Aperture 2 vs Lightroom 2: Same Image, Different Results

On occasion I’ll get asked about my preferences for workflow software, and it’s one of those questions where I know in advance that I won’t be able to give a satisfactory answer. The truth is, I use everything.

My basic workflow though begins with Lightroom 2, which I use to import my images and make bulk corrections on images that I can. For the real keepers, I pull them into Aperture 2, in part because I like the layout better and my Nik software plugins are there, but also because I tend prefer Aperture’s RAW engine over Lightroom’s ACR.

Lightroom 2 has improved from the first version though, and now supports multiple profiles. Nikon owners even have access to profiles included on their cameras (D2x modes 1,2, and 3). The point is it would be wrong to assume the differences between these programs is just in their feature sets, because behind the scenes, each application handles images differently.

The differences in their default processing is small, but noticable. I used two different shots and ran both through the default processing in Lightroom 2 and Aperture 2. Just for the sake of argument I added the following profiles from Lightroom: Adobe Standard beta, and D2x modes 1, 2, and 3 which are meant to emulate the Nikon profiles on your camera.

No processing has been done to the images, other than changing the profile, cropping, and identical jpeg settings for output. You can click to expand each image. (continues….)

Now for the next set, with an eye towards skin tone:

As you can see, there’s some differences there. I find Aperture to be the most correct, keeping the most detail, even in the shadows. This is pretty subjective stuff, and everybody has different tastes, but my goal is to start with the basics, then manipulate. For me Aperture provides that. For others, your mileage may vary.

Tagged as: adobe, aperture 2, comparison, lightroom 2, review, vs.