Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin_Doudoroff I guess I'm trying to discourage you from trying to force new tools to conform to your current workflow for the sake of expediency. |
A big +1.
Until recently, I was a Light Room user.
The first time I tried Aperture, I hated it. The second time I tried it, I did as David suggested and left the photos in their original locations. I liked it better but wasn't sold on it.
The third time I tried Aperture, I decided to cut the cord with the past and tried to use it the way it was designed including importing the masters.
After a few days of rough going, I finally "got it". I love the way it works and the way it uses vaults for backups. I also like the free form way you can work with your image. No more switching to develop as in LR.
Here my basic work flow.
1. Using Finder, I copy my images to my Firewire drive. I use a file structure by date and job. I do not rename the files and I back-up this drive. Original files for future use. I switched from Capture One Pro to LR to Aperture. Who knows about the future, so I want my original files.
2. I open Aperture and import from disk. (I store the masters in Aperture.) I rename them and place them in a new project. My projects are in sub folders by job, type, and year. I then assign keywords. Aperture is VERY strong in keyword, EXIF, date, and similar searches.
3. I pick the best and do a print album. If any need extra work, I send them to Photoshop. Aperture save that copy and keeps it with the masters and shows it in the album.
4. I export the whole print album to JPEG files in another folder.
5. I use a profession lab's software called TPI ROES.
6. After receiving the prints, I delete the JPEG files. I keep the print album with the project in Aperture if I want to do an exact reprint.
LR is good. I prefer Aperture. Good Luck
Philip