New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus ē Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts ē Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography Discussion of all things graphics.

Aperture 3 over iPhoto


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
fear7950

 
Member Since: Aug 19, 2009
Posts: 101
fear7950 is on a distinguished road

fear7950 is offline
Whatís the benefit of having Aperture over iPhoto?

Iím not a profession Iím just a hobby type person that likes taking family and fun pictures. I currently own a Nikon D3000 and like taking RAW and Tiff type pictures.

Tell me why I would want to have Aperture over iPhoto?

Thanks
QUOTE Thanks
Deckyon

 
Deckyon's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 06, 2011
Location: Louisville, KY - USA
Posts: 1,291
Deckyon is just really niceDeckyon is just really niceDeckyon is just really niceDeckyon is just really niceDeckyon is just really nice
Mac Specs: MBP 17" 2011, 2.3GHz Intel Quad-Core i7, 8GB RAM, MacMini 2011, 2.7GHz Intel Dual-Core i7, 8GB RAM

Deckyon is offline
There is better management tools with Aperture. Also, the spot editing is a lot more powerfull. However, if you have access to something like Photoshop or Lightroom, they would probably be a better fit overall. I am bootcamping with Win7 and CS3, but when I want to do some spot editing without rebooting, I went ahead and got Aperture.

First, if there is something you can't, but need, to do in iPhoto, then get Aperture. The $79 version in the Mac App store will do quite a bit for the price.

MBP 17" 2011, 2.3GHz Intel Quad-Core i7, 8GB RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1GB RAM
MacMini 2011, 2.7GHz Intel Dual-Core i7, 8GB RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256MB RAM
iPhone 5S 64GB, iPad Air 2 128 GB LTE, iPod Nano Gen6 8GB, Apple TV 3 & 2
QUOTE Thanks
BrianLachoreVPI

 
BrianLachoreVPI's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 25, 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,742
BrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: March 2011 15" MBP 2.3GHz i7 Quad Core 8GB Ram | Mid 2011 27" iMac 3.4 GHz i7 16 GB RAM 2 TB HDD

BrianLachoreVPI is offline
Because at $79 it's an absolute steal (I paid $200 for it). At the risk of having Doug B come in here and lambaste me and taking slight issue with Brad's post as IMO it will do everything Lightroom can do for the most part.

The point is - if you're ready to graduate beyond iPhoto - then the usual candidates are Aperture or Lightroom. There are threads galore on the interwebs debating the differences.

You also have a couple of other options like Pixelmator or Acorn - which offer a fair amount of editing features but not catalog management.
QUOTE Thanks
BrianLachoreVPI

 
BrianLachoreVPI's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 25, 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,742
BrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: March 2011 15" MBP 2.3GHz i7 Quad Core 8GB Ram | Mid 2011 27" iMac 3.4 GHz i7 16 GB RAM 2 TB HDD

BrianLachoreVPI is offline
Doug is writing about 4 paragraphs...I can tell
QUOTE Thanks
RavingMac

 
RavingMac's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 07, 2008
Location: In Denial
Posts: 7,664
RavingMac has a reputation beyond reputeRavingMac has a reputation beyond reputeRavingMac has a reputation beyond reputeRavingMac has a reputation beyond reputeRavingMac has a reputation beyond reputeRavingMac has a reputation beyond reputeRavingMac has a reputation beyond reputeRavingMac has a reputation beyond reputeRavingMac has a reputation beyond reputeRavingMac has a reputation beyond reputeRavingMac has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 4GB Mac Mini 2012, 13" MBA, 15" MacBook Pro OSX 10.7, 32 GB iPhone 3GS, iPad2 64gb 3G

RavingMac is offline
I like and use Aperture, and I too paid $200 for it. IMO though you would be better served by using iPhoto (free) and Adobe PSE (I got my copy thru Amazon for $49 after rebate) for additional editing power.
If you find that you need the additional capabilities offered by Aperture (better Library management and editing) you can always upgrade later.

I've always wanted to be smart, handsome and modest. But, I guess I'll have to be satisfied with two out of three . . .
QUOTE Thanks
Doug b

 
Doug b's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 22, 2008
Location: Forest Hills, NYC
Posts: 3,344
Doug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 15-inch Early 2008; Processor 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo; Memory 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM; 10.7.5

Doug b is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianLachoreVPI View Post
Doug is writing about 4 paragraphs...I can tell
hah..I was writing a short bit but then my interest suddenly waned for some reason. Could be the fact that I was poaching a bunch of salmon and then at the last minute screwed up a different part of dinner, causing me to do something rather rash.. chucked the whole thing in a very immature manner. (I know.. ME? Immature? stretch there eh)

Anyway... You'll get no lambasting from me. You're right that Aperture 3 is an absolute steal at its online/App Store price. BUT... and you've already asked this, so the question needs to be answered: Is the OP finding it really necessary to go beyond what iPhoto is capable of at this point, and why?

I can give you my own personal reasons for loathing iPhoto, but those reasons may not mean much to someone who doesn't compile thousands upon thousands of RAW images. And the next question is, to fear7950: Why do you care about shooting RAW and what are you doing with tiff files? So why exactly is it fear, that you are looking at something like Aperture? What is iPhoto not doing for you?

As far as LR vs. Aperture goes, I of course can give good reasons for why I use and prefer the former, but only if fear asks me. I have no agenda and won't push my preferences since he didn't ask about it. I will say however, that I paid $99 for LR, and it's getting to be that one can find it at this price point a LOT, if one looks. Adobe has always had promo codes to pay this price over the years.. but lately I think they've been making those codes a lot more accessible in order to compete with Apple's pricing for Aperture.

Doug
QUOTE Thanks
bobtomay

 
bobtomay's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 22, 2006
Location: Texas, where else?
Posts: 25,185
bobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 15" MBP 2.33 C2D 256 4GB, MBA 13" i7 1.8, MB 2.0 2GB, Nano 4th, 3GS, iPad 1

bobtomay is offline
Doug, if you run across LR for $99 again without any requirements, let me know. Want it, but I can't justify $150 much less their regular price of $299 to make the jump.

I cannot be held responsible for the things that come out of my mouth.
In the Windows world, most everything folks don't understand is called a virus.
QUOTE Thanks
fear7950

 
Member Since: Aug 19, 2009
Posts: 101
fear7950 is on a distinguished road

fear7950 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug b View Post
hah..I was writing a short bit but then my interest suddenly waned for some reason. Could be the fact that I was poaching a bunch of salmon and then at the last minute screwed up a different part of dinner, causing me to do something rather rash.. chucked the whole thing in a very immature manner. (I know.. ME? Immature? stretch there eh)

Anyway... You'll get no lambasting from me. You're right that Aperture 3 is an absolute steal at its online/App Store price. BUT... and you've already asked this, so the question needs to be answered: Is the OP finding it really necessary to go beyond what iPhoto is capable of at this point, and why?

I can give you my own personal reasons for loathing iPhoto, but those reasons may not mean much to someone who doesn't compile thousands upon thousands of RAW images. And the next question is, to fear7950: Why do you care about shooting RAW and what are you doing with tiff files? So why exactly is it fear, that you are looking at something like Aperture? What is iPhoto not doing for you?

As far as LR vs. Aperture goes, I of course can give good reasons for why I use and prefer the former, but only if fear asks me. I have no agenda and won't push my preferences since he didn't ask about it. I will say however, that I paid $99 for LR, and it's getting to be that one can find it at this price point a LOT, if one looks. Adobe has always had promo codes to pay this price over the years.. but lately I think they've been making those codes a lot more accessible in order to compete with Apple's pricing for Aperture.

Doug
Ok here it goes
I posted this for a friend that is on the fence of buying a MacBook Air or a MacBook Pro to do some photo storage and some editing and I showed him Aperture which I use on my MacBook Pro which he asked me why I would use Aperture over iPhoto. With my Canon 40D I have always shot in RAW which I feel gives me more editing power over a larger JPG. My friend uses a Nikon D3000 which shoots RAW and TIFF. What is the difference in TIFF over RAW because Nikon can shoot in TIFF or RAW which Canon can only do RAW or JPG. I understand the RAW is the negative in which what the sensor record within the camera.

Thanks for everyoneís input!!!
QUOTE Thanks
Doug b

 
Doug b's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 22, 2008
Location: Forest Hills, NYC
Posts: 3,344
Doug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 15-inch Early 2008; Processor 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo; Memory 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM; 10.7.5

Doug b is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtomay View Post
Doug, if you run across LR for $99 again without any requirements, let me know. Want it, but I can't justify $150 much less their regular price of $299 to make the jump.
You got it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fear7950 View Post
Ok here it goes
I posted this for a friend that is on the fence of buying a MacBook Air or a MacBook Pro to do some photo storage and some editing and I showed him Aperture which I use on my MacBook Pro which he asked me why I would use Aperture over iPhoto. With my Canon 40D I have always shot in RAW which I feel gives me more editing power over a larger JPG. My friend uses a Nikon D3000 which shoots RAW and TIFF. What is the difference in TIFF over RAW because Nikon can shoot in TIFF or RAW which Canon can only do RAW or JPG. I understand the RAW is the negative in which what the sensor record within the camera.

Thanks for everyone’s input!!!
Ok, so this is for your friend and not you. Forget about tiff, it's not something you or your friend want to work with. The file sizes are HUGE and practically useless for average consumers. Most if not all pro labs request jpgs for printing, so it's not a matter of needing a lossless file there.. a common misconception. Where a tiff file is necessary is in the art of high-quality forensics photography combined with image authentication.

If you shoot NEF and then export to JPEG or TIFF you will invalidate the authentication. In order to maintain the IA with a lossless high-quality photo, you would need to use TIFF from the camera. So now, unless you guys find that relevant to your shooting, I'd suggest forgetting about tiff. Be my guest and do further research if you need more to convince you.

Furthermore, I'd say that for 98% of the people out there, shooting RAW is kind of a waste of time and money. Waste of time, because shooting RAW means ALWAYS having to fine tune the image. ALWAYS. A RAW file is simply data, nothing more. It is not an image. A RAW file consists of the data directly recorded from the sensor plus.. usually two .jpg images. One for the camera's lcd and one slightly larger file. The larger jpg image is actually processed by your camera's hardware (yes, hardware not software) and utilizes some of the settings that you have defined in the menu system.

This jpg can even be extracted and used for most things (not for print though I'm thinking) like web publishing or soft proofing. There are a few apps out there which will extract said jpg's from RAW files and are very useful.

Then of course, there is the jpg file that YOU have set all of the parameters for. In your camera's menu system, you'll see options for how the jpg should render. The resolution, compression rate (fine, extra fine etc..) saturation, contrast, sharpness etc.. Now here's the important part. It's up to the shooter to figure out what combination of these settings is going to produce the look he or she is after. Do you want your images to be true to the scene (most do)? Of course, one can always mess with some of these settings afterwards in post processing BUT.. the point is to try and save time and not have to. So that's why it's important to try and get things right when shooting!

There's only one setting that is absolutely vital (IMO) and which has a limited amount of play in post processing. That's white balance. It's very important to get the white balance right the first time, and since light is always changing (unless you're in a controlled environment) it's important to remember to tell your camera what is happening lighting wise. Most pro's use a grey card in order to set a custom white balance and they are really handy to have with you. All you do is set the card next to what you're shooting, and then tell your camera that you're testing the white balance and it will do the rest.

Some camera's do a better job at guessing the lighting than others so YMMV. When outside, it's usually said that the "cloudy" setting is best for most camera's. I find that auto does great for my D300 so again, YMMV.

There's the waste of time part of it, unless you need me to clarify anything. The waste of money part is pretty obvious. The bigger the file sizes you have, the more storage space will be used up. Obviously then, you'll have to get more external storage space in a shorter amount of time. Now, unless you're a fine art photographer, or are just someone who likes to tinker with individual photos in order to achieve a very specific look (which I'll admit, I do a lot.. I find it fun and creative.), I'd say that shooting RAW is quite unnecessary.

This isn't always a very popular viewpoint, but it's logical and extremely true. Here's an example of why it's better to get it right in the camera and not have to futz around in post processing:

You're working for a newspaper and covering a baseball game. The paper needs those shots before any other paper.. and you go to the press box, and start uploading your RAW files to the editor.. Guess what? You're so fired! They don't deal with RAW data. Slow to work with and lack the look which is important to have when printing since the print process already diminishes some of the luster. What the paper needs is small files that are already processed. There are a ton of examples which follow this precept.

That said, I can see only one reason to ditch iPhoto (which is free) to get Aperture or LR. Ok.. maybe two. The first reason being that the way it handles its database is rather cludgy. It wastes a ton of space with stupid "versions" of each photo. Also, after importing photos, the only sense that the structure makes, is from within the GUI. Take that out of the equation, and you're left with an absolutely nonsensical barrage of stupidly named and placed folders with "versions" all over the place. Not very nice at all, should you have chosen to not back your photos up somewhere in a hierarchical manner.

I'd say that iPhoto is good for anybody who knows to back up their stuff and doesn't care about the things I mentioned. Now... the thing about Aperture, is that it carries over some of iPhoto's stupid behavior. And that's part of why I don't care for it. (though not the main reason) Aperture also tends to create "versions", though you can turn this "feature off". What you can't turn off (or I can't find where you can if so) is something really weird. When you create masks or layers (such as vignette's) these things are stored as separate tiff files in their own folder. And I really don't understand the purpose of doing this. In LR, what happens is that all data is written to either a side car file (xmp) which is only a set of instructions and takes up no space or can be written directly to a .dng file. The latter method is a ton more efficient.

Anyway.. Aperture is great if you're looking to go beyond iPhoto.

Doug
QUOTE Thanks
codda

 
Member Since: Apr 20, 2010
Posts: 472
codda is a jewel in the roughcodda is a jewel in the rough
Mac Specs: 21.5 iMac 3.06 ghz 12gb ram 500g HD iPad 2 16G

codda is offline
I appreciate the heck out of a post like that...for a relative photog. noob ( like myself ). Thanks man.
QUOTE Thanks
Doug b

 
Doug b's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 22, 2008
Location: Forest Hills, NYC
Posts: 3,344
Doug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 15-inch Early 2008; Processor 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo; Memory 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM; 10.7.5

Doug b is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by codda View Post
I appreciate the heck out of a post like that...for a relative photog. noob ( like myself ). Thanks man.
Ha.. my fingers say thanks for getting something out of it.

Doug

P.S. When someone uploads a RAW file to an iPad... the image being seen is not the RAW file. It is the .jpg file which resides IN the RAW file. People argue that the iPad is able to handle RAW files, which is in fact false. If this were true, it would be able to edit any RAW file as well and then extract a separate jpg file. My point being that it's silly to think there's a benefit to shooting RAW when uploading directly to the iPad for viewing purposes. This is a totally different issue than using a RAW file to achieve a specific look later on.

Soft proofing with a client that you're shooting with on an iPad is great, but my advice would be to shoot BOTH RAW and Jpg in that case. Othewise, if it's just for leisure then I'd say save the time and space and money.
QUOTE Thanks
fleurya

 
fleurya's Avatar
 
Member Since: Nov 18, 2006
Location: Anytown, USA
Posts: 4,922
fleurya is a name known to allfleurya is a name known to allfleurya is a name known to allfleurya is a name known to allfleurya is a name known to allfleurya is a name known to allfleurya is a name known to all
Mac Specs: 27" iMac 2.7GHz Core i5, iPhone 4S, 3rd gen iPad

fleurya is offline
Lots of great info in the thread, Doug. Thanks for sharing!

BTW, if you happen to come across one of those LR promos, please email me or post to the forum!

"Give so much time to the improvement of yourself that you have no time to criticize others"
QUOTE Thanks
BrianLachoreVPI

 
BrianLachoreVPI's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 25, 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,742
BrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant futureBrianLachoreVPI has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: March 2011 15" MBP 2.3GHz i7 Quad Core 8GB Ram | Mid 2011 27" iMac 3.4 GHz i7 16 GB RAM 2 TB HDD

BrianLachoreVPI is offline
Really nice post!! Your hands must need a rest right now - but then they're not as delicate or beautiful as mine - so not as big a deal
QUOTE Thanks
Doug b

 
Doug b's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 22, 2008
Location: Forest Hills, NYC
Posts: 3,344
Doug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 15-inch Early 2008; Processor 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo; Memory 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM; 10.7.5

Doug b is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianLachoreVPI View Post
Really nice post!! Your hands must need a rest right now - but then they're not as delicate or beautiful as mine - so not as big a deal
It's all good. Just took another long walk (not 8 miles though ) so I'm properly refreshed.

And yes. If I come across another LR promo for that price I'll be sure to post a new thread for it in this forum.

Doug

Edit: You can get LR3 directly from Adobe for less than $99 if you're a student or an educator. You just need proper ID/proof that you work in a school or are a student.
QUOTE Thanks
Elohan Arouy

 
Member Since: May 12, 2011
Posts: 1
Elohan Arouy is on a distinguished road

Elohan Arouy is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtomay View Post
Doug, if you run across LR for $99 again without any requirements, let me know. Want it, but I can't justify $150 much less their regular price of $299 to make the jump.
see if this works.....

Dear Amazon.com Customer,

Customers who have shown an interest in digital imaging software at Amazon.com might like to know about this offer exclusive to Adobe Photoshop Elements owners:

Now through May 14, 2011, use code AUXG-J9FVFH-BDJBYG to save $200 off the list price on Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3--that's 67% off the list price of $299. Simply enter the code at checkout to see savings. Limit one redemption per customer.
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« Recommend a solid consumer-grade camera? | iPhoto Help needed »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
iPhoto Help Needed rw1029 OS X - Apps and Games 1 03-19-2011 11:26 AM
iphoto, aperture and geotagging dan_f14 Switcher Hangout 5 08-04-2010 10:03 AM
Aperture 3 from iPhoto CandyManzCuzin OS X - Apps and Games 0 03-09-2010 10:30 AM
How to export Aperture 2.1 library into iphoto 08? rukind2 Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography 3 10-08-2008 03:40 AM
iPhoto and Aperture (a)ndy Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography 1 11-18-2006 05:28 PM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?