The Aperture loop magnifier looks pretty cool I'd say...

I have Lightroom 1.1 and really like it. It's easier on Ram and system requirements according to a review of the two I read from one of the Digital Photography Mags. I've had a few issues with crashes but I know Adobe is trying to work them out and it's a very small percentage of people overall who are having this issue..

Pros to Lightroom:Almost all in one workflow solution.Easy to organize photosEasy to make web gallariesEasy to make slide showsEasy Export to PHotoshop or Elements and maybe others.

Has a similar view to the Loop view in Apperature which lets you move around quickly.Low system requirements.

Cons:.

Some crashesSlide show is basic and cannot export with MusicNo lens distortion fix for barrel or pincussionCan only use on two computers.

About Apperature I'm not sure. Hope this helps..

Rick..

Tigger604 wrote:.

I've been reading about and some people do not like how Aperturedeletes referenced files by default..

Where did you read that? Aperture doesnt work like that, but it would seem that you may have now figured that out..

You can import files by reference and they stay put, in fact you shouldnt move them if you use this method, otherwise Aperture cant find it. If you edit the referenced file, Aperture works on a copy of your file and save it the updates, but it leaves the reference file alone.

You can also import them as managed files, and it copies your original files and stores them as master files that it keeps track of in it's database. When you edit the managed file, Aperture saves the modifiactions in it's database, and also preserves the master file. The original file you imported is never used or even touched, and the master file in the database it not changed. You could do anything you want to the imported files and Aperture would never know, since it doesnt use it after it was imported as a managed file..

There are 10 kinds of people in the world: Those that understand binary, and those that don't...

Just an update on my Lightroom 1.1 experience. I had mentioned crashes in my previous post. After doing a minor tweek and turning of some unnecessary start up apps including apdproxy.exe I was alble to put a heavy load on LR tonight with zero crashes and it is running pretty fast even with larger file sizes which makes me extremely happy!!:-).

Rick..

In terms of output quality, it's ahead of aperture IMHO..

LR runs well on even lower spec computers, Aperture is a resource hog being honest..

There are some crashes in 1.1, it does need distortion correction, and some more work on slideshows etc (burn to dvd slideshow anyone??).

Overall though, it's a very good progams, once the gremlins are ironed out..and some more bits added, it could be the only photo program you really need. I rarely need to pp outside it now..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ..

Barry Fitzgerald wrote:.

In terms of output quality, it's ahead of aperture IMHO..

LR runs well on even lower spec computers, Aperture is a resource hogbeing honest..

Your first point is debatable, but as you said, in your opinion..

True, but it will be interesting to see how fast LR is when it does a much DAM as Aperture. Right now, Aperture is a much deeper program than LR..

Lots of Mac folks are also anxiously waiting to see want Aperture V2.0 will be like, considering all of the improvement from v1.0..

There are 10 kinds of people in the world: Those that understand binary, and those that don't...

TestEng wrote:.

Your first point is debatable, but as you said, in your opinion..

Everything is debatable...!.

True, but it will be interesting to see how fast LR is when it does amuch DAM as Aperture. Right now, Aperture is a much deeper programthan LR..

I dont buy that, in terms of image processing LR is unmatched really. not to say aperture is not good, it is..I play with it a bit..on a fast mac it's good. LR in develop module is hard to touch. bar the need for distortion lens correction etc..

LR has some weak spots, no question...DAM wise it's adequate for most..but it could be more refined. Web is not of much use to me, slideshow isnt either...both need more meat on them..

Lots of Mac folks are also anxiously waiting to see want ApertureV2.0 will be like, considering all of the improvement from v1.0..

What would worry me is that apple had such a stonking idea..and then didnt run with it as hard as they could. Then adobe came along and stole the crown as such...

Competition is good...but as aperture is apple only..its stumbled on the starting blocks already. (when will apple work out that the real money is in software??) lol.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ..

I tried LR and I think it's a nice program, but Aperture suited my needs/wants better, though it was a tough decision, at first..

Theres been so much debate on which of these programs is better. I think the answer is that they are both very nice programs, each has it's advantages and disadvantages, and really comes down to personal preference..

The best thing to do is to give each one a 30 day free trial, and see which one is best for YOU..

Hopefully, the competition between LR and Aperture will make both programs better than they would have been on their own..

There are 10 kinds of people in the world: Those that understand binary, and those that don't...