Comments on: Aperture 2.0 Is Not A Professional Application

By: Tim Thompson

Tim Thompson — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 22:10:20 +0000

Come on Larry, Aperture is very much a professional application. Just because it doesn’t meet your exact expectation, doesn’t make the program lousy. I haven’t found any software that does everything I want, but that reason alone doesn’t make the program any less professional! Maybe if you choose your words a little more carefully next time Larry, you won’t come across quite so arrogant and all knowing.

By: Mark Reibman

Mark Reibman — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:47:53 +0000

The comments are directed to the headline “Aperture is not a Professional Application” This is not even a matter of opinion nor is it debatable. This is simply not true. Aperture is usued successfully and enthusiastically by a huge number of professional photographers. The slideshow feature is not one that is central to the work of the vast majority of photographers and if needed can easily be found internet based software or second party software.

I don’t think that even Aperture’s detractors would declare it is not professional application. It may not be a good one, in someone’s opinion ( not mine), but it is a professional application.

By: larry

larry — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:33:32 +0000

@Scott,
I appreciate your comments and respect your opinion. Yes, I expected criticism.

I agree, showing your work to a client is always preferred to doing it on the web. Real estate photographers however are in the situation of doing as many as 15 shoots a week for ~$200 each and delivering all the results of the shoot within 24 hours of the shoot. So it becomes impractical to sit down with each client.

By: Scott Bourne

Scott Bourne — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 14:14:08 +0000

Interesting - I guess four published photo books, 10 years of supporting myself strictly with photography and more than 1000 published photos in books, magazines, web sites and newspapers make me an amateur - but I think Aperture is very much a professional tool. I agree that Lightroom has a better slideshow feature - but that hardly makes Aperture an “amateur” application. And I do care about showing my clients their photos - do it all the time - with great success.

Lots of pros - like me - understand that the best way to sell images is to show them in person - not on a web site - and with the client sitting next to me - looking at Aperture’s slide show on an Apple Cinema Display - I do quite nicely thank you. Exporting your slide show for your clients’ review is not always the best way to sell images. In fact - it’s almost always the worst thing you can do.

By the way, if you’re going to engage in hyperbole of this type - expect some criticism.

By: Mike Martin

Mike Martin — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:28:13 +0000

I almost hesitate to ask… But what is the major objection to Adobe Photoshop Elments slide show creator?
But I have to wonder, what’s all the fuss. Why does anyone need these tools if you subscribe to a great virtual tour provider? Doesn’t whatever you produce need to be linkable not only to the agent’s/brokers website but also to websites like Realtor.com? Virtual tour providers make it ultimately linkable. Hard to beat for the price. You do is the photography and upload. They host and distribute the tour. Why look further?

By: David Palermo

David Palermo — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 02:53:22 +0000

Aperture is a pro app but like LightRoom they both suck at slide shows or professional looking Web sites. In each app they have to be modified in order to feel “pro” in my opinion. That is where both Aperture and LightRoom are weak. I prefer LightRoom over Aperture just for it’s image editing capabilities.

It could also be argued that LR is not a pro app because it doesn’t have any sort of backup capabilities - except to back up it’s catalog which only backs up changes you’ve made to your original files.

I guess it’s a very subjective thing and depends on what we individually want in a pro app.

David

By: larry

larry — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 18:08:14 +0000

@Michael- Good point, the export plugins add a measure of control to prevent downloading and viewing everything.

@Gio- I read there is a feature to write slide shows to a folder. I spent some time trying to do that but haven’t got it to work yet. This however, removes all the wonderful syncing features and ease of use.

@Miguel & greg- Yes, of course my blog title exaggerates somewhat. If you don’t care about showing your clients your work Aperture is very professional. But who can live with that weakness? You have to be of a mind to use Apple applications, no matter what. It’s tantalizingly close to being a wonderful application!

By: Miguel Marcos

Miguel Marcos — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 15:02:38 +0000

While your point is well taken and Aperture’s slide show limitations are constricting, I agree with others that this weakness doesn’t make it a non-professional app. I say this is simply cause for Aperture users to complain to Apple to improve that part of the app. I’m a Lightroom user myself and quite happy with it but competition is a good thing here.

By: greg.newman

greg.newman — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:56:36 +0000

Larry,
You have a good point about slideshow and/or web site creation. .Mac is garbage. Any “pro” level mac user will say that. However, I wouldn’t go as far as to say that makes an application “Pro” level or not. The application is meant for storing, managing and processing images. Site creation in an app like this, be it Aperture or Lightroom is just an afterthought.

You also need to be aware, if you’re not already, that Aperture 2.0 has a full plugin API that should be released to developers soon at which point I think we’ll see a plethora of new features both for image processing and probably on the side of site creation.

By: evb

evb — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:54:27 +0000

well of course instead of just making 1 click you now have to take those few extra steps that just add a bit of annoyance every single time.