|
| ![Apple Aperture 1.5 [Old Version]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41VnWjoFjGL._SL160_.jpg)
 enlarge | From: Apple
Category: Software
List Price: $299.00
Buy New: $189.97
You Save: $109.03 (36%)
New (4) Used (2) from $95.00
Avg. Customer Rating:  24 reviews
Sales Rank: 4205
Format: Cd-rom
Platforms: Mac Os X Intel, Mac Os X
Media: CD-ROM
Operating System: Mac OS X Intel
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.4
Dimensions (in): 9.5 x 8.1 x 1.9
MPN: MA715Z/A
Model: MA715Z/A
UPC: 885909129942
EAN: 0885909129942
ASIN: B000J1CIT6
Release Date: September 28, 2006
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Customer Reviews:
 Outstanding RAW Conversion and Photo Organization/Management - Highly Recommended! June 14, 2007
12 out of 12 found this review helpful
I have been using Aperture since version 1.1, and love it. The few issues/disappointments I had were resolved with version 1.5.x.
In terms of my camera, it is Nikon's top-of-the-line D2X. As such, the RAW files that Aperture has to deal with are large 12-megapixel images. And Aperture handles said images with ease. (Bear in mind that I am running Aperture on a first-generation MacBook Pro 17" laptop.)
I also evaluated Adobe Lightroom -- both during Beta and after the 1.0 release -- and it is also a great program. But I much prefer Aperture's UI, as it does not "get in the way" as much as Lightroom's does. (Having to switch between Lightroom's various modules -- Library, Develop, etc. -- tends to impede my workflow.)
My personal preferences aside, both Aperture and Lightroom are outstanding applications. The only caveat is that both require powerful hardware when working with large RAW files.
Bottom line, you may want to download the trial version of each, to see which is more comfortable. Otherwise, at least as of this writing (Aperture 1.5.x vs. Lightroom 1.0.x), both are evenly matched feature-wise.
Switched From Lightroom May 30, 2007
26 out of 26 found this review helpful
When I purchased my MacBook Pro I had no intention of switching to Aperture, but downloaded it and tried it out of curiosity. I have since sold my Lightroom license and am purchasing Aperture. There are specific reasons for that decision.
First, I really like the feel of Aperture 1.5 better than Lightroom, it is more intuitive to me, and the whole project thing with light tables works great. I have ~10,000 images that I never did get organized with Lightroom and was able to do so in the first few days on Aperture.
The intergration with other apps on the Mac is great - Aperture 1.5 (not 1.0) creates hi-res previews of all my images (see speed note below) and I can work away from my files to update my website, email proofs, design, etc. I keep all my photos on an external drive and leave them at home with me. When I am out of the house working, which is most days, I have my entire library with me without filling up my MacBook Harddrive. Once I need the hi-res file to either edit or send to a customer, I plug back in at home and work seamlessl. With lightroom I was not able to work unless the files were with me.
I had expected Aperture to be slow, but it is not slow. It is very comparable to lightroom, really no difference to mention. There is ONE RALLY BIG CAVEAT ABOUT SPEED with aperture -- when I imported those 10,000 images, the import seem to go fast, maybe 20 minutes or so. BUT, it is not done at this point. In the background Aperture is creating thumbnails and hi-res previews (which can be shut off, but I need them). That is alot of processing for any program, and in the background it ran for HOURS, without me knowing. When I closed Aperture it paused the process, when I restarted Aperture it resumed the process, so for the first few days that I used it, the speed was slow. Then I realized what was going on -- look in the window menu for SHOW TASK LIST, and you will see the progress.
If others did not know this was going on and tried to get immediately to work in Aperture, they would think it was very slow. I wonder how many people have dumped thousands of photos in and used it for 30 minutes and then uninstalled it assuming it was slow? Lightroom handled this much better, showing the progress in the corner and also was faster by default with the 1:1 preview turned off.
In conclusion, Aperture works great for me on my MacBook Pro 17". I love it and I'm sticking with it. I do miss the vibrabce slider from lightroom, no question, and the develop module in lightroom is better, though not enough to stop me. I jump to photoshop cs3 when I need the vibrance controls.
The best advice I can offer when making the decision between Lightroom and Aperture (or others) is spend the 30 days with them and see which one gets you WORKING and getting things done. For me, that is Aperture.
 This is a dog May 12, 2007
7 out of 30 found this review helpful
Forget about this product. Managing photo collections is a horrible slow-motion experience filled with bombs, unexplainable occurrences and incredibe inefficiency. This program was not ready for release and it shows in almost every phase of the application. The interface is terrible and the results are inconsistent and amateurish. This program DOES NOT run like the Quicktime demos which Apple shows. In action the most consistent feature is a spinning beachball as the application plods through even minor tasks. Check back again in two years when Apple either "upgrades" this to a real product or allows this pig to die a well-deserved death.
Best raw converter combined with photo organizer May 7, 2007
9 out of 9 found this review helpful
I wanted a raw converter that allowed sufficient control and adjustments so that I could avoid the use of another program for printing (e.g. photoshop). Aperture provided that and eliminated the use of iView Media Pro as my photo organizer. I tried Lightroom but Adobe cleverly left out some adjustment controls (sharpening) so that you still needed Photoshop. (Gee, I wonder why ?) With the demise of iView since it was bought by Microsoft, Aperture has filled the bill. I tried Bibble but it was not able to make conversions of high key photos.
 Falling behind Lightroom fast... May 1, 2007
26 out of 32 found this review helpful
As a professional photographer, I was thrilled when Aperture came out. It was just the push I needed to finally switch over to Apple computers. I've spent the better part of 7 months using the product to manage workflow for sports and wedding assignments.
At first, using Aperture was helpful. It clipped large amounts of time from my workflow, and it has a lot of cool things like the Loupe built into it... but I found that a lot of them were just toys, not usable tools. The interface lacks that Apple intuitiveness and seems to always need more steps than necessary. Using it in conjunction with Photoshop slowed both programs to a standstill. Worst of all, it always wanted to create more thumbnails than necessary. I could understand doing a before and after thumbnail, but if I made an adjustment like a crop with their tools, then also a Photoshop adjustment, pretty soon I was looking at three thumbnails, not two, and to make it worse, if I had rated the adjusted file and then did a search by ratings, all I got in the search results were the unedited results, not the retouched versions. In addition, the internal image adjustment tools don't have the same crispness that the corresponding Photoshop tools have.
When Adobe Lightroom came out, it was a revelation. The image adjustment tools behave like the full Photoshop versions, it's faster, makes batch changes simpler to do, and it even allows you to work on the early files of an import from a card reader while the rest of the images are still uploading. When you consider that Lightroom is also PC compatible, it opens it up to a lot more users. If most of your adjustments are just color and exposure corrections, you'll never even need to open Photoshop anymore, instead of the co-existing that Aperture forces you into.
I've retired Aperture on my main machine, and installed Lightroom on both of my computers, one of which never had Aperture. My workflow now takes 1/4th of the time it did on Aperture. I realize that this reads as much like a Lightroom review as an Aperture one, but I don't think you can discuss the one product without comparing it to the other. If you need to, download the free demos of each of them and see for yourself-- Adobe beat Apple at their signature style: their product is simpler, more intuitive, and more elegant.
|
|
|
Disclaimer: This is an Amazon storefront - the products referenced on this site are manufactured and sold by other parties and sold through Amazon.com We make no representations regarding either the products or any information vendors offer about their products. Any questions, complaints, or claims regarding the products must be directed to the appropriate manufacturer or vendor, or to Amazon.com. |
| |
