Had it with iPhoto, looking for alternatives

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by alex_ant, Mar 7, 2003.

  1. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #1
    Well, we all know how iPhoto 1 sucked. I waited through all of 2002 hopeful that iPhoto 2 would fix some of 1's numerous problems. Turns out it added nothing I asked for and everything I didn't. I have 1700 photos in my library and iPhoto is using 45% of my computer's 768MB of RAM. That's right, it's using nearly 350MB of RAM, immediately after being opened. I'm sorry, but that's unacceptable (and retarded). I can't complain too much, though, because it is free software after all (and Apple has demonstrated that it isn't really listening anyway), so instead of complaining, I only wish to quietly switch photo apps.

    Curator by Caffeine Soft was my first candidate. But Caffeine is now out of business. Other possibilities were gBrowser, PhotoGridX, and Graphic Converter's image browser; those are only image browsers, though, and don't have the same features as iPhoto. What I'm looking at now is the software that comes on CD-ROM with digital cameras. I know Canon has their own app, as does Olympus, Minolta, and Nikon. My questions are: Do you use any of these apps? How do you like them? How well do they work? What are they like? Yup, that's it I think...
     
  2. alex_ant thread starter macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #2
    Something I forgot, good for a few laughs...
     

    Attached Files:

    • grab.jpg
      grab.jpg
      File size:
      84.6 KB
      Views:
      478
  3. howard macrumors 68020

    howard

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2002
    #3
    i agree, iphoto sucks, to download pics i use image capture...i organize them how i want them in folders and i view them with a little program called slides!...it works very well.
     
  4. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #4
    I have over 700 photos so i did a quick check and found out that mine was 17% of the 1 gig of memory, i dont see what your complaint is about. iphoto is a great program. Buy more memory or another program but to say iphoto sucks is incorrect. iphoto is great.
     
  5. alex_ant thread starter macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #5

    I'm glad to hear that iPhoto works well for you, but it doesn't work well for me. It's taken me about 4 months to take the 1700 photos I have so far. At this rate I'll have 3400 photos in another 4 months, which means iPhoto will be taking up 90% of my memory(!!!!!!!!!!). If I upgrade to 1GB (the max on a TiBook), that will only buy me a few more months. iPhoto does indeed suck for people like me who take lots of photos. But it doesn't have to suck - it could simply stop caching all thumbnails into memory (like a proper image browser) and then it would be a lot better. Until it does that, though, it is not a wise long-term photo management option for me.
     
  6. Chad4Mac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #6
    For you serious photo people, iPhoto sucks; for us consumer to moderate, fun picture, show your friends, .mac people, iPhoto is perfect (depending on which Mac you have). I can't tell you how much more productive I am on this software than any other I have used. What a great photo app. iPhoto, "you're my boy, [Blue] (adapted from the movie Oldschool; one of the funniest movies I have ever seen).

    However, I have a difficult time using iPhoto on 17in iMac. It's really slow. I find myself just sitting there when trying to rotate an image or enhance. Not on my PB 667, it glides through the whole app.

    Chad4iPhoto
     
  7. timbloom macrumors 6502a

    timbloom

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2002
    #7
    I have 1,983 Photos and 1 Gig of RAM and iPhoto is only taking 6.4 percent of my RAM. All photos are 4.1 megapixel jpegs. Are you using .tiff ? Mainly the memory usage is to store all those thousands of thumbnails for your pictures. When it comes to RAM usage, anything that keeps thumbnails of your pics in RAM is really going to take a chunk of RAM.
     
  8. alex_ant thread starter macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #8
    Mine are all 4 megapixel JPEGs as well... does iPhoto still only take 6.4% when you view your entire library at once?
     
  9. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #9
    where can you go within iphoto to tell it how to store photos, tiff, jpeg etc. i went into preferences but didnt see it?
     
  10. crap freakboy macrumors 6502a

    crap freakboy

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    nar in Gainsborough, me duck
    #10
    iview media pro maybe?

    IViewMedia Pro is fast, used it in 9, tried it X...but after only a slight speed increase in the latest incarnation of iPhoto I prolly be going back to it...well definately. Maybe. No i will as Ive just remembered the time it took to burn an iPhoto CD...Jesus H...took longer than a 'Ken Burns'.

    my first post...bless...1 2 3 aaawwwww

    :)
     
  11. alex_ant thread starter macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #11
    You can't do that within iPhoto - you have to change the settings on your camera that control what format the camera saves its pictures in.
     
  12. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #12
    i feel your pain man. i was (still am i guess) in the same situation. i had about 2200 pictures i took while living in polynesia. i tried using iphoto as well and found it severely lacking.

    i don't even see what v2 is a full point update as far as i can tell they didn't change anything — just fixed some of the more obvious bugs.

    i spent a few months seraching for a good alternative and the sad thing is there is none. i downloaded every application on versiontracker and gave em a spin. It made me realize why Apple had created iphoto and why they are not investing more resources into improving it. iPhoto is the best thing out there.

    i do the same thing howard does. i use image capture to download and organize them in folders in the finder (though even the finder gets agonizingly slow when dealing with large folders). I give all of them thumbnails using Pic2Icon. I rotate/touchup/etc in preview, iphoto, or photoshop.

    After i organized all the photos i imported them into iphoto to order prints — that was a mistake. The prints you order are very expensive (the .mac free photos deal didn't work) and they do not offer the option of preserving the aspect ratio for non 4x3 photos. If all yor photos are perfect 4x3 it woudl work fine (though it would be expensive) but other online vendors are much cheaper and actually walking into a vendor give the best price and options.
     
  13. alex_ant thread starter macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #13
    Thank you crap freakboy! (no offense)

    iView Media Pro rocks! This is exactly what I was looking for. This app appears to be proof that 1700 photos need not slow down an image browser.

    Too bad it's $90... :(
     
  14. khollister macrumors 6502a

    khollister

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2003
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #14
    I believe iView has a $50 upgrade offer if you have Toast. It is a great program - unbelievable how much faster than iPhoto with many more features to boot. I ditched iPhoto in a second when I found Media Pro.

    Since Apple seems to be trying to buy up Mac media software houses, they should look into buying iView and replacing iPhoto.
     
  15. Freg3000 macrumors 68000

    Freg3000

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2002
    Location:
    New York
    #15
    Like it has been said, iPhoto is generally a consumer App, hence its "i" designation. So if you really want a good photo organizer, you'll need to be looking for a professional App that probably won't be free. I don't know of any because iPhoto is perfect for me.

    Well, some of the differences between version 1 and 2 are the retouch brush, the 1 click enhance, iDVD integration, and some other things that elude me at the moment. Those three, along with the bug fixes, made this a full-point upgrade.
     
  16. timbloom macrumors 6502a

    timbloom

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2002
    #16
    yes, that is what I was doing when I tested it.
     
  17. melchior macrumors 65816

    melchior

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2002
    #17
    i gotta say, 3 minor updates do not make a full-point release. especially since retouch brush and 1 touch enhance suck very very badly. iDVD integration is the only thing you can respect. that is not a full-point release
     
  18. alex_ant thread starter macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #18
    I'm surprised to hear that iPhoto is not so much of a hog on your machine, timbloom. I wish it was that way on mine. Don't know why it's not.

    I've just imported all my photos into iView and I must say I really like this program. I can actually view my images at their actual size without being forced to view the jaggy scaling, and I can view all the EXIF and IPTC info right alongside my photos, and I can open the program without having to wait 20 seconds for it to start up. Apple should buy this thing and make an iPhoto Pro out of it.
     

Share This Page