John Nack: Lightroom pulls further ahead of Aperture

22 09 2009

Apple have really dropped the ball on this one! I guess the problem is with Apple is they are essentially a hardware company; Snow Leopard has shown that software is a value add for them.  Aperture 3 will be a big decider for a lot of photographers.  I for one made the jump to Lightroom a few months ago and am very very happy with the software – I'll take a massive intervention in the next version of Aperture to win back my loyalties.

Lightroom pulls further ahead of Aperture
via John Nack on Adobe on 21/09/09

The past couple of years at this time (see entries for 2007, 2008), independent research company InfoTrends has surveyed professional photographers* about their choices of raw image-processing tools. It's interesting to check in on how the competition between Adobe Photoshop Lightroom & Apple Aperture is going.

Among photographic pros using the Mac,

In 2007 Lightroom was nearly twice as popular as Aperture

In 2008 it was nearly three times as popular

In 2009 it's approaching four times as popular


By the numbers:

  2007 2008 2009
Photoshop Camera Raw plug-in 66.5% 62.2% 57.9%

Lightroom

23.6%

35.9% 37.0%
Aperture 5.5% 7.5% 6.3%
     
On the Mac platform only:    
Lightroom 26.6% 40.4% 44.4%
Aperture 14.3% 14.6% 12.5%


You might notice some decline in the use of the Camera Raw plug-in inside Photoshop as more pros move to using Lightroom. Let me be clear in noting that Photoshop use among these pros remains in the 90% range, and that the decline applies only to Camera Raw usage. (That makes sense as Lightroom and Camera Raw share the same processing engine, and photographers are, as expected, handling more of their raw processing in Lightroom.)

 
 





What I’d need in Aperture 3 to make me move back from Lightroom.

15 09 2009

When Aperture and Panasonic decided to invest in a round of photographic gut-barging and not support my superb little carry-everywhere LX3 I was forced to look to alternative solutions to process the RAW files flying off my card.  I have used both photo management systems extensively over the years but had invested in Aperture about two years ago to hold my metadata.  I just found Aperture’s interface far more intuitive and, although it came at a space cost *cough*, the tools ability to render and process standard darkroom adjustments still kicks the crap out of Lightroom.  Aperture was starting to show it’s warts however so the LX3 wasn’t the only reason for my move to Lightroom; the fact that Aperture handles referenced files like an enraged toddler with a bowl full of mushed veggies was an endess source of hair pulling, as was the fact that I needed a small data center to store it’s enormously bloated library file, squatting like a pregnant cane-toad with previews and thumbnails for every image I had.  So I took the complete plunge into a world of clunky windows, slower previews and wonderful gorgeous non-destructive edits and haven’t really looked back.

Nostalgia, and a love of the power of the Apple software (insert fanboy expletive here) still have me tinkering around in Aperture and there is still nothing like it for putting photo books together.  I also still have a whole lot of metadata in Aperture that I am happily putting off moving over – so I’m sitting on the fence yet again until the much rumoured Aperture 3 makes it’s secretive entrance from the locked down, hush hush Aperture development headquarters.  I do have a couple of basic non-negotiatiable requirements from Aperture 3, fail me on these and my search for the one photo tool to rule them all (sorry Mr. Tolkien) will be over.

  1. Referenced file management:  I like to move my files around on the disk (or multiples thereof).  Aperture 3 will need to be able to synchronise folders without throwing its toys and all your adjustments out the window.  Yes I know you can re-attach images but it’s a pain.
  2. Non-destructive edits:  This is a biggie.  I don’t want a 60Mb TIF file every time I do a little dodge and burn – it’s not fun so please could we take a leaf from the Lightroom school. en-oh-en-dash-dee-ee-ess …..
  3. Smaller library: I’ll take the performance hit.  Libraries almost the same size as your image folders are not cool and there is no need to keep every preview forever; delete them if I haven’t looked at the picture in a month or two.
  4. Better DNG support:  It’s pretty much an archival standard now.  I use it, a number of camera manufacturers use it, many many high profile photographers use it so please support it.  There are these cool new things call Opcode lists which store camera specific information for things like barrel distortion compensation; please look them up.
So that’s all really, not too much to ask from the Aperture development team is it?
Hello … can you hear me down there … hellllloooooooo!
Did someone remember to let the dev team out when Steve went on leave?