Aperture- compared to Photoshop PS5

[eric black]

I am getting a new computer- 27" iMac, quad processor, lots of RAM etc... and am planning on getting Photoshop CS5. Aperture is offered during the purchase for something along the lines of $200 or so. I dont do a huge amount of photoshop manipulations when I process an image- more or less just dodging, burning and getting rid of dust images that come along with drum scans- my files like most of yours are large and usually I end up with 2-3 layers per image- question is if Aperture buys me anything that I can use in my workflow or if I should just stick with Photoshop of which I currently have CS. IM interested in feedback on if the $200 is worth spending or not and if so, what did you get out of this program.

[Mark Stahlke]

There is no need to buy Aperture when you buy your computer. You can download a 30 day trial. If you decide you like it, Aperture is only $79.99 in Apple's App Store.

[sultanofcognac]

You will definitely enjoy working with Aperture. I tested it alongside Lightroom a few years ago and Aperture won hands down. I use it religiously as it will do many things that PS won't. Aperture works well with PS.

Have a good time with it

[Kirk Gittings]

Funny, I tested Aperture against LR3 last year and I thought LR won hands down. Even though I had a free copy of Aperture (from my school), I ended up paying for Lightroom and using it. You should try both. BUT for large layered images I don't think there is any option but PS CS5.

[Peter Mounier]

I have an older mac ppc G5 quad core machine with Aperture and CS4. For dust spotting CS4 is way faster, and Aperture 2 doesn't have dodge and burn capabilities, although I think there are better ways to get that done, such as Aperture's highlights and shadows sliders. I have found that I can make the same corrections to an image in Aperture that I would've made with layers in PS. That being said, I love Aperture and recommend it for what it can do. Aperture is more of an image repository with editing capabilities. It has a great raw image processor if you have a digital camera.
Have you checked to see if PS CS can work in the Intel machines?

Peter

[Ken Lee]

At what file-size does Aperture become unusable ?

I like to observe (and I may finally be wrong) that LightRoom and Aperture are designed to work with a large number of small files - whereas Large Format photographers work with a small number of large files.

We need to edit large images, and also traverse thumbnails of TIF and PSD files - not just small JPGs.

[Leigh]

...whereas Large Format photographers work with a small number of large files.

That's not limited to LF photographers.

The images from my Hasselblad digital back are each 117MB.

- Leigh

[Leigh]

Another option to consider is the Phocus program, free from Hasselblad. Excellent program.

It has all of the standard photo manipulation functions, and works quite well. It's designed to handle large files.

Free download (requires registration which is no big deal) from www.hasselbladusa.com

- Leigh

[photobymike]

I use an older Quad PPC MAC with Lightroom 2 and PS CS4. I am going to upgrade the software but need to look at the hardware first. I would be interested in performance differences in Aperture and LRoom3. I am thinking of using a Mini Mac. Any experiences with an Intel Macs and the software discussed. I also use files of 50 to 100 meg size.

[Leigh]

Any experiences with an Intel Macs and the software discussed. I also use files of 50 to 100 meg size.

I'm running Phocus and CS5 on an Intel-based 13" MacBook Pro with a 24" LED Cinema display, 8 GB of RAM, and a whole bunch of disk space.

I never use CS5, although I paid good money for it. I just got it for compatibility with other folks.

- Leigh