Photographer

Excelsior Photography

Posts: 1582

Santa Fe, New Mexico, US

I am new to portraits and don't want to get into Photoshop.
I have heard Aperture is a lower-cost alternative for those of us with Macs. Would be grateful for any advice, pro or con.
Easy of use is my main concern. Looking for something I can use to clean up backgrounds. Not interested in creating other-wordly effects.
So, what say ye on Aperture??

Jun 08 09 11:34 am Link

Photographer

Cameron Cushman

Posts: 374

Vero Beach, Florida, US

From my understanding aperture is very similar to lightroom. Lightroom is a great program but i rarely use it anymore as photoshop has many more uses. I used to say i never wanted to get involved in photoshop, hah.

Jun 08 09 11:37 am Link

Photographer

KGToops Photography

Posts: 2439

Treasure Island, Florida, US

i love it, except dont believe you can clean up images as far a skin, i using to mess with exposure or change to black and white.. its basically a digital light table.

Jun 08 09 11:39 am Link

Photographer

StromePhoto

Posts: 922

Kalamazoo, Michigan, US

I have been using Aperture for about a year now and really like it.  It isn't necessarily a replacement for photoshop, but it has a lot of tools that I use constantly.

If you have Itunes, you can download free Aperture demonstrations in the form of video podcasts.  They walk you through everything from importing photos to retouching, color correction, etc.  You can see the program in operation for yourself to give a really good idea of how it works.  Good luck!

Jun 08 09 11:46 am Link

Photographer

KuttingEdge

Posts: 314

Fayetteville, North Carolina, US

I can't imagine a portrait photographer getting by without photoshop. Photoshop is the king of all editing tools, especially in retouching headshots and portraits. I think you will have a different opinion in the near future about not using PS for portraits.

Jun 08 09 11:47 am Link

Photographer

Excelsior Photography

Posts: 1582

Santa Fe, New Mexico, US

Thanks to all.
My reluctance to Photoshop is based on a number of factors:
my background is in journalism, so I am trying to get at truth, not a prettified version of it; money, I have been ill for 12 years; ease of use, as I am not a computer whiz.
I don't want to erase wrinkles or crow's feet. I just want to eliminate background clutter, possible change the color of the background.

Jun 08 09 04:42 pm Link

Photographer

robert christopher

Posts: 2706

Snohomish, Washington, US

looks like you may want photoshop elements, even cheaper than aperture. i have aperture and i dont think that you can change backgound colors very easily, you may be able to clone out clutter but a cumbersome way to do it. elements is less than $90 and with iphoto should be all that you need.

Jun 08 09 09:47 pm Link

Model

-A L I C E-

Posts: 329

San Francisco, California, US

Gimp is free, available to Mac users and supposedly has features similar to that of Photoshop.

Jun 08 09 10:45 pm Link

Model

-A L I C E-

Posts: 329

San Francisco, California, US

Oh, and I have Aperture as well, cost about $200-- it is a superior photo organizing program. However, the editing functions are limited in scope compared to Photoshop and Gimp.

Jun 08 09 10:46 pm Link

Photographer

jimo66

Posts: 303

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Hal Kahn wrote:
I am new to portraits and don't want to get into Photoshop.
I have heard Aperture is a lower-cost alternative for those of us with Macs. Would be grateful for any advice, pro or con.
Easy of use is my main concern. Looking for something I can use to clean up backgrounds. Not interested in creating other-wordly effects.
So, what say ye on Aperture??

i have a mac i tried aperture i did not find it friendly, i use cs4, but for color correction and simple darkroom procedures ( film days) i use lightroom 2 it is just like the old days with a darkroom, easy to use and does wonders

Jun 09 09 04:15 pm Link