As I might have mentioned once or twice, my main tool for processing my photographs is Lightroom, which has worked very well for me in the organising and twiddling of my pictures. It’s currently on its second major version, with a beta of version 3 being freely available. I like Lightroom, and I’ll more than likely upgrade when the new version appears. But there is (for Mac users, that is) an alternative: Apple’s own Aperture. This does a very similar job to Lightroom, and the new version 3, which was announced today has oodles of new features which look quite interesting. Not all of them are things I’ll have a use for, but there are enough improvements there to make me sufficiently interested to give it a try.
I did briefly consider it a while ago, but at the time, Lightroom’s cross-platform licence was quite important to me, but now my personal computing is exclusively of the Mac persuasion, that no longer applies. So, I’ll be downloading the trial and giving Aperture a bash. Will I defect from Lightroom, or maybe use both tools for different purposes, or decide to stay with what I already know remains to be seen. I may well talk about it here at some point…
 Technical expression
 Another technical expression
 Unlike Photoshop, where if you want to move from Windows to Mac (or vice versa, but let’s not talk about that), you need to jump through Adobe’s burning hoops backwards while reciting Hamlet’s “to be or not to be” soliloquy in the original Klingon and promise to destroy all electrons that might refer to the existence of the platform you’re moving from, a Lightroom licence is good for both. So you can have it on a Windows desktop and a Macbook. Most civilised. Why this can’t be done with other apps from Adobe is an unanswered question.