Life after Photoshop

Alternative photo editing apps, plug-ins and processes

  • News
  • Reviews
  • Software
    • Adobe
      • Lightroom
      • Photoshop
      • Elements
      • Bridge
    • Alien Skin
      • Exposure
    • Apple
      • Aperture
      • Apple Photos
    • DxO
      • Optics Pro
    • Google
      • Nik Collection
        • Analog Efex Pro
        • Color Efex Pro
        • HDR Efex Pro
        • Silver Efex Pro
      • Snapseed
    • Skylum (MacPhun)
      • Aurora HDR
      • Creative Kit
      • Luminar
    • ON1
      • ON1 Photo RAW
      • Perfect Suite
    • Phase One
      • Capture One Pro
    • Serif
      • Affinity Photo
  • Ideas
  • Downloads and offers
    • Adobe Photography Plan
    • ON1 Photo RAW
    • Skylum Luminar
    • Skylum Aurora HDR

Powered by Genesis

Aperture vs Lightroom: 4 images compared

November 5, 2013 by Rod Lawton 11 Comments

07 Detail rendition 3

Aperture vs Lightroom

This shot was taken at ISO 1600 on a Nikon 1 compact system camera. This has a 1-inch sensor, so the noise levels are medium-high. The Aperture version (left) controls the noise well, but the fine detail isn’t particularly sharp. The Lightroom version (right) is sharper, but the noise is actually quite bad. I’ve felt for a while that Lightroom and Adobe Camera Raw (they’re the same thing) is quite noisy, and this bears it out. On balance, I think the Aperture version holds up best.

08 Corrections

Aperture vs Lightroom

I didn’t want to get drawn into any comparisons between image-enhancement tools, but distortion correction is now a basic feature of many RAW converters, including Lightroom, Capture One Pro and DxO Optics Pro 9 – but not Aperture. For architectural shots like this, Lightroom has a clear advantage, correcting barrel and pincushion distortion and perspective issues like converging verticals. You can see the difference between the uncorrected Aperture version (left) and the corrected Lightroom image (right). Aperture depends on external editors for this kind of correction, whereas Lightroom has it built in.

09 Detail rendition 4

Aperture vs Lightroom

The fine detail comparison delivers the same results as the previous images. The Aperture rendition is less noisy but also less sharp; Lightroom delivers slightly greater sharpness but a lot more noise.

10 Conclusions

I prefer the overall colour and tonal rendition of Aperture RAW conversions. I think its images look punchier and more natural. Up close, though, it’s apparent that Lightroom’s conversions are a little sharper – though its noise levels are surprisingly high, and you’ll often see noise in low ISO shots taken with large-sensor cameras. Its in-built optical corrections do give it a significant advantage over Aperture for some types of photography, though.

To be honest, though, I think neither can really match up to DxO Optics Pro and Capture One for ultimate quality.

See also

DxO Optics Pro vs Lightroom vs Capture One Pro

 

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Filed Under: Adobe, Aperture, Apple, Lightroom, Reviews, Software

Comments

  1. Dick says

    November 5, 2013 at 8:43 pm

    Thanks!! I did not expect such a quick response and it is greatly appreciated!

    Reply
  2. Dick says

    November 5, 2013 at 8:55 pm

    After reading and seeing results it appears that Capture One Pro needs to be added to my software tools. Since I use Aperture for my Cataloging and Keywords would the Express version of Capture One Pro give me the same results that you did in your blog entry?

    Reply
    • Rod Lawton says

      November 6, 2013 at 12:20 am

      Capture One Express delivers the same basic quality, but it doesn’t have the localised adjustment tools or the lens correction profiles in the Pro version (not covered in my comparison). You can download a 30-day trial for either version from http://www.phaseone.com/en/Downloads.aspx, and I’d recommend that first to see how you get on. I love the results, but integrating it with an Aperture workflow in a straightforward takes a bit of thinking through.

      Reply
  3. Shura Shum says

    November 11, 2013 at 11:32 pm

    How on Earth did you conclude that LR has worse highlights recovery options? Just by making default conversion? You just need to move the highlights slider in LR to prove to yourself that LR does recover MORE than Aperture.

    Reply
    • Rod Lawton says

      November 12, 2013 at 12:07 am

      You might want to read the post again. This was the best LR could do AFTER I adjusted the highlights and was NOT a default conversion.

      Reply
      • Yama says

        June 5, 2014 at 4:27 am

        I would just ignore those comments Rod. You didn’t have to respond to that person’s comment. You had made it quite clear that you had already adjusted the slider. Some people just can’t read or have an axe to grind.

        Reply
  4. Doug Wigton says

    November 25, 2013 at 9:50 pm

    An interesting comparison, but I’m wondering about the “default” conversion comparisons. As you probably know, Aperture actually has a way to “customize” the “default” conversion using the Camera RAW Fine Tuning controls. Usually, Aperture picks up the Defaults it made for that particular camera, but unlike other RAW convertors, the defaults are indeed customizable. Also, when you just use the default conversion in Lightroom, if you look in the “Detail” brick, you will find that Sharpening has been preset to Amount 25, Radius 1.0, Detail 25. And the color noise adjustment has been set to Color 25, Detail 50, and Smoothness 50. If you back those off to their 0 adjustment, you will get a better look at Lightroom’s “default” conversion. But, in general, I agreed with your assessment.

    Reply
    • Rod Lawton says

      November 25, 2013 at 10:47 pm

      Thanks, Doug, though I don’t think I can agree with you about ‘default’ settings. To my mind, the program ‘defaults’ are the settings the software will apply unless you manually override them, and I really do think the argument is that simple. You can change the Aperture RAW Fine Tuning, but then you’re no longer using Aperture’s default settings. And if you zero the Lightroom sliders, you might produce a kind of ‘baseline’ conversion, but it’s not, by definition, Adobe’s default. If Adobe sets the sharpening Amount (etc) to 25, that’s because Adobe thinks it’s both necessary and produces the best results.

      The sharpening example is interesting. I don’t think you can assume that ‘zero’ settings mean what they appear to mean. All digital images need a degree of sharpening, largely because of the low-pass filters used in front of most camera sensors to prevent moire effects, and the interpolation process needed to generate full-colour data from the red, green and blue photosites on our single-layer sensors. Adobe would probably argue that ‘zero’ sharpening is inadequate, an Amount value (etc) of 25 is adequate and any more is subject to user discretion. Other makers may build this ‘capture sharpening’ into the camera conversion profiles and simply not tell us, so the sharpening is hidden, rather than being out in the open like Adobe’s.

      Reply
  5. Doug Wigton says

    November 25, 2013 at 11:36 pm

    My understanding is that the ACR (Lightroom) conversion already has the normal RAW conversion sharpening to offset the effect of the low pass filter and interpolation. They actually add a little sharpening in the adjustment pane because they know that it will make the image a little bit more appealing. Aperture also applies the requisite sharpening in the RAW conversion, but it does not add some after the fact. Add a similar amount of sharpening in Aperture and you will see a similar look. As you mentioned, “lightroom has produced sharper fine detail”. Take another look at the RAW Fine Tuning tool in Aperture. I don’t know of another RAW convertor that lets you fine tune the actual “initial” conversion. Most others are locked. I think it’s very difficult to compare RAW conversions between programs, because each one makes different assumptions about what is default and what isn’t.

    Reply
  6. Don Marcille says

    February 24, 2014 at 10:04 pm

    I want to scream that Apple let Google buy Nik instead of them. Had they done that and incorporated Nik into Aperture 4.0 I would have been the happiest Mac owner and photographer.

    Reply
    • Rod Lawton says

      February 26, 2014 at 12:26 pm

      Yes!

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Why the design changes?

With more and more browsing being done on mobile devices, it was about time Life After Photoshop had a makeover based on a minimal, flat, mobile-first design rather than an old-fashioned magazine theme.

Latest news

Capture One Pro 11.1 brings new camera support and more

Capture One Pro 11.1 brings new camera support and more

April 20, 2018 By Rod Lawton Leave a Comment

Luminar ‘Jupiter’ announced with speed and RAW improvements

Luminar ‘Jupiter’ announced with speed and RAW improvements

April 12, 2018 By Rod Lawton 6 Comments

Adobe introduces ‘profiles’ in major update

Adobe introduces ‘profiles’ in major update

April 3, 2018 By Rod Lawton Leave a Comment

MacPhun Luminar 2018 announced

MacPhun Luminar 2018 announced

November 1, 2017 By Rod Lawton 6 Comments

DxO acquires the Nik Collection and launches DxO PhotoLab

DxO acquires the Nik Collection and launches DxO PhotoLab

October 26, 2017 By Rod Lawton Leave a Comment

Ideas and techniques

Batch processing (4) Black and white (32) Blend modes (7) Bokeh (5) Borders and frames (7) Clarity (7) Colour tweaks (9) Combining filters (4) Contrast (7) Cropping (2) Curves (7) Dehaze (2) Depth of field (4) Distortion correction (2) Dodging and burning (8) Film looks (9) Graduated filters (15) Grain (3) HDR (14) Highlight recovery (6) Layers (5) Lens corrections (7) Levels (3) Miniature effect (2) Mist and fog (2) Moonlight (2) Noise reduction (6) Organising (10) Panoramas (4) Perspective correction (7) Plug-ins (6) Presets (8) Quick fixes (5) Retouching (5) Shadow recovery (3) Sharpening (3) Soft focus (4) Solarisation (2) Structure (3) Textures (8) Tilt shift (5) Toning (3) Vignette (12) Warmth (5) White balance (2)

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,359 other subscribers

Contact

You can use the comments fields beneath individual articles to ask questions or offer help to other users. All comments are read, moderated and answered where possible. Or, for general queries or feedback, you can email lifeafterphotoshop@gmail.com

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.OK