#Lightroom vs iphoto full
#Lightroom vs iphoto pro

The workflow support works quite well for me. It does all its processing in 16bits per color and has excellent raw support for Canon, Nikon, Pentax and others. It has great workflow support as well as being multithreaded and able to take advantage of multiple cores.

#Lightroom vs iphoto pro

I have been using Bibble Pro on Linux and have been very happy with it. Oh, and I badly miss dual monitor support! As a 'darkroom' it does most of what it should, but there's still some most have functions that are just not good enough (Noise Reduction/Sharpen/Clone). As a work-flow program it does everything I want. But the important thing is - the interface is still responsive, if you can click on a thumb and have that image load, even if the thumb is only halfway loaded (note: some people do have issue with LR performance, but it seems to be a specific issue for them).Īs a photographer - well. They haven't perfected it, but most of the time, the program responds very quickly, by starting on something that shows you that it's working on what you wanted it to do - like you can see the details in your thumbs-images get better and better and suddenly it's there. More programs should be written like this - it's clear that Adobe has given a lot of though to responsiveness and threading. As a developer, the structure of the program it self, gives me a warm fussy feeling. I've been using LightRoom since the beta's and 1.0 since it came out (link to my walk-through in the sig). Lightroom is more accomodating for tinkerers and semi-professionals, the two occupy different segments of the market. Aperture is a pro app, and that's why it makes the assumptions that it does about hardware.

#Lightroom vs iphoto full

A fast mac, chock full of ram with an excellent video card and a 30' cinema display costs *peanuts* in the grand scheme of things when it comes to the operating costs of a professional photographer.

The costs involved in professional photography are high. (Hint: this is the expensive part).Īdd a bunch of fast, high-capacity memory cards.Īdd a nice DSLR (or more likely, a few) and lenses for that/those camera(s) as well.Īdd lighting equipment of various types to that.Īdd a large studio space to that, in addition to mobile facilities. Take a look at how much some decent digital backs for a hasselblaad will run you.Īdd to that the many lenses that you need to have on hand as a pro.

Computer hardware is among the *least* expensive financial commitment that a pro photographer will make: While I don't doubt that there are many great photographers on slashdot, I'd be surprised if there was a single regular poster (or lurker) here who depends upon photography on a professional level, as his/her only source of income.Īs someone who has spent much time working with pro photographers in my past life as an art director, I guarantee you that any *PRO* photographer will not think twice about plunking down some serious dough for a the latest and greatest mac, chock full of ram and sporting the best video card it will support.