'm going to give you sip one time. But use it wisely. Continually insulting a mod gets you kicked off sites very quickly, no matter what you may think. You are pushing it.
melgross,
I hope you agree that I have been very civil with you and have been trying to keep things civil on all sides. I ask that please you review how many people in this thread have stated that they use Aperture and try to keep an open mind. As I stated earlier, I believe Aperture is a popular app. I frankly don't care to qualify people as pro vs non-pro. Doing so can get insulting and I think is what lead to some unpleasantness in this thread.
Quote:
I try Lightroom every time there is a new version and so far I have stuck with Aperture because LR seems so clunky and counter-intuitive
I'm just a hobbiest photographer and like Apple's Aperture
But how to migrate to LR?
I far prefer the Aperture way I've been working for so long that I haven't gotten up to speed on it, so whenever getting a lot done in the proper amount of time looms, which is nearly always, I just fire up Aperture and get it done.
Aperture isn't that popular.
I respectfully disagree. Aperture is currently #5 in top grossing paid Mac apps in the Mac App store
lets just leave this as a religious debate.
No, it's not.
You're new here, so I'm going to give you sip one time. But use it wisely. Continually insulting a mod gets you kicked off sites very quickly, no matter what you may think. You are pushing it.
I hope you can see why I said that this was going to be a religious debate and why it would be better to take the high road. Nothing good can come from this except getting people upset or worse, banned, when in fact they should be "blocked" from your view.
no offense intended to anyone. Just trying to calm things down. If you feel I need to be banned for stating this, then feel free to ban away.
religion causes too much fighting and upset people. peace.
melgross,
if you would like entertain productive conversation about pro features in LR, I'd like to know what pro features in LR, don't exist in Aperture, that you feel pros can not live without. I honestly never felt anything lacking for myself in Aperture. What am I missing?
As far as having a strong link between LR and Photoshop, I am not sure that this necessary. Most good photographers try to take shots with the right composition, filters, camera settings and emotion (when possible) to avoid need post as much as possible. Its all in the prep and hard work ahead of the shot; not after. There are very talented people out there who use Photoshop. I am not one of them. More often than not, the pro photographer and the pro Photoshop expert are two different people. Its a different mind set. So for me, instant tie in between quick post tool (like LR or Aperture) and serious image manipulation tool like Photoshop is not very important. I avoid getting into a tool like Photoshop when ever possible, and I would be surprised if many photographer were not in the same boat.
melgross,
if you would like entertain productive conversation about pro features in LR, I'd like to know what pro features in LR, don't exist in Aperture, that you feel pros can not live without. I honestly never felt anything lacking for myself in Aperture. What am I missing?
As far as having a strong link between LR and Photoshop, I am not sure that this necessary. Most good photographers try to take shots with the right composition, filters, camera settings and emotion (when possible) to avoid need post as much as possible. Its all in the prep and hard work ahead of the shot; not after. There are very talented people out there who use Photoshop. I am not one of them. More often than not, the pro photographer and the pro Photoshop expert are two different people. Its a different mind set. So for me, instant tie in between quick post tool (like LR or Aperture) and serious image manipulation tool like Photoshop is not very important. I avoid getting into a tool like Photoshop when ever possible, and I would be surprised if many photographer were not in the same boat.
This is a rough comparison, and I haven't used the most recent versions of either. I haven't used Aperture in years. The newest one looks better. Early versions of it stored a lot of extra data to a proprietary library, which I always found odd. Lightroom is very lightweight in that regard, storing everything in compact xml. Adobe makes some poor choices when it comes to things like working spaces, but I still found processing results to be somewhat superior with little adjustment. I think they could both be way better than they are, and prophoto was the worst working space ever designed. They should have started from scratch there. If I had to use one, it would be Lightroom, although there are a lot of areas where Adobe could have improved years ago. Video compositing apps had the right idea with input profiles and linear workflow on everything.
Photo Splash FX Lite (iOS)
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/photo-splash-fx-lite/id840972638?ls=1&mt=8
Photos to Albums app can be good alternate.