![viveza 2 aperture 3 viveza 2 aperture 3](https://fotosjj.fr/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Nick-Collection-photoshop.jpg)
![viveza 2 aperture 3 viveza 2 aperture 3](https://live.staticflickr.com/7130/7548316134_62fda7678a_b.jpg)
I will likely end up with several workflows: 1.) For clients (either Aperture or Lightroom) 2.) Personal work (NX2 or DxO). When concerned with producing single images for personal work at their highest quality (e.g., portfolio, gallery, publication, etc.), I lean toward a more dedicated RAW converter, rather than a "workflow" application like Lightroom or Aperture.
#VIVEZA 2 APERTURE 3 PRO#
My preference to convert RAW files would be either Nikon's Capture NX2 and/or DxO Optics Pro 7. Truth be told, I have no definite workflow right now, and I do not use Aperture as my primary RAW converter. My reply for that question is as follows: I re-read your post, and you actually asked, "Which is better for processing my RAW files, Lightroom 3 or Aperture 3?" which is not what I answered. Although I'm not as familiar with Lightroom, I know it definitely has some capabilities that Aperture cannot match, and any "missing features" in the current version of Lightroom looks as though they've been addressed in the Lightroom 4 beta release.ģ. The popularity of Aperture in this thread is a bit of an anomaly.Ģ. So, expect continuing product upgrades from Adobe.
![viveza 2 aperture 3 viveza 2 aperture 3](https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1BZEbC4EMss/VnRE9Xw6CbI/AAAAAAAAEos/IDP4rZd0RW8/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/Viveza.png)
Lightroom has far more users than Aperture. I was in a hurry to post my last message. The first is the most comprehensive, the latter two sell for below their published price, and are a good bargain at only about $12 each. I bought the only three titles available on Amazon-all three are pretty good, and I highly recommend them if going with Aperture: I'm still figuring out my workflow, but I liked Aperture enough to invest in its current version and some books.
#VIVEZA 2 APERTURE 3 INSTALL#
However, with a clean OS X install on a wiped boot drive, Aperture runs very well, even on just a 4GB iMac. If you own a more recent Mac, I would recommend no less than 8GB if planning to run RAM-hungry plug-ins such as onOne's Perfect Photo Suite, etc. Note that 2007-2008 (models 7,1 and 8,1) iMacs can actually support 6GB of RAM, not just 4GB as Apple states 2009 and later iMacs support 8GB-16GB of system RAM. Primary 300GB Aperture library file resides on its own, dedicated 500GB Firewire external drive. 2008, iMac, model 8,1 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo with 6GB of RAM (1x4 in slot zero, 1x2 in slot one).ģ. Last weekend, I did some HDD housecleaning/memory upgrades, and did a clean install of both Snow Leopard and Aperture 3 on my internal boot HDD. I've had Aperture since I bought my iMac in 2008. I just read Rick Ellis' comparison (linked previously) last night, and agree that it's one of the more balanced comparisons. If plugins are everything to you, then look at Lightroom. If you can mostly live with the tools provided by Aperture, then it doesn't matter. The big-name plugins are available on Aperture but not nearly as many as for Lightroom. I haven't used the printing/books features but they seem very well done. Workflow is fast - importing files, reviewing and rating shots, editing, export. The RAW support is fast and seamless - other than the extended dynamic range for adjustments, you can't tell the difference between working in JPEG or RAW. Aperture works just as well, and intergrates very nicely with the rest of the Apple ecosystem (I also use Final Cut Pro and DVD Studio Pro.) Aperture has all of the editing tools I need for 99.5% of my photos.
![viveza 2 aperture 3 viveza 2 aperture 3](https://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/viveza_2/viveza_2_03.jpg)
The price difference didn't make any sense - I feel that Aperture is priced appropriately and the Lightroom (like all Adobe products) is expensive. I like Lightroom a lot, but ended up buying Aperture.
#VIVEZA 2 APERTURE 3 TRIAL#
I spent a couple of hundred hours using Lightroom on my wife's Mac, and then used the trial of Lightroom 3 on my machine. I bought the program to manage my growing library of images! In essence, this means you can't see the image outside of Aperture.This also means you can't move or accidentally delete the image outside of Aperture as well. In this case, Aperture imports the image into it's own directory system (inside a package not available outside of Aperture unless you want to go digging around in the package contents). Aperture can also use a "managed" library. Again, both Aperture and Lightroom can have referenced libraries. But if you move of delete the image, then the program won't "see" the image. You can navigate to them outside of using program. In a referenced library, your images are still located on your hard drive within your typical folder hierarchy. Even more-so when you consider the price difference and at one time Aperture was crazy, $499, expensive! If choosing Aperture, be advised that Aperture has two ways of managing your images: referenced and managed.