Things have changed a little since round one, in that Lightroom has had a 1.1 release which added some new features and overall performance and stability enhancements. I have managed all images from my British Columbia bike trip in Lightroom 1.1.
Lightroom is much-improved in 1.1, mainly in small refinements and speed. Aperture has been pissing me off in small ways lately. It seems to spend a lot of time dealing with its previews. It also seems to bog down when doing more than basic manipulations of an image. Lightroom was already faster than Aperture, and it’s even faster now.
One of my basic complaints about Lightroom was that its organizational abilities seemed a bit behind Aperture’s, but this time around I feel differently. Once I embraced Lightroom’s module concept and used it’s flag-rate-develop-output workflow, I was really comfortable in Lightroom. The docs have gotten better too: there are now videos and tutorials online that, which not quite as nice as Aperture’s, have filled that void I mentioned before.
Now that I’ve spent a week exclusively in Lightroom, I feel like it’s the better program (for now). I’ve compared the programs pretty extensively before, so here’s a look at just the differences I really care about.
I really miss these from Aperture:
- The Loupe. Aperture’s Loupe is excellent, and got even better in Aperture 1.5. Lightroom uses a zooming loupe, which gets the job done, and is even faster than Aperture’s, but it’s just not the same.
- On-screen proofing. I’ve resigned myself to printing from Photoshop instead of either of these programs, so this one’s not a big deal anymore. Aperture’s printing is just plain not as good as Photoshop’s, and there’s no point wasting paper and ink when I can use Photoshop for the limited printing I do, and PS does have on-screen proofing. PS also fills one of the voids of both Aperture and Lightroom: sharpening. Both programs have gotten better than their 1.0 versions in this respect, but neither is good enough yet (Aperture has a slight lead here). So I’ll sharpen in Lightroom for web output and in PS for print.
- Smart Folders. Like iTunes, Aperture has the ability to automatically create albums based on arbitrary criteria that is very nice. There’s nothing quite like it in Lightroom.
- Flickr Export and other plugins. Adobe has not publicized Lightroom’s plugin API yet, although it has one. So while we can expect great things from the assorted Photoshop plugin makers, there aren’t any yet. The one I miss from Aperture is Flickr Export, which lets me quickly post images to the web on my Flickr account. Dave, who also uses Lightroom, uses Picasa instead and he gets no love either. Right now I have Flickr Uploader set as a post-export action, which takes one step out of the process of posting photos online, but I’d rather have it integrated directly. A big thing missing from what I get with Flickr Export is automatic updating. When I upload a pic to Flickr, Flickr Export automatically tags the photo in Aperture with its Flickr ID. If I ever change and re-upload the pic, it (optionally) replaces the original in place with the new edits. I want Noise Ninja bad, too. I can use it in PS for now, but I’m shooting with a compact camera at high ISO for a lot of the bike shots, and Lightroom’s built-in noise reduction isn’t up to the challenge. A good plugin API will help Aperture overcome the sharpening bit above, too, since I tend to use PS plugins for sharpening. Come on, Adobe, open ’er up for the plugin guys!
- Multi-monitor support. I’m on the road, so I don’t miss it right now, but Aperture has excellent support for multiple monitors, which is lacking in Lightroom. Lightroom does have very nice full-screen modes, though, which work even better than Aperture’s (very good) full-screen mode, especially on a laptop.
Things I love about Lightroom now that I’ve used it more:
- The Develop Module. This is the biggie. Man, is Lightroom better at photo manipulations than Aperture. Access to Curves, while not quite as powerful as Photoshop’s, is a mile better than what Aperture offers, and is good enough for 99% of what I do (maybe 100%…I haven’t punted to PS for a manipulation yet). Lightroom is just really, really good in this area. There’s a new “Clarity” manipulation, which is really a smart, local contrast control. It’s very cool, and super easy to use. Aperture 1.5 has a new edge sharpening tool, but this is different than that. It’s a nice bonus for Lightroom.
- Performance. Another biggie. Lightroom’s just plain faster, and it’s especially noticeable when you start manipulating images. Now that I’ve been processing a lot of images (I imported every mountain bike trip I’ve got pictures for…some 2500 images so far), Lightroom’s performance really shines.
- The Slideshow Module. I tend to gang up selects from a day’s riding and show them to folks while on the trip, and Lightroom is better at this than Aperture, although not by too much. I’d like to see an export to a DVD, video or presentation app as an option. LR can export to Acrobat, which is pretty lame, IMO. It also sucks that Apple’s DRM on iTunes music means that I have to jump through extra hoops to use music I bought on the iTunes Store in a Lightroom slideshow. This is really a ding on Apple, not Lightroom, but it’s something that I don’t have to worry about when keeping it all-in-the-family with Aperture.
- Metadata. Lightroom has more and better metadata options (and they’re presented nicer), including automatically creating Collections. I’d could certainly use Aperture’s Smart Folders to replicate this, but it’s nice to have Collections automatically available based on most common criteria. Also, Lightroom has better XMP options.
Overall, I’d say the race is still close. I think the fact that I’m having to do a little more work on my images from this trip because of the challenging low-light conditions is what’s making me so happy with Lightroom this time around. I’ve had the chance to process some RAW pictures from the 30D taken in better conditions though, and now that I’m comfortable in Lightroom, I’m finding that I even like it better for that too. Both programs are clearly pushing each other, and that’s a great thing. I think Apple missed a chance to keep its lead with Aperture by not getting a 2.0 out this year at PMA. I bet Lightroom 2.0 won’t be far behind, if at all lagging Aperture 2.0.