[drewprops]

With a new modern laptop in my future I am beginning to plan my migration to modern software.

In the realm of photo management, I am one of the final holdout using Aperture.

Right now I expect to land in Photos or Lightroom.

My decision will be affected by file management with the next platform.

The thing I love about Aperture is that I can manage photo folders in Finder, if necessary.

I do not currently work in RAW, although that could change.

I do work in the Adobe suite on a daily basis.

At this point I am going to attempt to make my iPhone 7+ hang on until the iPhone 13 drops in the fall.

So in the early days I won't have as many iOS/MacOS integrations due to the age of my phone, but I want to plan ahead for a time when the new machine will be talking to the new phone – and that Mac integration might edge out integration between my Adobe apps.

Anyway, any anecdotal thought would be helpful.

Ta!

...

[psmith2.0]

For better or worse, I’ve been a real “first party” guy all these years, only using third-party stuff for things Apple isn’t providing, free and tightly integrated, out of the box (Illustrator, and now Affinity Designer, being the one constant biggie; most everything else - writing, music (listening, organization and creation), PDF viewing/creation, photo management/simple editing, email and messaging, contact management, web browsing, video editing, reminders, video chatting, etc. - already comes on the Mac and I’ve never really had the need/desire to wander beyond those things for my basic, modest needs. A vector illustration application, MacTracker (I love reference/fact-checking stuff!) and sometimes Sketchup have been about the only 2-3 third-party software titles I’ve ever had on my Mac, for 15+ years now. The need for more has simply never come up.

So, since 2002, I’ve never used anything other than iPhoto, and then Photos, for my digital photo storage, organizing and simple editing needs.

The above tasks are all I’m really doing with them, so I’m not performing any heavy, serious or professional-level work. I’m not a photographer by any stretch, and since 2007-2008, every photo imported to my Mac has been from an iPhone, my current model at the time. I’ve actually never owned a digital camera so any pre-2007 imports have been from borrowed digital cameras (or scanned real-life photos).

It all depends on your needs/status, I suppose. Are you, like me, a casual hobbyist whose only “camera” is the iPhone in your pocket? If so, I can’t imagine Photos not being up for the job and more than you’d need.

I dislike the current Adobe setup/subscription thing and don’t want a monthly fee to manage my pictures when there may very well be weeks/months of nothing new to manage because I’m not a serious photographer taking gobs of photos all day, every day, with dedicated, high-end gear.

YMMV. You may be well beyond that.

I guess it comes down to, and you brought it up, the whole integration thing. You know all future versions of MacOS (and the accompanying Photos) are going to all work well together, and with any Apple portable iDevice, better than anything Adobe could ever guarantee.

Adobe rarely seems in a hurry about such things. Photos is, obviously, already M1 (and current OS)-ready/compatible. Lightroom may not run natively for a long time (or are they already? I’m out of the Adobe loop these days and truly don’t know). But I know they’ll never be as compatible with everything as Apple’s gonna be with their own software, OS, Macs and phones. They’re gonna beat Adobe at that one thing, at least, every time.

Unless there’s something specific and concrete that Lightroom provides that you must have, and is completely absent/unsupported in Photos, the answer may be clear.

And I assume Photos is going to work and feel more like Aperture than Lightroom would? Might be less of a learning curve/adjustment, on top of the other factors above. But that’s just a guess, having never used it.





I might’ve just written the most unhelpful, “maybe, but maybe not...who knows? That’s for you to decide, I suppose” post ever. You’re welcome!

[PB PM]

Photos is a horrible program that just seems to keep getting worse in terms of image management. It’s more concerned with montages and peoples faces than meaningful organization, at least that’s my impression. I haven’t used it other than for backing up iPhone images for a long time, so I’m likely not the best person to ask though.

That said, if you are not working with RAW images, not making panoramic or HDR images in post, there is no reason to get Lightroom. If you need that in the future, get it when you need it. It’s far too much money a year just for image organization. If you get LR with your Adobe CC package by all means use it, but if not I’d look for other solutions if image management and viewing are the only aim.

[drewprops]

Yeah, you two are zoned in on the considerations I'm facing.

I *do* already pay for the full suite, so I could start using Lightroom now if I wanted to... it all comes down to understanding the way that libraries work.


Here's the short list of things I want to be able to do:

– navigate to the original version of any photo/video in Finder anytime I want


That's about it.

Everything else is gravy.



...

[PB PM]

Like Aperture, Lightroom Classic does have an option to manage the images yourself, so you don't have to put the original files in the catalog (Adobe's version of Libraries). I moved from Aperture to LR within a year of the end of support, so to be honest I don't even remember how I set everything up. There will be a catalog either way, since it stores previews. That is how I do it, I started with Aperture as well, going from managed to self-managed, since it allows me to quickly manage backups between different drives. If you do use Lightroom you can set it to save a lot of the editing data to XMP files, which various programs can read to some extent.