Posted 23 February 2013 - 08:48 AM
I find all this fuss about how Aperture has languished quite funny. One of the things I like about Aperture is that it focuses on image correction that's fast, accurate and efficient. Sure, I'd like to think Apple isn't going to abandon Aperture too, but to say the program is DOA is simply inaccurate.
As a wedding shooter, I've looked at Lightroom; I have Photoshop. But I choose Aperture. From import to final output (books, DVDs, etc.) I can essentially stay in Aperture. And I can do so very efficiently.
I do try to get exposure right in the camera; I do try to do as little post as possible, but when you compare some of Aperture's tools (white balance, for example, and book creation), many are flatly superior to Adobe's. Not all, of course, but many. And the efficiency of using Aperture is, IMHO, unmatched.
Photoshop and InDesign, for example, are powerful tools. But I often find all the bloatware features do little more than get in my way.
Sometimes, a lack of features can be a good thing.