Shared publicly  - 
Import & Browse Test: Aperture vs Lightroom vs Photo Mechanic (yeah, we went there)
Import & Browse Test: Aperture vs Lightroom vs Photo Mechanic

by +Thomas Boyd 

Almost every assignment I do is deadline driven. Sometimes I even show images from a wedding that I’m still shooting. Speed is important to me. I’ll never complain that something is too fast. I’m always wanting it to move faster.

Aperture 3.3 has dramatically improved the speed in which we can look at photos not already in the library. Aperture 3.0 gave us the ability to browse, adjust and export images before they were even all finished copying from the card to the hard drive — this was a massive leap forward in productivity. Now, the Aperture team has taken Aperture 3.3 to the next level with dramatic improvements to handling the embedded JPEG file. They have made the speed in which the images draw to screen much faster.

It made me wonder; is Aperture faster than the other apps pro photographers use to do this? Adobe has recently made made Lightroom 4.1 available. I hear it’s more responsive, and I want to know for sure. Many pro photographers still swear by Photo Mechanic for their deadline photo browsing and metadata duties. They perceive it to be faster than Aperture and Lightroom. Are their perceptions correct? I want to know.
Bob McClenahan's profile photoMarcelo Pinheiro's profile photo
It would be interesting to see an output quality assessment to see if it really makes any difference to use Lightroom over Aperture. I have over 50 K images in Aperture and I haven't seen any solid justification yet to convince me to migrate to Lightroom and lose all the adjustments I have applied to my images.
Add a comment...