Posts: 3,964
Threads: 629
Joined: Jul 2024
It seems like all my devices come with software for managing and sorting photo libraries. My scanner came with Epson Creativity Suite; my camera came with Canon Image Browser. I've mostly been using GraphicConverter.
I'd like to hear observations on which, if any of these, you particularly like. I'm reluctant to go iPhoto because it seems like it doubles the needed storage space and never really throws away any files.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 32
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
I'm wary of iPhoto too, for the same reason.
After trying several other options, I happen to like the Bridge software that comes with Photoshop Elements.
Posts: 21,885
Threads: 1,109
Joined: Mar 2024
Reputation:
0
I have been using Adobe Bridge most recently; I just make a dated folder for each event I have taken pictures for and keep them in the Users/Pictures folder, ie. "2011.10.08 Pictures" so that they are easily sorted in the Finder. You just open up the folder you want to work with in Bridge and it does the usual thumbnail view. What I like is the Photoshop integration as all my files as RAW, I do a lot of adjustments with the RAW plug-in. Also has good exporting tools to send directly to Facebook, or just your local drive. You can actually delete files directly from the interface too (which is not impossible in iPhoto, but it is easier here).
Edit: Making edits to RAW files is more efficient than making a duplicate JPEG as in iPhoto because the RAW settings are just metadata stored in a text file along with the RAW file. No real duplicates unless you export them on purpose, and you can always go back and undo the RAW settings if you so choose.
Posts: 32,462
Threads: 3,127
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
None of the things mentioned besides iPhoto is appropriate, they are glorified Finders.
Digital Asset Management software is built on the philosophy of non-destructive edits. This means never throwing things away. At some point it becomes impossible, conceptually, to do both that and just store the selects, which by definition aren't masters but "become" them.
So what you do is put your selects, or "versions" into their own library---you no longer deal with a library that has "too much" in it. Not hard to do with iPhoto, or Aperture, or Lightroom. And on a larger scale it's what professional organizations such as newspapers and magazines and other electronic libraries do with their images, using software no one here has ever heard of. (I used to manage the archive dept. at a major newspaper.)
The consternation comes when people use DAM software for presentation or permanent storage of what they like and editing/versioning functions without proper segregation of each purpose.
Posts: 1,390
Threads: 237
Joined: Jan 2022
Media Pro http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/5534/media-pro
Been using this for years, in all its incarnations. Fast, simple yet sophisticated, doesn't alter the original file. Worth a try IMHO.
Posts: 33,936
Threads: 1,272
Joined: May 2025
deckeda wrote:
None of the things mentioned besides iPhoto is appropriate, they are glorified Finders.
exactly. In these days of $60 2TB drives, who cares how much data iPhoto uses?
regardless, iPhoto does *not* double anything. Your photos are stored in one place, the iPhoto library. Period. If you edit a photo, then yes, it will make a second copy of the edited version.
But thats all there is to it beyond that.
You can edit photos from iPhoto in Photoshop, integrated. iPhoto imports RAW. Facebook is one click. Finder is one click. Flickr is one click. Command -delete and the photo is gone.
Super simple Batch change, date & time adjustment, faces, GPS, SMART albums, export to specific sizes and specific compression, books, prints -- way more than that...
Posts: 1,188
Threads: 240
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 19,291
Threads: 1,696
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
jdc wrote:
[quote=deckeda]
None of the things mentioned besides iPhoto is appropriate, they are glorified Finders.
exactly. In these days of $60 2TB drives, who cares how much data iPhoto uses?
regardless, iPhoto does *not* double anything. Your photos are stored in one place, the iPhoto library. Period. If you edit a photo, then yes, it will make a second copy of the edited version.
But thats all there is to it beyond that.
You can edit photos from iPhoto in Photoshop, integrated. iPhoto imports RAW. Facebook is one click. Finder is one click. Flickr is one click. Command -delete and the photo is gone.
Super simple Batch change, date & time adjustment, faces, GPS, SMART albums, export to specific sizes and specific compression, books, prints -- way more than that...
:agree: I have over 14,000 photos in iPhoto and no complaints.
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 175
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Mr Downtown wrote:
It seems like all my devices come with software for managing and sorting photo libraries. My scanner came with Epson Creativity Suite; my camera came with Canon Image Browser. I've mostly been using GraphicConverter.
I never use the manufacturer's software. It's almost always badly written and has a terrible interface.
I'm reluctant to go iPhoto because it seems like it doubles the needed storage space and never really throws away any files.
It throws away files that you trash within its interface. The extra storage space its may use enables iPhoto to return you to the original photo no matter how many edits you've made to it.
And iPhoto is very well integrated with the rest of your system. Its features and capabilities are excellent.
Posts: 10,590
Threads: 663
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
zero wrote:
Picassa
Just don't upload it to Picassa. Last time I checked, by uploading you agree to:
In addition, by submitting, posting or displaying Content which is intended to be available to the general public, you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, adapt, distribute and publish such Content for the purpose of displaying, distributing and promoting Google services.
|
