Aristotle's hylomorphic forms attribute to a thing while for Plato various things participate in Forms according to reference here:
These criticisms were later emphasized by Aristotle in rejecting an independently existing world of Forms... But exactly how is a Form like the day in being everywhere at once? The solution calls for a distinct form, in which the particular instances, which are not identical to the form, participate; i.e., the form is shared out somehow like the day to many places.
So for Aristotle the form especially his substantial form is a necessary attribution of a substance and the same form doesn't exist outside of the substance in some imagined independent realm or pure mind. So form is like an instantiated token instance for Aristotle while Plato's Form is like a universal type. For Aristotle both red table and red apple have redness tokens, as you rightly conceived, they're still two different tokens thus in terms of color they only resemble each other due to each instantiating an imperfect redness token but not sharing a common token instance strictly speaking. For Aristotle the form is innate as substance's material nature, so we can perceive them with our senses, if forms reside independently our human senses may not perceive them.