Aperture 2 is out, thoughts?

[Jim Poor]

It looks rather lightroom-ish to me at first glance, but seems to solve some of the issues I have with remote storage and such.

I'm off to read more, but wondered if anyone else has an opinion.


Edit: Tutorials here:
http://www.apple.com/aperture/tutorials/#intro-interface

[Giulio Zanni]

I bought Aperture when it came out. Then frustrated due to the lack of raw support to several cameras I moved to Lightroom. Now it appears that I would have to purchase it from scratch so, no way.

Giulio

[Jim Poor]

There is an upgrade option. I've been using LR too though. I downloaded the A2 trial and it seems pretty nice so far (not very long) but I haven't found out yet if I can export the adjustments intact to PS3. I'm not even sure I can edit in PS3 from the trial version . . .

[Alfred Forns]

Jim I bought Aperture also and abandon ship after 1.51 Using LR and can not be any happier Do let us know what you think regarding the new version Hope it does well !!!

[Rocky Sharwell]

I haven't played with it yet--I think I will wait as I happen to like Lightroom.....

[Jim Poor]

I've been happy with LR as well, but am always game to try something new. So far after few hours of messing with the free trial, I'm pretty impressed with some things, not so much with others.

I really like the way the Shadow / Highlight clipping preview can be turned on and left on without holding a button on the keyboard. I've played with adjusting a few images and then opening them up in CS3. The histograms look good and the adjustments seem to be more effective then in LR (recovery for example).

It seems to work on JPG images to although the tutorials say that "real" recovery can only be done on a RAW file.

I don't like the navigation so far, but then I don't have the benefit of a manual to work with.

[SteveLgBch]

Does anyone else find that making adjustments is incredibly slow. I have a dual 2.66 Ghz Mac Pro with 8G of memory and find that making any adjustment takes sometimes like 20-30 seconds or more to complete. If ypu over or undershoot the amount you think you need, you have another wait. Is there any way to speed things up? I find it very difficult to visually adjust when it's so slow. Aperture is generally the only thing running.

[Jim Poor]

Yes, I've noticed that the sliders don't move at times and then they "jump" to a new location too far.

I'm leaning farther away from Aperture the more I play with it.

[Larry Daniel]

Currently I am using the v2.0 trial on a MBP 17" with 4GB RAM. Runs surprisingly well, much faster than NX. This is on a Leopard fresh install. It seems that Leopard has some graphics display advantages over Tiger. I have a Mac Pro on order and anticipate fantastic performance from it with the optional graphics card I ordered.

Highlight and shadow recovery works exceptionally well. Healing brush is a great addition. Of course it is still not CS3, it is easier to learn IMHO. I just read an article that Apple may open it up to developers to write editing add ons. BorderFX works fine for framing and EXIF display and Reihard it working on a new version with even more capabilities.

I will buy v2 in the next few days although I have hopes that NX will run fairly fast on the new computer. Editing with NX on my current Mac has been painfully slow. May be due to my workflow as I have read there are other ways of using the tools that are faster.

[Jim Poor]

. . . Highlight and shadow recovery works exceptionally well. . . Yes it does!

[Jay R. Seltzer]

I too was discouraged after using Aperture v1.x On a dual G5 it was intolerable slow without even approaching real-time feedback from the sliders. I recently downloaded the v2 trial and although the interface is slightly more intuitive, it is still too slow on my machine. Some nice features but not enough for me to change. Although I've been looking for an excuse to upgrade to a Mac Pro intel machine, this is not it. I've been very happy with LR and it works seemlessly with PS CS3. No turning back for me.

It seems odd to me that Apple is so good at creating intuitive software but in the case of Aperture, I couldn't figure out some of the features without looking it up; whereas with LR, there is really no need for a manual at all....

.... Just my opinion...

Jay

[Wayne Nicholas]

I just upgraded, since I already had the original. I have noticed that it definitely faster than 1.5.1. Also, and most importantly, the converter has been improved immensely, IMHO. Before, I could literally be off by 1000-1500 on WB between PS and Aperture. Now, they're within very close tolerances. I didn't use 1.5.1 or earlier because it did a pathetic job of handling the shadow detail. That has been improved handily. I have run several of my "difficult" images through it over the last few days and am very happy with the results. I was even so picky as to check noise with and without the noise reduction on and comparing it to a standard conversion in ACR, with a quick fix from Noise Ninja. The results are too close to split hairs about.

The interface is also much easier to navigate compared to 1.5.1 or earlier. So far, my opinion is that it isn't PS, wasn't meant to be, but it is an evolution away from where it started. I am continuing to work with it and think it will eventually work its way back into my workflow. It is, afterall, about the easiest way to carry your inventory with you on the road, just in case.

[Jim Poor]

Well, I think the jig is up for me on A2. I've been trying to use it with files on network storage. Everything goes well on import and continues well until I close and re-open the program. Then it suddenly can't find the files anymore and reports them as off line. I can still navigate to them through Finder though, so I know the connection hasn't been lost.

That is pretty much a show stopper for me. Too bad, because the Shadow & Highlight recovery capabilities were starting to win me over.

[Rocky Sharwell]

Wayne,

I am a recent Mac convert....So I never used the earlly versions of Aperture...What do you get from Aperture that you don't get from Lightroom?

I ask because Lightroom seems to work really well for me....

[Jim Poor]

I'm not Wayne, but I'll take a shot.

The one thing that has impressed me the most about A2 is the shadow and highlight recovery capabilities. You can have hot & cold areas highlighted on an image and then adjust the Recovery and Black sliders (among others) to recover the detail in these areas. The resulting histogram looks real nice when opened in Photoshop.

The same function is available in LR for the highlights, but the black slider starts out at the bottom so there is no wiggle room in that direction.

I'm not impressed by the quality of the editing tools as far as object removal goes in A2. It doesn't seem to work anywhere near as well as the tutorial shows on most images.

All that said, it won't hurt you to download the 30 day trial from mac.com to play with it.

[Rocky Sharwell]

Thanks Jim...

I downloaded the trial this morning but was debating whether I should spend the time to play with it. Sounds like it is worth trying

[mikeojohnson]

What you get with Aperture that you don't get as well with LR is tight integration with Apple and Mac. The program has a lot of great features, but some of them, like the levels controls, seem hard to learn. Historically, Apple has been slower than Adobe to update Aperture (which is done with operating system upgrades) for new cameras. Aperture 2 fixes most of the complaint issues that folks had with the level one software.

I find myself going back to LR because I have been using it for about a year. I gave up on the earlier versions of Aperture. I bought the upgrade and am slowly giving it a trial.

Don't know where I'll land as there are plusses and minuses for both options.
Mike

[Wayne Nicholas]

Hi Rocky,

I actually like working on images in LR, but have always found it clunky. Aperture 2 has all of the controls that LR has, but has a much more elegant interface. the new inspector is awesome, as it now tabbed. The project pane, metadata pane, and adjustment are all on the same side and are very fast to toggle through and to make disappear for more screen real estate. One thing I like and hate about LR is the filter section. It's crammed into the left side which takes away space from the folders sections; even when it is collapsed. Aperture 2 uses the entire height of the pane to give maximum viewing room for projects. There's a lot to see that I can't really describe well enough. I recommend viewing the videos on Apple's site and downloading Aperture 2 trial to play with. the tutorials are at http://www.apple.com/aperture/whatisaperture/ . Check it out.

[Rocky Sharwell]

I have decided to seriously play with Aperture--I have downloaded the manual and other info about it. I think what I will do is convert images in LR as well as with Aperture to see which I like best...

[Jim Poor]

Well, I've been determined to give A2 a fair shot, so I used it for the first three shoots of Wildlife Photographers Base Camp. I had around 750 images from the first shoot, 1100 from the second and 1000 the third. Each time A2 failed at a little beyond the halfway point when downloading the images from a single 16GB card. It locked up my whole machine all three times. Back to LR and they downloaded just fine.

[Wayne Nicholas]

I have decided to seriously play with Aperture--I have downloaded the manual and other info about it. I think what I will do is convert images in LR as well as with Aperture to see which I like best...
That's the best way to do it. It will also let you get a feel for the interface.

Jim, I would consider reinstalling Aperture 2, after zapping the PRAM and Repairing Permissions on your Mac.