Considering LR4

S

spacester

Suspended / Banned
Messages
399
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Hi all

Considering moving to LR4 from Aperture 3. I've just upgraded my OS to Mountain Lion, and something has gone wrong with Aperture (won't start). Given Aperture is a bit behind the times, I thought I would take is opportunity to investigate other options. What are the pitfalls of a change of software? Is the library conversion reliable?

Thanks
 
The worst thing about LR4 is how slow it is to do anything compared to 3. I'm about to uninstall it and put 3 back on and my PC is pretty quick.
 
The23rdman said:
The worst thing about LR4 is how slow it is to do anything compared to 3. I'm about to uninstall it and put 3 back on and my PC is pretty quick.
Click to expand...

Agreed lr4 is slower but it depends on your workflow if the speed loss is worth it. It was for me, but I'm not a pro/semi pro

S
 
Hah - I just downloaded the trial, it asks me if I want to set up a new Lobrary, and I say yes. Then all I get is a grey window. Nothing else. Presumably now I drag photos to the icon/window, or do I plug in a camera? Doesn't appear to be an import script for aperture libraries? Or is this another stability issue with LR?

I remember way back, when choosing between Aperture 2 and LR1, I went with Aperture as it was much more stable (LR1 corrupted my image database after the 3rd use, meaning hours of painstaking manual imports....). Things don't seem to have improved!
 
Last edited:
Looks pretty nasty - no way of keeping metadata or adjustments in RAW, but instead you export png or jpg (then reimport). Ugh. You'd have think they would make it easy, especially of the want my £££!
 
spacester said:
Looks pretty nasty - no way of keeping metadata or adjustments in RAW, but instead you export png or jpg (then reimport). Ugh. You'd have think they would make it easy, especially of the want my £££!
Click to expand...

Why would they make it easy? :)

Apple want you to keep using aperture, and adobe want to tie you into LR/PS.
 
The23rdman said:
The worst thing about LR4 is how slow it is to do anything compared to 3. I'm about to uninstall it and put 3 back on and my PC is pretty quick.
Click to expand...

Yes I've noticed it annoyingly slower on my laptop with 4GB RAM, but it's fine on Desktop with 16.
 
4wd said:
Yes I've noticed it annoyingly slower on my laptop with 4GB RAM, but it's fine on Desktop with 16.
Click to expand...

it seems to be much more about ptocessor and graphics card grunt then ram
 
iamchrisphoto said:
Why would they make it easy? :)

Apple want you to keep using aperture, and adobe want to tie you into LR/PS.
Click to expand...

But Adobe want you to move to LR from aperture, and vice versa. Wonder why they don't make a script to transfer automatically into LR, and vice versa. It is in their interest to make it easy..... More sales!
 
boyfalldown said:
it seems to be much more about ptocessor and graphics card grunt then ram
Click to expand...

That may be true. I am running a quad but it's not i5 or i7 quick, but my GPU should handle it okay. 16 gigs of the fastest RAM doesn't make diddly difference.
 
I'm not sure if it does run slower even with a fast computer or its my d800 files. But I do notice the difference from 3 and d700files even though I was using a slower laptop. Now I'm using a i7 Mac Pro with 8gb ram and its still sluggish at times,but I much prefer the extra sliders. So wouldn't go back to 3.

I tried aperture about a year ago and couldn't get on as we'll as with Lightroom,but probably didn't give it enough time.
 
I gave up. Fixed Aperture. I don't fancy transferring 200GB of photos by hand! Lost sale for Adobe here.... Maybe someone who works there frequents this forum, and can feedback?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top