Tikkabik

You can start by answering a question for me, if you prefer:

I would imagine that since Aperture is not photoshop, it is less likely to enable "unethical" edits.

So here are my questions:

With Aperture, can I:
1) correct a white point globally
2) correct a white point for portions of the image (for shots in mixed light)
3) Ethically lighten or darken areas of a photo (that is, with curve-altered versions of its own pixels, instead of some more destructive method)
4) Reduce noise from high-ISO or underexposed images, similar to the way Noise Ninja works? (Or, can I use Noise Ninja with Aperture?)
5) Easily put IPTC data into a template, so that with a click or three I can fill in a buttload of data without typing my name and various cutline information over and over again?
6) use Applescript or some other macros to quickly export a batch of photos at a particular print resolution (say, 200dpi); copy them to an ftp server or AppleShare volume, and print off a proof that includes the cutline, credits, and custom messages?

In short, does this one app replace the Photoshop/PhotoMechanic combination for photojournalism?

Jason:

You're right, Aperture isn't Photoshop. In fact, it's set up to support the use of external editors quite easily -- you can send an image to Photoshop or anything else you'd like to use, and as soon as you save it, the change is saved in Aperture.

Aperture's workflow is totally non-destructive, so you can return to your master image file at any time. In the case of an external editor, like Photoshop or Noise Ninja or what-have-you, Aperture will create a second master file and link it to the first so you know that you've got two copies.

Yes, you can correct a white point gobally, and you correct luminance and color values individually as well. This makes it possible to do some pretty detailed lightening and darkening of images while still keeping all of your detail and not introducing massive noise. And like I said, it's all non-destructive.

You can't spot-lighten or darken, however. That's something that's probably best left to Photoshop. What'd happen is that you'd make any global changes you wanted to make in Aperture, then use the Open with External Editor command to send the file to Photoshop. Make whatever changes you want and click command-S to save them -- Aperture will have kept track of those changes and created a new master based on them, so you can still return to the "original" master image if you need to.

Yes, you can create IPTC metadata presets. You can also batch-apply IPTC metadata to ranges of images.

Aperture certainly is AppleScriptable. Looking over the Automator actions for Aperture, I think you can do what you need using a combination of Automator and functionality that Aperture has built in -- such as saving a specific image format preset, applying that to a batch of images, then specifying an external location for them to live, then applying preset metadata and printing.

I'd also add that Apple offers a 30-day trial version of Aperture for download from its Web site, so you're welcome to give it a shot and see if it works for you. Remember, everything that you do in Aperture is non-destructive, and even though you can open up the library and pull out your originals (Aperture saves all managed files in a package in the Pictures directory by default) you always have the choice of using referenced files instead. So if you're using a different workflow system to manage your photos now, Aperture can work seamlessly with it, too.

Hmm... I am beginning to understand now.

At work I use Photomechanic and Photoshop. - Photomechanic lets me look at thumbnails of my shots (it existed long before Adobe Bridge); then I "loose edit" by keeping only the RAW files I want; these are copied, and an IPTC template applied with custom information for that shoot.

Then I use PhotoMechanic on the copies on my HD...when I edit those photos, they open in photoshop, and then I do my toning SOP (Adobe Camera Raw: White point, then exposure and shadows; then brightness and/or luminance smoothing); Ethical dodge and burn (with curves and history brush); then some other stuff before finally captioning.

Since I can't dodge and burn in Aperture, I'd still need Photoshop (or Elements, if it has a history brush and the curves tool...)

So then Aperture would be a replacement for PhotoMechanic. At twice the price of Photomechanic it should do a whole lot better: I like the idea of every image being in a database. Does it make backups and archiving (and getting stuff out of the database) really easy, too? (PhotoMechanic has no DB and no real archiving utilities)

Yeah, Aperture makes backups as easy as falling off a log -- you create a Vault, which contains the contents of your library. That Vault is persistent, and you can (and actually should) put it on another volume, like an external FireWire or USB drive. Aperture keeps track of what's in it and tells you whenever the Vault falls out of sync with the library. Click one button and they'll reconcile.

I've toyed with the idea of external HDs as backup devices... are they that much better than DVD-ROMs?

Well, I dunno from better, but certainly faster. There are two schools of thought on this: One is that you should never use a hard drive for backup, because it's bound to fail. The other is that hard drives are cheap, convenient, fast, and bigger than DVD-ROMs, so you should use them for backup. Both schools of thought have their strengths and weaknesses: After all, if you lose a DVD or if it gets scratched or broken, you're hosed.

Anyway, bottom line is that the way that Aperture's Vault system works, the presumption is that you're using a hard drive for backup.

Waah. I finally downloaded the Aperture trial and I don't have the right system for it anyway. :-(

Waah. I finally downloaded the Aperture trial and I don't have the right system for it anyway. :-(