26

Lightroom gives you a lot more control over the processing of your images. You can finely tune vignetting (add and remove), curves, sharpening, split-toning, adding clarity, removing chromatic aberrations, powerful noise reduction, de-warping (lens distortions and perspective) "selective editing" (e.g. change the saturation/luminance of one color only, or of ...


11

There is nothing wrong with your Aperture setup. RAW files are like film negatives, they need to be processed so they can be viewed/displayed as intended. Your camera does not show the RAW file when you press play and preview the image but rather a JPEG image that has been processed in-camera. This is known as a sidecar file. The software that came with ...


9

Lightroom is pretty much the defacto standard for photo management. It has the backing of Adobe and this gives it more chance to last than the competition. This is a double-edged swords as some people are concerned that Adobe will abuse its power and force users to buy into a subscription model with little to escape since the majority of data is stored with ...


8

In addition to the answer @max provided, an important feature of Aperture and Lightroom offer, is non-destructive editing. Basically, Aperture and Lightroom never make changes to your original images, but store the steps made to achieve the changes. See it like a 'recipe' to produce the changes; Aperture and Lightroom apply that recipe 'real-time'. ...


8

Photos for OS X The next version of OS X Yosemite coming Spring 2015 will have an application Photos for OS X that will integrate many of Apertures features. Photos for OS X is a new product that combines features from the soon to be retired Apple Aperture as well as Apple iPhoto. Photos for OS X is tied closely to other Apple cloud products, and edits are ...


8

In June 2014, TechCrunch reported that Adobe are "committed to helping interested iPhoto and Aperture customers migrate to our rich solution". ArsTechnica, quoting TechCrunch, have a slightly different spin on the situation, saying that Apple's developers are "working with Adobe to work on a transitionary workflow for users moving to Lightroom". Presumably ...


6

Emiel's answer on this question explains how Aperture stores modified versions of images. Since the biggest concern is the large original images there are two things that might help. First, when importing you can tell Aperture to store images in the Library, in the photo's current location, or in a specific location. Perhaps that would help for new ...


6

I'm using Aperture too. Here's is my far-from-perfect workflow. It works for me, but not always. My point is to start trashing as many shots as possible, and to keep only good or important ones, so later I can give more attention and time to a small, manageable, number of really good ones. Important: I'm using a managed aperture library, so I keep ...


6

On the side of open source options, in Apple OS X and Linux (but not in Windows) a nice option is darktable. I use it a lot (as an almost exclusive Linux user), and I am quite satisfied with the results(1). There is still no support for X-Trans sensors, but it is coming along. (1) caveats: I am not a pro. And I know that there are a lot of missing thing ...


5

Yes. In Aperture it's called lift and stamp. Apple have a video explaining how to do just that here.


5

You have to do the imports. The systems need to set up all of their information about the images somehow, after all. So, start the imports and go do something else for a while. You're not required to sit and watch the imports. Let the computer do its thing, and then come back later when it's done.


5

I'm not sure why you awarded that answer. It's absolutely fixable easily with aperture. I've spent less than 5 minutes on this and already got decent result. This is your exposure -2EV: This is what I got to (different from above but it's even better imo): All I did was brush in levels set to: Followed by setting recovery to 0.14 (because some area was ...


5

Command line solution In your terminal try to run this command: sips -s format tiff /Path/To/Image/bla.CR2 --out bla.tiff Now you can easily create a Shell Script and do your batch conversion. Credits to this solution goes to this comment. Automator solution I came up with another solution that utilize the very nice feature of Mac OS X: Automator! ...


5

You are probably working with RAW files. RAW files include a preview of the image rendered as the camera would have made a JPEG, which includes some sharpening applied. When you first load the image in a program like aperture, the preview JPEG is displayed until the RAW file can be processed. Since the RAW file has no sharpening applied, it appears to get ...


4

Did you ever find an answer for this? If not, it's pretty simple. Just open an image and if it automatically goes to 100% then just push "z". Now close the image. next time you open any image you should be back to normal. Good luck.


4

Although storing your photos in folders is fast and simple, you can't place one photo into two folders without making file duplicates. And thus locating the necessary images might require more time. So economy in a stage of image library classification will leads in loosing time in finding images later.


4

In Aperture, at least, you can import photos into the database but leave the files where they are. In the Import settings (when you click on the "Import" button), choose Store Files: In their current location (instead of "In the Aperture Library").


4

Yes, you can do it several ways. With the image selected: Pull down the Image menu, then say Duplicate 1 Photo. ⌘-D Right-click or Ctrl-click the photo, then say "Duplicate 1 photo" None of these methods make a copy of the original file on disk, a fact you can verify by subsequently saying File → Show Referenced File in Finder. No matter whether you ...


3

That beautiful image when the photo first loads is your camera's rendition of a JPEG. You might want to start shooting RAW+JPEG so you see both and can either take the JPEG as is or possibly refer to it as you WB your images.


3

The big point of raw files is that it is the original unprocessed and unmodified data from the sensor - the minute you do any processing what so ever on the file (for example, distortion correction) it's no longer the unmodified sensor data - even if you export it into a "raw file". So, exporting to an high bit depth TIFF is just fine, the data loss is ...


3

Canon will almost certainly always have a version of Digital Photo Professional to include with their cameras. Apple may not always support Aperture. (Yeah, I know. Hindsight's always 20/20) Additionally, it has been well over five years since the question was asked and most of the other answers written. Digital Professional 4 is a far different ...


3

There may be a work around using Adobe DNG Converter. I don't have a Mac to try it on, but it can convert many DNGs to a more generic type.


3

According to the Aperture camera compatibility list you should be able to shoot tethered with the original Canon 5D with Aperture 3.0.3 and higher. The camera should be set to PC Connect communication mode. On page 123 of the manual it is explained how to set the communication mode of the Canon 5D.


3

Yes! I'm doing this myself. The key is to make the right choice during import. One of the import settings is RAW + JPEG Pairs which give you five self-explaining options. Both (Use JPEG as Original) Both (RAW as Original) Both (Separate Originals) JPEG files only RAW files only If you choose one of the first two, you're JPEG+RAW pair will be treated as ...


3

From what you describe I do not believe Lightroom has an exact equivalent. Find Photos in Lightroom I understand why someone might ask the question that you have and desire that view. It is the standard view for graphical operating system folders such as Windows or OS X. The thing is when you have 10's of thousands of images and hundreds or thousands of ...


3

You should buy a calibrator(x-rite or spyder are the two main brands that come to mind) and do the calibration yourself. Having it calibrated there won't necessarily do you much good. For a proper calibration you should do it right about as you want to edit those photos. And that's only after you have had your screen on for about 15-20 minutes. That's ...


2

The best way from my experience is to upgrade your memory. My iMac has almost the exact configuration as yours, except that I recently upgraded from 8GB to 32GB. The result is much more impressive than I could have imagined - navigating in Aperture is now instant. It seems as if the entire database is cached. I have also tested Aperture on an SSD-based Mac, ...


2

For your thumbnails/previews, an SSD is going to help a lot, so if you can install an SSD that will speed up the browsing/management side of things (though I'd max out your RAM first). If you can't afford an SSD of sufficient size, then you won't lose too much performance by having the Masters on an external Firewire/eSATA drive (in fact this may be faster ...


2

I am with you entirely. I hate having to do an import. I don't mind pointing an application at a folder that I have laid out. I can further sort within the app, add tagging, etc. But it had better not move my photos around. I don't know of any way to do what you want with iPhoto. Lightroom does indeed support a "folder" approach where that folder and ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible