hey guys, this is my first post here ....

there are two apps similar (Aperture and Lightroom),so I need to know what are advantages each one, and which one is better?

high-greeting

The UI on both are very similar.. I used aperture for about 3 months, because I'm an apple fanboy.. I found it a little difficult to learn.. So I tried LR1 (this was 2 years ago now) and was happy that it looked the same.. Then found it a LOT easier to use than aperture..

I think it's smart to get the trial of each, and try them side by side.. And make the decision yourself... I haven't regretted the switch to LR and I use LR3 on a daily basis as a professional photographer.

I also found a lot more ppl out there making filters and such for LR so that is really handy! (check out lightroomkillertips.com)

Lightroom 3 user here and loving it.

Also a quick search would have resulted in a few threads on the subject already on ehMac.

Like this one: http://www.ehmac.ca/anything-mac/87398-aperture-lightroom.html

Lightroom 3 all the way for me. Very powerful and intuitive to use, plus if you have Photoshop the integration is great. I also believe it is less intensive on system resources, but I could be proven wrong on that point... just something I seem to remember having read somewhere.

Oh, and welcome to ehMac NasserRadi. :)

if you have Photoshop the integration is great.

This is very true.. But I will also say, once I learned some of the more advanced features of LR3 I hardly EVER go to Photoshop (CS5) anymore

This is very true.. But I will also say, once I learned some of the more advanced features of LR3 I hardly EVER go to Photoshop (CS5) anymore

True. Photoshop has become the application for more "esoteric"/"design" based photo manipulation rather than a straight up photo editor.

note that aperture is now available in the new app store for only $79...

note that aperture is now available in the new app store for only $79...

Yes it is a very good price for those on a budget.

Hmmm.......I have both Aperture and Lightroom but haven't installed either for i have been putting it off until i decided which one i thought might be easier......but i like what i hear about not really needing PS once you got more familiar with LR......

Sounds as if Lightroom just won

Aperture 3 vs Lightroom 3 on Mac Pro (http://www.barefeats.com/wst10c4.html)

some benchmarks here

Another vote for LR here. I only use photoshop for a couple of things these days. Soft proofing (it's really really annoying that we STILL cant' do this in LR) and panorama stitching. That's about the only reason I've opened PS in the last several months.

some benchmarks here



So the only areas where Lightroom is slower (marginally comparatively speaking) than Aperture is on Import and Export and for actual processing Lightroom kicks Aperture's ass...

If you are willing to pay the price differential, the choice is obvious, to me at least...

NOTE: It's been pointed out that the reason for the big difference in speed in "gang" adjustments is because Aperture isn't just re-rendering previews but re-rendering the masters (or versions of the masters). So now the question becomes, does Lightroom offer a faster workflow or are you being "cheated" by not adjusting the RAW image in real time?
note that the information is not entirely clear about the processing speed. if you are getting accurate info from adjusting the previews, then it is better. but at some point, the machine is going to have to render the master, and that presumably is going to take time...

I did a brief trial of each and liked the feel of Lightroom much more. Never looked back.

any issues with having both on a mbp? i already have aperture, and to be honest there is not much in books out there for it but for adobe many books for ideas and lessons.

You should be able to run both at the same time.

Another very happy Lightroom user here. I don't know what I'd do without it - the only things I do in Photoshop these days are cleaning up scans of really old photos, and creative stuff for web site headers etc. Even have my Nik filters available in LR. :)

LR here too. Been using it since LR1 beta. I tried Aperture a couple times, once for the first release and again on the most recent. I found it slow which seems to be proven in the above mentioned comparisons. LR also handled a multi-display setup much better. Not sure if Aperture is doing better now or not as my last use was on a MBP.

The price differential is huge now though. $300 vs $80. Wow. I wonder how Adobe will respond?

LR here too. Been using it since LR1 beta. I tried Aperture a couple times, once for the first release and again on the most recent. I found it slow which seems to be proven in the above mentioned comparisons. LR also handled a multi-display setup much better. Not sure if Aperture is doing better now or not as my last use was on a MBP.

The price differential is huge now though. $300 vs $80. Wow. I wonder how Adobe will respond?

Well if they are like Apple you could expect maybe a 10% price drop. ;)

The UI on both are very similar.. I used aperture for about 3 months, because I'm an apple fanboy.. I found it a little difficult to learn.. So I tried LR1 (this was 2 years ago now) and was happy that it looked the same.. Then found it a LOT easier to use than aperture..

I think it's smart to get the trial of each, and try them side by side.. And make the decision yourself... I haven't regretted the switch to LR and I use LR3 on a daily basis as a professional photographer.

I also found a lot more ppl out there making filters and such for LR so that is really handy! (check out lightroomkillertips.com)

hey dear, I used Aperture 3 about one week but I couldn't use it very well, I felt it is difficult
so I use the lightroom 3 and i saw some features are great such as effect (to make black on the edges) and control the colors. well, I did not learn every thing about lightroom even though has another features. at last there are some people using aperture and they are praise it


thank you dear

This is very true.. But I will also say, once I learned some of the more advanced features of LR3 I hardly EVER go to Photoshop (CS5) anymore

I still use Lightroom 3 and I haven't used CS5 I use CS4
so, I asked you about those apps because I am not certain which one is better

I still use Lightroom 3 and I haven't used CS5 I use CS4
so, I asked you about those apps because I am not certain which one is better

As youve seen from the responses.. Ppl seem to prefer LR.. but I will say it's personal preference.. Get the trials and give them both a shot..

Am I the only person here that likes Aperture better? Using it feels like you'te using iPhoto for pros. I like it much much better than LR.

Am I the only person here that likes Aperture better? Using it feels like you'te using iPhoto for pros. I like it much much better than LR.

i do not think so, there are many people using aperture but I use LR well, I used aperture but I couldn't understand its tools.
I also use iPhoto but for making albums I haven't tried adjust any photo with iPhoto.
when I used aperture, I saw the aperture imported my photos from the iPhoto then i lost spaces from my hard drive because my photos are in my computer two times

I saw the aperture imported my photos from the iPhoto then i lost spaces from my hard drive because my photos are in my computer two times

Not that I'm in favor of aperture.. But this problem is simple user error.. You need to change the import settings to stop that from happening..

I use Aperture 2 and love it. I will one day move on to 3 when I have a Mac that will run it. If you are super photographer that likes to work in Photoshop a lot, then Lightroom is a no brainer. But if you just do it for a hobby or don't need the Lightroom/Bridge/Photoshop workflow. Another thing Aperture 3 got going for it is that it's only $79.99 on the Mac App Store, thats a steal.

I've heard on more than one occasion, that you will like Lightroom if you fall into it's strict procedural workflow. Aperture is more open and less constricting.

I don't know if LR still has the same strict workflow or not.

I've also heard LR works better on older, slower Macs.

I'm soon going to make the same decision myself. I'm leaning toward Aperture - because it's cheaper, because it integrates with other Mac software more easily, and because it seems more freeform.

I've heard on more than one occasion, that you will like Lightroom if you fall into it's strict procedural workflow. Aperture is more open and less constricting.

I don't know if LR still has the same strict workflow or not...


I don't know what to make of this part of your post as I have never felt constricted in my work flow with LR... perhaps you could elaborate....

I have Aperture. I like it. I'm used to it. I'm still mad at it for crashing twice hard and not re-installing my backed up library. Maybe a one off situation, but still :)

for me, AP is not used for work. I use it for home use, organization of photos, used with mobileme to update family etc... so for that purpose, it works well. I've used it since version 1 so I am familiar with the UI although I will admit, I'm not a hardcore power user. Somewhere in between medium and hardcore if you will :) Heck, I'm about to embark on a major keywording project for all of my photos.

But i have seen LR in use and think it looks fantastic. I've dloaded the demo and am considering on using it for client projects where I have to scan and edit photos. I'm still on CS3 and after watching some of the videos for LR and Photoshop CS5, it sure looks like they have some time saving features for the editing side which would increase my dollar cost averaging :)

Other folks have said it, but I would dload both demos and play. Create a small library representing how you use a photo org software, duplicate it twice then use once each for both programs.

I don't know what to make of this part of your post as I have never felt constricted in my work flow with LR... perhaps you could elaborate....

As I said, I've only heard this from other people. I haven't used it myself. But a quick google search turns up numerous hits about people finding Lightroom's workflow linear and restrictive (i.e. you have to work according to its steps), while Aperture's is more open, and lets you work in whatever order you want.

I really like LR but can't justify the price when Aperture is only $80. I just picked up Aperture from the app store and if I don't like it compared to my beta use of LR, I'll save up and switch.

As I said, I've only heard this from other people. I haven't used it myself. But a quick google search turns up numerous hits about people finding Lightroom's workflow linear and restrictive (i.e. you have to work according to its steps), while Aperture's is more open, and lets you work in whatever order you want.

Hmmm, I don't know what google searches are turning up, but I do not find LR restrictive in any way. On the contrary, I think the workflow is very open and efficient. The issue (if there is one) might be how LR is set up initially and whether intergration with other Adobe apps (such as Photoshop) is required or not. You can set up LR to use any graphics editor as the default external editor, but using LR with anything less capable than Photoshop is hugely redundant.