1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Aperture or Lightroom and Libraries

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by majordude, Jun 5, 2014.

  1. majordude

    majordude Mu-43 Regular

    108
    Dec 28, 2012
    I use iTunes for music. It has an option to copy all files to the library. I don't think Lightroom works the same way because if I delete the file from my Mac Lightroom says it can't find it! Doh!

    Do either of these programs copy the actual file to it's own folder or database?
     
  2. Matero

    Matero Mu-43 Veteran

    455
    Jun 22, 2013
    Finland
    I don't know Lightroom but at least Aperture copies images to its own library structure. But, I have just made huge effort and taken out all pictures from Aperture library and put everything to normal directory structure. Why? This enables the usage of multiple tools for same images, eg. in my workflow Aperture and DxO.
     
  3. randyspan

    randyspan Mu-43 Veteran

    312
    May 24, 2014
    New Hampshire, USA
    Randy Spann
    Lightroom does not! It just stores the information of your edits as a "sidecar" file. Your original RAW files are not touched.
     
  4. Itchybiscuit

    Itchybiscuit Photon Mangler

    512
    Dec 10, 2013
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Ivor
    You have to export your edited files from LR once you've PP'd them - it'll ask for a location when you do so.

    When you import them into LR, you have to specify a folder on your PC - you probably already know that though...
     
  5. mcasan

    mcasan Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 26, 2014
    Atlanta
    iPhoto only does a managed library where the original files, jpg previews, and edit info are all stored inside thr photo database package. Bad idea if you have lots of photos and a small main drive.

    Lightroom takes the opposite approach. In its catalog it only references the location of the originals. So you can have a large set of photo as the larger folders/masters can be on a large external HD.

    Aperture gives you the choice between a manages or referenced library. Note that both Aperture and LR can reference the same folders of originals.
     
  6. David A

    David A Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 30, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Disclosure: I used to use Aperture but I swapped to Lightroom.

    There was no news about Aperture at WWDC and I don't think there was any about iPhoto. There was news about a new photo app for the Mac so it looks like things are changing. Aperture has not had a major upgrade in over 4 years now and where many once thought it was ahead of Lightroom in features those days are gone. It fell behind some time ago and continues to fall further behind with every new version of Lightroom. It now looks as if the writing may be on the wall for Aperture if Apple is starting to tout a new application and making no mention of Aperture.

    What I do to get the photos I want to have on my iPad from Lightroom is to use Lightroom's Publish Services function. I set up a series of folders that I want synced to the iPad, tell Lightroom the image size and other details about howI want the photos exported (a once only task when you set up the service), and then simply drag photos to the appropriate Publish Services folder while in Library module. You then have to select that folder in the Library module and it will show you thumbnails of the published and unpublished images in the folder, the unpublished ones being the ones you either just placed there or previously published images which have been edited since you placed them there. You then have to tell Lightroom to publish those photos which is the point at which it exports JPEGs to the folder structure. You tell iTunes that you want your photo library on the iPad to sync with the parent folder of your structure, and which sub-folders you want to include. After that your images get synced to the iPad automatically every time you sync the device. It's nowhere near as simple and intuitive as syncing from a iPhoto or Aperture collection but it is fairly simple to do once you create the Publish Services folder. What it does mean, however, is that you will have a folder structure on your hard drive with JPEG images in it and you are effectively manually controlling and managing that structure. Lightroom only tracks changes to those folders which it makes so if you change the contents of those folders by making changes in the Finder such as moving images to the trash or adding other images to the folders via a Finder window, then Lightroom won't know about your changes and it isn't going to show them in its Library module.

    The alternative is to set up folders in the Finder, tell iTunes to sync those folders to the iPad photo Library, and then manually add JPEGs for any images you want on the iPad. Those images can come from anywhere and the visual results on the iPad will vary with the resolution of the image you add. You could create an export template for the image resolution and other characteristics that you want and simply export to that folder or manage it any other way you want. I think the Publish Services approach, once set up, works pretty well and ensures consistent quality for all images.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. majordude

    majordude Mu-43 Regular

    108
    Dec 28, 2012
    Well, I just noticed that it LR seems to store raw files in a folder but not jpgs etc. Then again, I may just not know what the hell I am doing!
     
  8. bassman

    bassman Mu-43 Top Veteran

    678
    Apr 22, 2013
    New Jersey
    Scott
    LR gives you the option of having its catalog point to the image files where they currently live on your hard drive, or copy (or move) to a centralized file structure of your choice. It never stores the images in the catalog. If you're importing directly from an SD card or your camera via USB, it always makes a copy and stores it in a file structure you define. <br />
    <br />
    It cares not whether you import raw, JPEG, tiff or any other image format. Once in LR, you can treat them all the same to the limit of that format (more bit depth in raw than JPEG, etc.) The interface doesn't distinguish. <br />
    <br />
    If you shoot raw+JPEG, you can have it treat them as distinct images or to ignore the jpegs and only import the Raws. <br />
    <br />
    As you edit the images, the edit instructions are stored in the catalog and the image file is never modified. That allows all edits to be non-destructive. When you want to do something with that edited file, it dynamically creates a JPEG which is exported, printed, emailed, etc.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium

    Not quite right about iphoto there

    iPhoto, like Aperture, now has the option to store the original image file either as part of the Library or in within a folder structure . Aperture offers much more flexibility on where you store your pictures on import.

    However both iphoto and Aperture use the same library structure, and can open each others libraries.

    At a fundamental level I don't believe there is any major difference in how iphoto/aperture and LR operate in managing where images exist

    cheers

    K
     
  10. mcasan

    mcasan Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 26, 2014
    Atlanta
    I stand corrected on iPhoto having the option of doing a referenced library.

    f talking an external referenced set of masters/originals, both the Apple and Adobe products can do that. If talking a managed library where the masters are stored inside the database, Adobe does not offer that in LR.

    Bottom line, more options in the Apple products.
     
  11. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser
    At WWDC there was a reference to iPhoto, it is going to be redone. There was not enough detail given to see where Apple is headed. It will be interesting to see if Aperture is updated this fall as well.
     
  12. mcasan

    mcasan Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 26, 2014
    Atlanta
    I am a long time user of LR. I am now also using Aperture. For the life of me I can't think of anything in LR 5 that is a must have that I can't do in Aperture. The only tool I can think of is maybe the radial filter in LR. It is OK. But I prefer using control points in Nik Viveza. Some folks point to lens corrections. But Aperture, just like LR, does do lens corrections when the raw file contains the lens correction data. That is why you won't see M43 equipment in the lens correction tables in LR. Thank goodness as M43 shooters, lens corrections is not something we have to hope for in a future release.

    LR6 will likely debut later this month. With Apple making major changes in the IOS and Mac Core Images platforms, we should have an executing time in photography in the next few months. It is always good to have choices.
     
  13. Cederic

    Cederic Mu-43 Veteran

    212
    Nov 14, 2012
    Nottingham
    Could I make some nominations?

    It's healthy that there are choices out there. I love Lightroom and what it does for me, and switching away would lose all of the post-processing I've done (unless something else can read the LR catalogue and replicate it - that would be impressive, but unlikely) so realistically I'm unlikely to switch. But Adobe can't sit back and celebrate being wonderful or they'll lose ground on the competition, so Lightroom will continue to improve as a result. Meanwhile the competition will be trying to differentiate and offer innovative features, so they'll improve too.

    Not sure LR6 is due all that soon though. If it does I'm hoping for HDR support, better B&W options and an improved plugin API.

    Back on topic, I have LR configured to copy my photos off the camera and into a defined folder hierarchy on my hard disk. From there I can copy them to my NAS for backup. If I want to delete one (or more accurately, when I delete the 80% of photos that I got too horribly wrong following an import) I mark them in Lightroom and let that delete them from its catalogue and from the hard disk at the same time.
     
  14. mario23

    mario23 Mu-43 Regular

    127
    May 9, 2014
    FL
    I read somewhere that the only way to get the colors from our oly cams is to upload the images first with their viewer software then export them. Any truth to that?

    Sent from my SM-T520 using Tapatalk
     
  15. mcasan

    mcasan Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 26, 2014
    Atlanta
    create a preset in LR or Aperture to match any colors in any jogs you think you are missing. As for raw files, those should be a very neutral capture of what the sensor recorded. In Aperture start with Enhance adjustment.
     
  16. mario23

    mario23 Mu-43 Regular

    127
    May 9, 2014
    FL
    I will...still learning. I was just curious if that's true.

    Sent from my SM-T520 using Tapatalk
     
  17. RobWatson

    RobWatson Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    It is true that the way the various raw converters generate a viewable object is a bit different. LR cannot exactly replicate OV3 (I have not seen a similar result proved one way or the other for Aperture).
     
  18. mcasan

    mcasan Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 26, 2014
    Atlanta
    LR being presented on what calibrated monitor? Color management is a whole project unto itself. Without a calibrated monitor it is hard to know if any color changes are the monitor or any software between the camera's capture and the image you see on the screen. But always start with a calibrated monitor for the color space you want to use....typically sRGB or AdobeRGB.