Some Observations Of Mine

[Ian Farlow]

Aperture, especially version 2.1, is a great program with several excellent features. I can certainly understand why photographers use it. Even though I use Lightroom, now version 1.4.1, there are some features from Aperture 2.1 that I would love to see in Lightroom:

1. Say I am exporting multiple images to SmugMug. I absolutely love the export plugin window in Aperture because it has the ability to show me thumbnails of the images I am exporting. Lightroom doesn’t do this, and only gives me a drop-down list of images that I am exporting. Aperture’s handling of multiple images during export to SmugMug is infinitely better. Maybe the export plugin development will allow for thumbnails in the future?
2. Aperture uses standard Mac input boxes, text fields, etc. while Lightroom uses a custom interface that is forced to show the underlying standard fields in certain circumstances. For example, if I want to rename a field in Lightroom, Lightroom has to show a standard text field to accomplish this, which results in a misaligned text field on top of the custom Lightroom interface. This, to me, is just sloppy and really needs to be addressed. I think this might also have something to do with poor performance when tabbing through fields while also using auto-complete. I have never been satisfied with the way Lightroom handles auto-complete, especially when trying to tab to the next field.
3. Aperture can scroll through thumbnails much quicker. More specifically, maybe, is that Aperture feels faster at responding to my input, while Lightroom feels somewhat sluggish responding to the same input. I don’t know if this is fixable or not, but I hope so. I recall reading somewhere, although I don’t know where, that response to user input must be instantaneous, or so nearly instantaneous that it feels connected. Anything less than this feels disconnected.
4. Aperture has very detailed Smart Folder abilities. Lightroom 2 BETA has Smart Folders (called Smart Collections), but the search criteria is somewhat limited in comparison. This might just be a limitation of the BETA, however, but I would still request (and have done so) more robust searching capabilities.

There are a few other bits and pieces that I would like to see carried over from Aperture, but what I listed above is the bulk of it. However, Lightroom 2 BETA looks to be very promising. I can’t wait for it to be released, and I can promise that I will be as close to the front of the digital line to buy it as possible.

I still like Lightroom that much. I anticipate that I will ultimately keep Aperture as a book-making tool, at least until I find something better or Lightroom gets its own book-making capabilities.

Comments? Discussion?

 

[johnbeardy]

Ian

I agree with you on point 4 and we must keep encouraging Adobe to enrich the functionality of smart collections. Aperture 2 made an interesting step forward in that you can now target adjustments, not just conventional descriptive metadata. So you can build a series of smart folders to control your workflow so no pictures slip out of the door without certain tasks - eg edge sharpening, having been completed. For an example of this, see http://www.beardsworth.co.uk/news/index.php?id=P1142

As for point 3, that's very true of preview mode though I think the comment applies to full screen previews as much as to thumbnails. I find it very handy when first reviewing pictures, and I bet it's great for those who don't have to do any adjustments, or have a deadline preventing them from doing so, and for some photographers this preview-browsing is a significant plus. OTOH, once you switch out of preview mode, it's no faster, and I find I need to do this so often that for me I'd say that to do anything useful one has to take the speed hit and one's no better off than with LR.

The other feature I really like is Aperture's Loupe.

One big downside - it still won't work on any computers other than Macs.

John

 

[Ian Farlow]

Very nice article you've written, John. I agree completely. I use color labels to handle the ingestion workflow (needs review, needs placement, needs metadata, needs keywording), but being able to create a Smart Collection for processing stages would be very nice.

I've said it somewhere else before... iTunes, and now Aperture 2, have excellent searching capabilities, and it's obvious that Apple knows how to search metadata very effectively. I hope Adobe will review those applications to see how it's done, and then make those changes to Lightroom.

 

[Richard Earney]

I don't think Adobe doesn't understand how to search metadata efficiently, it is probably how to do it cross-platform (which Aperture doesn't have to worry about). Smart collections are another example of this; they are a system level function on the Mac, but not necessarily on Windows (maybe Vista, but I have never seen it).

The Loupe seems to divide users. Personally I hate the Aperture one as it is overly flashy (however it is massively improved from v1). Lightroom has a very good loupe - but it is often overlooked because it is understated.

Aperture's books capability is good though. I haven't seen the output, but it is an intuitive tool to use.

 

[Braders]

I do what Ian does, usig color lables for exactly that. Would love to see what i see in John's article in LR.

 

[johnbeardy]

Smart collections are another example of this; they are a system level function on the Mac, but not necessarily on Windows

Richard, I think you are wrong in how Aperture does this. Although it resembles the system level equivalent, I don't think it is - it's a SQL query and not a call to operating system functions. I suspect the difference between Apple and Adobe here owes less to operating systems and more to the influence on Aperture of Extensis Portfolio which had smart galleries long before Aperture came out - the product manager is an ex-Extensis guy and I could point you to quite a few other borrowings. While Aperture developed from that database/cataloguing direction, Lightroom came out of Photoshop/Camera Raw and Adobe's image processing strong suit and smart collections may not have seemed as obvious a feature or as high a priority.

We saw in the LR1 beta how well Adobe use customer feedback, but so often with software, users don't know or properly express what they need until the program is actually in front of them and they suddenly start elaborating and detailing solid requirements. Smart collections are interesting as they are now, but in that article I was trying to move the debate on and get people to see some of the possibilities of using a database application. It's a waste of what's in the database if smart collections only target descriptive metadata, and including Develop data would help make us more efficient and consistent.

I agree about the Aperture Loupe being divisive. I just happen to love it - and you know how reluctant I usually am to praise Apple. One part of this is that I think it's a very photographic way to examine an image, so it appeals to me in the same way that I've always hated Lightroom's use of "grayscale" to refer to what photographers call black and white. I like its flashiness, and love using it when I'm showing off some new pictures. By contrast, I find Lightroom's Loupe+Navigator combination looks more prosaic and a little lacklustre. What the two approaches actually achieve is little different - I'm just being swayed by a pretty face!

John

 

[Richard Earney]

John
Perhaps you are a Mac user at heart

'Smart' stuff on the Mac is done using Spotlight, which as far as I know uses an SQLite db for its info, so maybe it is closer than you think. Also it is a system level function, so I would assume Apple would tap into that.

I'm sure more resources will be devoted to this area as in a way it is the User Interface of the future (or at least near future). It doesn't seem flashy like swoopy panels, but it is rethinking the way to manage files. Whereas in the past people would obsessively file things in folders and subfolders, Spotlight means you can be messy and still find stuff.

Not that that should stop a good folder structure; but not everyone has the time to devote to tidying up. My images are nicely structured, but I have several folders called Desktop Cruft, which ought to be sorted one day!!!

 

[DonRicklin]

Cruft = Stuff (USA). Got too many of those kind of folders, myself!

Don

 

[MikeCaine]

I notice that the latest Practical Photography (UK magazine) compares Aperture 2 / Capture One v4 / Lightroom 1.4 and seems to conclude that Aperture is the best.

I wonder if they reviewed Lightoom 2 beta would it change their minds?


I also notice that the header photo got the article shows Aperture running on a Sony Vaio :roll:

Mike

 

[johnbeardy]

I wonder if they reviewed Lightoom 2 beta would it change their minds?

If they didn't, how long would it take you to stop laughing?

'Smart' stuff on the Mac is done using Spotlight, which as far as I know uses an SQLite db for its info, so maybe it is closer than you think. Also it is a system level function, so I would assume Apple would tap into that.

I'm pretty sure you are right about Spotlight storing its metadata records in a SQLite database, but Aperture makes no use of it. It's more a case of similarity of design and using common feature names - which of course isn't a bad thing to do.

Mac user at heart - huh!

John