A couple weeks ago I wrote about my then tentative switch from Aperture to Lightroom. The following Tuesday Apple released Aperture 2. I downloaded the trial and after my initial 24 hours with AP 2 I decided I would probably stay with Lightroom. In the days since I’ve gone back several times to edit a few images in AP 2 and experiment more with browsing and searching. I think that because I spent nearly a year with AP I really wanted to stay with it, wanted to give it a real chance. After nearly a week I’ve confirmed my decision to switch to LR and have gone ahead and started moving the rest of my Aperture images over. Here's why.

Workflow and Speed
There’s no doubt AP 2.0 is an improvement in speed in both browsing and editing but I’m still seeing delays and the spinning beachball… less often of course but the fact that I’m still seeing it when I do not ever see it in LR says something about the basics. I can’t help but think that the drag I’m still seeing with AP, mostly during editing, is tied to Apple’s reliance on the graphics card for much of the workload. I’ve got a MB Pro with 2 gigs of ram, Core 2 Duo and it still just feels sticky to me. Using the Loupe or viewing at 100% feels even worse. I can and often do view my images at 100% in LR and it feels very smooth aside from the initial render of the image when I switch to the magnified view.

When it comes to browsing and searching, again there is no doubt that AP 2 is faster and smoother than its previous version. On the downside, I've also noticed that while I can very quickly scroll through thumbnails in my Aperture Library those thumbs are empty outlines and drawn in with the photo after a very slight delay whereas LR scrolls about as smoothly and images are already 95% rendered rather than empty outlines. As soon as I stop scrolling the 95% rendered images snap to focus. I prefer the method used by LR because I know as I'm scrolling where I'm at, there is zero wait for the thumbs to draw in and I can keep scrolling to where I want to be. While LR lacks Aperture's excellent smart groups I don't miss them much because searching is instant and because of the built in keyword and metadata browser which I'll get into momentarily.

I was a bit disappointed with Aperture 2 in regards to adding keywords and captioning which is another area that I still prefer the LR method. It is much easier to select a large group of images and enter the same caption by just typing it into the caption field and hitting enter with no need to go to the menu bar and choose batch change or even to use the short cut for batch change. I just select them and click into the caption field. While keywording large groups of images is fairly easy in Aperture it is even easier in LR to click a button in an already present sidebar or even typing into the keyword field rather than Aperture's drag and dropping of keywords. Not only that but Lightroom's browsing by keywords feature is fantastic way to actually use the keywords you've added. Just below the keywords section of the sidebar is metadata browsing which provides an easy to use list of criteria such as file type, lens, camera model, ISO, shutterspeed, and more for quick filtering of images.

One last thought regarding workflow, after editing I often like to DO something with images. Most often I like to upload to Flickr and upload to my own image galleries at Enchanted Planet. Aperture accomplishes this with Connected Flow's excellent Flickr plugin and via integration with iWeb and that is great. While LR also has an excellent Flickr plugin it is not integrated with iWeb or any other Apple application such is the iWork apps so I first have to export images to a folder then drop them into iWeb. However, and this has only become an issue since I started using LR, I can publish to a web gallery using one of the included galleries or downloadable templates. I've been fairly happy with letting iWeb step in for Aperture's very basic web export and was really hoping Aperture 2 would bring some greatly needed improvements in this area. Nope. Unfortunately there is nothing at all besides integration with .Mac galleries and the templates appear to be unchanged with there are no new additions. This won't do. With LR the default galleries are much better than Apple's defaults and, even better, I can download user created templates. In the first week of using LR I found and have been happily using such a template that has PayPal integration for selling images. As an example you can check out my gallery of song birds. I could have never done that with Aperture.

Image Editing and RAW Conversion Quality
Image editing and the quality of RAW conversion were both issues with Aperture, especially when compared to LR. With Aperture 2 Apple has done a fantastic job with RAW 2. The editing results are nearly identical with LR in terms of quality. The noise reduction is much better for images shot at ISO 400 or higher though I don't think it's quite as easy as LR to get the best results. With LR noise reduction and sharpening are all neatly available by default in the Details section of the Develop sidebar. With a couple of tweaks I am usually done in seconds. With Aperture 2 i can get those results but it requires adjustments in the RAW Fine Tuning then additional steps of adding noise reduction and edge sharpening sliders (not available by default) before I can even adjust those things. The results are improved over AP 1.5 and equal to LR, but the work required to get those results requires more steps.

In regards to image editing with AP 2 I have to mention the new Retouch Tool which can usually be used to replace the dreaded Spot and Patch tool. The Retouch Tool is fantastic with excellent results and very smooth performance... it is almost too easy to use!! In fact, the first time I used it I actually giggled aloud at how easy it was. There is no doubt that this tool is a huge leap beyond what LR has in the way of spot removal and healing. There are other new adjustments that I'm not going to go into other than to say that they are all well implemented and bring image editing up to par with LR.

In the end I've decided to stay with LR for two reasons: speed and much better web export. I'm certainly glad to see Aperture improving because it provides another option and will, no doubt, keep Adobe on its toes in regards to LR. Moving thousands of adjusted images around is far too much work to keep jumping from program to program. Now that I've seen AP 2 I am comfortable with my choice to switch to LR.


Technorati Tags: Apple, OS X, Macintosh, Mac, Aperture, Lightroom, iWeb, flickr

I've been using Aperture since March 2007. I wrote positively of my switch from iPhoto to Aperture and have greatly enjoyed the Aperture workflow as well as it's integration with iWeb and other aspects of the Mac OS. However, in recent months I become increasingly frustrated with it, primarily the slowness in searching and editing.

I'm using it on a MacBook Pro 2.16 core 2 duo with 2 gigs of ram. I have a relatively small library of 16 gigs which is organized so that each month is a project which is usually less than 600 pictures. The slowness begins with opening the program which takes far too long, usually 20 seconds, sometimes close to a minute. From what I've read my library is relatively small and I can't imagine how slow this would be with a library as large as some have.

In usage, editing is way too slow. Trying to use the Spot and Patch tool is an exercise in patience and doing it at a zoom of 100% in like watching a melting glacier retreat up a mountain. In fact doing anything while zoomed in is terribly slow. Sure, I can use the loupe but that tends to require more work with the trackpad. When it comes time to search or use a smart folder I often get a long pause, sometimes the spinning beach ball. Just switching between projects can cause delays.

When it comes to exporting, often the last step in the process for any image that is shared or used, anyone using Aperture with Leopard will encounter what is apparently a bug. Exporting images with Aperture (as well as iPhoto) results in much softer images, apparently due to the core OS technology used by these apps. Softness is not good unless it is intentional. I shoot lots of bird images and I want the details of the feathers to be as sharp as possible. Softness introduced by my editing software is not acceptable on any level.

Like many Aperture users I've been hoping for a serious update but have seen little evidence that one is coming. It might be tomorrow, it might be 6 months. About two weeks ago, I decided to try Lightroom which I had been avoiding because I really like the Aperture workflow and integration with iWeb and other aspects of the OS. I've also avoided the possibility of switching because in the 9 months I've been using Aperture I've put a good bit of time into editing, keywording, and captioning my images. If I switch to Lightroom I loose that work. 



After two weeks with Lightroom I'm fairly certain that I am going to make the the switch. With each day that I use it I import more images and organizing them into the same system I have created with Aperture. I'm still importing images so I can't comment on the speed of browsing and searching a full 15 gig library but with 5 gigs imported it is FAR faster to search and browse than Aperture. Even more important, editing is FAR smoother... in fact, I find it hard to believe how much faster it is. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I'm finding that the editing results are much better both before and especially after export. I've already mentioned that Leopard introduced a softness to all exports, but I think the differences I'm seeing even go beyond this.

Two of my favorite features thus far. First would be noise reduction which is fantastic and far superior to that in Aperture. As someone that shoots without a flash often in the deep shade of the woods I welcome this. If at all possible I avoid using ISO 400 or above due to the noise but with Lightroom I'm finding that I can eliminate most of this noise which means I can now shoot in conditions I would have previously avoided. Second, In just two weeks I'm discovering that the large community of Lightroom users includes a few that develop add-ons such as plugins and templates. There is a flickr plugin similar to the one for Aperture but that's not the end of it. There are folks actively developing fantastic templates for Lightroom's default Web publishing module. While the default web publishing is already much better than Aperture's being able to easily drop in a template is fantastic. I've already begun the process of building new PayPal linked galleries to tie into my existing galleries generated by iWeb. As an example, you can view my wildflower gallery.



There is more to say about this and I'll likely write about it soon. My suggestion is that if you are a frustrated Aperture user that you try Lightroom if you have not already. I was put off by the workflow at first but I'm finding that it fits much better than I thought it would. If you do give it a try I'll leave you with one final thought, a tip really. Much has been made of the module-based workflow of Lightroom which can seem a bit difficult at first. Here's the tip: you can hit the d key and jump right to the full screen develop module which is similar to Aperture's full screen editing which is a click of the f key. Different but not that different. Want to jump back to the grid of your Library? Hit the g key.


Technorati Tags: Apple, OS X, Macintosh, Mac, Aperture, Lightroom, iWeb, flickr

I've written before about .Mac and iWeb. Back in the days of the free service known as iTools I was a happy user and when it went to a paid service I subscribed for a year. After that year first year I unsubscribed because I felt I was not using the features it offered... it did not fit my needs. As a free service it didn't matter that I didn't use the features but once I started paying I wanted a better match and better performance. Since then I have made it a habit of evaluating it once a year just to be up-to-date on the current features and performance. In the few years since my paid subscription I've never seen anything that would prompt me to subscribe again or recommend it to family or friends. Until now.

This past February I started taking more pictures when I purchased a new DSLR and I started thinking of finding an alternative to flickr. I love flickr but as a dial-up user I don't always have the time to comment on photos and really that seems to be a central focus of the site... it is a community for sharing photos and commenting. The other problem is that free accounts are limited to 200 photos. Thinking I would cancel my account there I cobbled together a system using iWeb and Galerie to host a couple of personal pages and a place for images here on my MacProductive server. It worked but it was never really convenient and as a result I've continued to post images to flickr and failed to keep my own pages updated. After a few weeks evaluating the new version of iWeb in combination with the recent upgrades to .Mac I've decided it is time to move back. Initially I'll just be moving my images and personal blog there but I may also end up hosting MacProductive there if I can work a way for the two sites to co-exist with domain forwarding and/or the new .Mac personal domain feature.

Using iWeb 2 with the new .Mac has been a pleasure. What has impressed me is that even on dial-up it has been very stable for me. While changing pages and adding images is not super speedy I have yet to have any errors. iWeb just steadily chugs through the process. By comparison when posting to this blog with RapidWeaver I often have to make several attempts due to errors. I'm still not totally happy with the way iWeb compresses images though the larger files are worth dealing with because of the convenience. Making new image albums in iWeb or adding to existing ones from my Aperture library is simple drag and drop. I'm hoping that the next version of Aperture will gain the same integration that iPhoto has with the new .Mac image galleries which look fantastic and are even better than those in iWeb. Until then though I am very happy with what iWeb offers.

If you are looking for an easy way to build a site and/or host images take a look at iLife 08 and .Mac if you have not already. I ordered my .Mac via Amazon because it is a bit cheaper that way, around $70 rather than Apple's $100.

So, come over for a visit and poke around for a bit. There are lots of images and my little blog: A hermit speaks. Feel free to leave comments on any image or blog entry.

Technorati Tags: Apple, OS X, Macintosh, Mac, iLife, iWeb, flickr

What a nice surprise FileMaker delivered on Tuesday! Of course Bento is only a preview release but after a couple days of use I'm very happy with it. Over the course of the past couple years I've developed a workflow based on Spotlight as a project manager that brings together related iCal tasks, email, contacts, and files. With Leopard this has only gotten better. The only hiccup has been my need to use FileMaker Pro for my invoices. I've created my own fancy invoice template/system with FileMaker Pro and it works very well. But it is a system outside of my workflow. I have to add clients, project jobs, and line items separately. The great thing about Bento is that it may allow me to bring everything under one unified workflow.

First, let me say that Bento is a Leopard only product because it simply would not be possible without the new features of Leopard. With Bento FileMaker has adopted the very slick interface that has become common with many of today's Apple and third party Mac applications: iTunes, iCal, Delicious Library, NetNewsWire, and many others. This is definitely not FileMaker Pro! This is what I would expect from the iWork team, a database to sit alongside of Pages, Keynote, and Numbers. It is a perfect compliment to iWork and given the quality of this preview release I would not hesitate to recommend it.

In my couple of days with Bento I've tweaked the "Project" library (in Bento a database or table is referred to as a Library) and the Time Billing Library so that I can use them in conjunction with iCal tasks to track projects and billing. Because the system is using data from iCal and Address Book there's no duplication. Not only that, but I can modify iCal and Address Book data from within Bento. Even better, I can enhance the usefulness of this data by adding new fields in Bento.

As an example, iCal tasks do not include a field for job hours but when I track a task for a paid project I need to track the hours. I normally add this into the task notes field in iCal. When it comes time to create an invoice I gather up my iCal tasks and the lists of hours within the notes fields and transfer them to line items in my FMP invoice database. It works but it is not ideal. With Bento iCal task and event data, as long as the preference is set, is easily viewable within the provided form layout. I've added a field for job hours and this data resides in Bento but is associated with that particular iCal task data. By doing this I can now display and modify my iCal tasks, along with the duration of the task in my Project and Time Billing Libraries.

To put it simply Bento uses the Apple apps and data as a foundation and allows me to build new functionality around them. This is a preview release and there is plenty of room for improvement. As it is now I cannot add any graphic objects such as my logo to the invoice I have set up. Text formatting is a bit limited and the layout is a bit clunky requiring spacer boxes and only allowing one line of text per text box. I'd much prefer a layout engine like the iWork apps that are much more free form. Still, this is an excellent start.

Technorati Tags: Apple, OS X, Macintosh, Leopard, FileMaker, Bento

Seriously. How cool is this? When viewing fonts in Leopard we can Quick Look them to get a preview! In fact, Quick Look works on most everything I've tried and has turned out to be my favorite Leopard feature. I can quickly view iCal events, emails, previous iChats, and client web pages all from one finder window. It is instant and I cannot imagine using a computer without it. Not only does it work well on my MacBook Pro but even on older G4 systems it opens quickly and fluidly.




Also very handy is the Finder Cover Flow feature which is not too much of a surprise for me... I fully expected I'd find it very useful. Like Quick Look, Finder's Cover Flow seems to handle practically anything I throw at it though sometimes in unexpected ways: fonts display a two letter preview, html documents display as fully rendered webpages while address book entries display simply as a contact photo.

With Leopard I'm finding that there are new reasons to create Smart Folders for the Finder Sidebar. For example, I've created a Smart Folder of my contacts and can scroll through their images and then use Quick Look to get their details. In fact, when I Quick Look a contact all the normal Address Book data is active with live links so I can send email, initiate an iChat, or jump to a Google map!

Images in Cover Flow are, of course, fantastic and I've created a Smart Folder so that I can view all of the images in Aperture's library right in the Finder... very cool! This would work for iPhoto as well and is very handy for quick access to images without opening the application.

One last note. Screenshots and window grabs in Leopard automatically generate drop shadows! How nifty is that?

Technorati Tags: Apple, OS X, Macintosh, Leopard