Comments on: Aperture 3 Review

By: admin

admin — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 13:36:10 +0000

I think everyone agrees with you Luther. I still havent decided if I will be using A3 or LR3 for my trip to Iceland. While I love some of the features of A3, it wont be fast enough to process the hundreds of daily pictures I will be taken there…

Apple seems to have taken a turn toward the costumer market at the expense of the pros recently. I hope we see some improvements soon in this regard.

By: Luther

Luther — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 13:01:16 +0000

Apple, now that the iPad is finished, can we please have those developers back to add some polish to A3? Thank you kindly.

I tested Aperture 3. Briefly. Honestly? It’s rubbish. I was expecting a speed boost (even on my modest Mac) but I was disappointed. The worst part is full screen viewing: it’s substantially slower. I switched back to A2 and the difference is substantial (and that was reading off my primary 200GB library, not a 4GB test library). Certain aspects of A3 are snappier but the most important features are not. I can survive without faces and geotagging in return for a more responsive application.

By: J. B. Pittman Visuals

J. B. Pittman Visuals — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 01:01:08 +0000

Ultimately it simply what works for you. I have been a photographer longer than I like to remember. (I made most of my money with a view camera.) So, I have to say the tools we have to work with now are so much better that those early “digital” photography applications and hardware that the differences are mostly insignificant in the big picture. Arguing about the merits of these two applications…? Well, it is not the sword I want to die on.

By: admin

admin — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 11:50:02 +0000

Of course you can somewhat do tone splitting with curves and replicate the other tools in some way. My problem is that these tools are commonly used (I grad filter almost all my outdoor shots), yet Aperture does not make them easy to use.

It is like the metadata window. Why does it not put the cursor in the search field when you open the window? Instead you have to use the mouse to click in the field and then start typing. I use metadata extensively and the idea of this fix came to me when I was using A1. How come no one at apple ever thought about it? They dont even follow the Apple design guidelines with this!

Things like these make me wonder if the Aperture team are actually using their own software or just reading a list of specs. BTW, I did say that the curve tool in A3 is awesome!

I am planning another photoshoot next weekend. I will use A3 again to see how well it goes with the new software update and a few optimization tweaks I have read on the net.

By: Martin L

Martin L — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 08:12:11 +0000

Thanks for the review. It was detailed enough to show your bias towards Lightroom, but concise enough for me to get through the whole thing. How about next time you really evaluate the software rather than just trying to replicate your Lightroom workflow in Aperture? I mean come on, you can split tone and do much more with full RGB curves. You can also brush that in or away with a big brush. A grad filter would be nice, but far away from a necessary tool. And did you even see the Devignette adjustment?

Seriously, the apps are very different and if you try to replicate either’s workflow in the other, you will not be happy.

By: John Waugh

John Waugh — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 00:21:08 +0000

I have to say that Aperture 3.01 is remarkably fast.
That being said I run a machine 2-quadcore mac pro with 2 video cards for (1 for each 23″ cinema display). Apple regretfully does not make a video card that will handle 2 mini display port monitors.
That may be the key to the speed. There is no difference between preview and full screen mode with this setup.

By: admin

admin — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:47:02 +0000

Ken: Can you tell us which mac / video card config you are using? I spent a few minute at the apple store the other day and played with a maxed out Mac Pro and I found it kinda slow. Not super slow, but I would have expected it to be faster given its price tag.

By: admin

admin — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:42:19 +0000

Interesting Pittman, and it is true that in your case, the auto update of web galleries is a nice plus. I very rarely change pictures once they have been edited so it never occurred to me how practical the auto update could be.

But I would disagree with your preference toward round tripping to PS for editing. I do 99% of my style edits in Aperture/LR and only do the retouching in PS. To me, these are two totally different things. One determine the style of the shot while the other correct its flaws at the pixel level. I have used Capture One for a while and I guess it influenced my workflow with other apps.

By: Ken

Ken — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 18:47:01 +0000

Speed of Aperture really depends on your graphics card — much more than LR. My experience is that Aperture is faster than LR in almost all cases.

By: J. B. Pittman Visuals

J. B. Pittman Visuals — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 17:51:56 +0000

After a shoot, images are imported using custom metadata. This is critical since selects will be uploading to a website that pulls this metadata into the site. Location data is now being added. Then they are processed by making selections, stacked, rated, created albums etc. Different selections are distributed in various ways. For us time is critical and communicators in the company need to see work as soon as possible. Because of the nature of Aperture images can be adjusted and updated on web galleries, books and lighboxes, all of which we use frequently, at anytime after receiving feedback from the final users. Round tripping to Photoshop is easy and versions are easily managed. We use referenced libraries, for speed and security.

Our workflow is not that much different from most. We just find that Aperture offers more flexibility and speed allowing us to do what we have to when we have too without a bunch or redoing or backtracking. The ability to export and sync libraries is a new feature that will prove invaluable as well. Faces will probably be incorporated more and more too.