Photos OS X release?

[Artimus12]

Uhm, it's easier then it was before.

Previously, after taking a crap photo I had to erase it from the camera roll and then go in to Photostream and erase it from there and (if my Mac was on at the time) go and erase a 3rd copy from my computer.

Under the new system if I hate a photo I erase it once and it goes away everywhere.

That sure seems easier to me.

It didn't work that way for me when I tried it, but it's possible that the aforementioned bugs in Yosemite mean my experience is tainted! 95% of the time I can't get Airdrop to work - and this after 2 clean re-installs.

I might take half a dozen pictures of a subject and like only 1, but currently all 6 get uploaded - wasting my bandwidth, allowance and consuming my time to search out and delete the 5 that don't make the cut.

I'd like the opportunity to upload only the images I specifically choose to upload from a folder I designate! I could then easily delete what's left on my Camera Roll without worrying that I might accidentally delete the 1 good image of the half dozen - how hard can it be to limit Auto-uploads to folders of my choosing?

Get this: I found a new year greeting on the mobile web and saved the image to my phone to use on social media sites, That too has been copied to my photo stream and Mac before I could say "...temporary". It's beyond Stupid.

Imagine how much server space\money Apple could save if they didn't have to hold a copy of every single picture you'd taken, received or saved from other sources. The whole system needs rethinking IMO, and I pray that's what they're doing with the Photo's app.

 

[jms969]

Photo will never be activated on my idevices, it is a disaster waiting to happen. Just think of the bandwidth that it eats up... No thanks!!!

 

[fisherking]

Photo will never be activated on my idevices, it is a disaster waiting to happen. Just think of the bandwidth that it eats up... No thanks!!!

impressive that you've worked that out BEFORE anything is actually released! personally, i'll check out Photos when it's out, see if it's something i want...or don't want...

 

[BaldiMac]

I might take half a dozen pictures of a subject and like only 1, but currently all 6 get uploaded - wasting my bandwidth, allowance and consuming my time to search out and delete the 5 that don't make the cut.

]I'd like the opportunity to upload only the images I specifically choose to upload from a folder I designate! I could then easily delete what's left on my Camera Roll without worrying that I might accidentally delete the 1 good image of the half dozen - how hard can it be to limit Auto-uploads to folders of my choosing?

Step 1: Disable Photo Stream or iCloud Photos
Step 2: Use any other photo service.

Some people like to sync all their photos to all their devices. Some don't. Use the service that best fits your needs.

Get this: I found a new year greeting on the mobile web and saved the image to my phone to use on social media sites, That too has been copied to my photo stream and Mac before I could say "...temporary". It's beyond Stupid.

Get this : I found an image on the mobile web and saved the image to my phone to use in a presentation. It was copied to my photo stream and Mac so I could insert it into the Keynote presenetation before I could say "...useful". It's beyond Convenient.

Imagine how much server space\money Apple could save if they didn't have to hold a copy of every single picture you'd taken, received or saved from other sources. The whole system needs rethinking IMO, and I pray that's what they're doing with the Photo's app.

I'm not really worried how much money Apple is spending on bandwidth and storage. iCloud storage prices are reasonable to me.

 

[jozeppy26]

After some brief internet searching I'm still a little clueless. What will this offer OS X users over iPhoto? BTW I do not like iPhoto. I feel like its a cluster F of photos that aren't as easily accessible by external programs as I'd like. So anything would be an improvement to me I'm just curious what those improvements would be.

Sooooo true. I freaking HATE having a giant database file that has all my pictures in it that i can only access directly via iPhoto. I swear with only very light picture taking on my iPhone, that database file grows and grows and grows and duplicate photos everywhere, random events that don't make sense, etc. I am so super OCD about my iTunes library and file storage organization in general on my laptop and the lack of my ability to control photos in any way drives me insane.

Like.. why not just auto-sort the photos in file folders like the iTunes media folder? Why the database file? why? Am I supposed to import the pictures from my iPhone when i plug it in to my macbook or just save photostream months? wait.. does it automatically save photo stream months? Do I have to manually do that? Wait, is there still photo stream since I have Photos beta enabled on my iPhone? Where are those photos in iPhoto then? What's happening?

I quite literally go thru that thought process every time in iPhoto until I panic and close it and try to forget there's a problem.

 

[aristobrat]

Sooooo true. I freaking HATE having a giant database file that has all my pictures in it that i can only access directly via iPhoto.

I don't see how you can't have your music and photos in a database if you're going to do any sort of organization with them (like playlists or albums), where one particular track or photo can exist in multiple locations at the same time.

If I'm going to have one song/photo that appears in 6 different playlists/albums, then I'd prefer to have just one physical copy of that song/photo on my hard drive, and some other mechanism for making it available for the various playlists/albums that it's on. That's where the database comes in.

As for why iPhoto hides the photos, I don't know the actual answer, but to me it seems like that's required, otherwise people are likely to directly edit the photos. As you've noticed, iPhoto keeps smaller versions (thumbnails, etc) of photos, so if you're going to be editing stuff outside of iPhoto, it's not going to know that the photo was edited, and from that point on, the thumbnail that it has for that photo isn't going to be correct.

If you're not going to be organizing and sorting your photos, then why not just use Image Capture instead of iPhoto? That app will allow you to drag 'n drop your photos from your iPhone to any folder you want them to go into, where you have full control over everything.

 

[jozeppy26]

I don't see how you can't have your music and photos in a database if you're going to do any sort of organization with them (like playlists or albums), where one particular track or photo can exist in multiple locations at the same time.

If I'm going to have one song/photo that appears in 6 different playlists/albums, then I'd prefer to have just one physical copy of that song/photo on my hard drive, and some other mechanism for making it available for the various playlists/albums that it's on. That's where the database comes in.

iTunes organizes music files outside of a hidden database file. You shouldn't need to copy the file to have it visible in different "playlists" or "albums". One file, less space, use an "album" file similar to playlist files that is just a method of sorting the files already located somewhere else.

 

[aristobrat]

iTunes organizes music files outside of a hidden database file. You shouldn't need to copy the file to have it visible in different "playlists" or "albums". One file, less space, use an "album" file similar to playlist files that is just a method of sorting the files already located somewhere else.

My guess is that's because a direct edit of a music file won't cause a negative effect in iTunes (like it does in iPhoto), so there'd be no need to hide music files.

In Aperture, they give you the option to put the "masters" wherever you want to. They don't have to be hidden. But Aperture still maintains a separate database of thumbnails/previews of your "masters". Maybe the new Photo app will allow the same. That seems to address at least one of your concerns.

 

[BaldiMac]

iTunes organizes music files outside of a hidden database file. You shouldn't need to copy the file to have it visible in different "playlists" or "albums". One file, less space, use an "album" file similar to playlist files that is just a method of sorting the files already located somewhere else.

iPhoto doesn't store photos in a hidden database file. Just like iTunes, the original photos are organized within folders. The difference is that Apple chose to make the iPhoto Library a PKG file (basically, a special folder), so that uninformed users didn't go in and muck about. You can easily access the files with the iPhoto Library by right clicking on the library and choosing to view files.

I'm not sure what you are referring to about duplicate files. iPhoto used to duplicate the photo when you modified it, but I don't think it does that anymore.

 

[Small White Car]

Imagine how much server space\money Apple could save if they didn't have to hold a copy of every single picture you'd taken, received or saved from other sources.

As a pro photographer I don't need any of this stuff. I have my own systems in place. (I've been playing with iCloud, but should it die tomorrow it's not going to touch my actual photos.) So yeah, why should I care?

Well, I look at all of my family members and try and figure out how many of them have actual backup plans for their family photos and you know what number I come up with? About 10%.

If you count "they're on Facebook" as a plan then that number goes up to about 30%.

I consider both of those numbers abysmal. I've helped my own parents set something up but what about everyone else? What's the solution?

I don't think iCloud photos is totally amazing either but at least Apple's trying to do something. What's your solution? Just throw up your hands and say 'screw it, it takes too many servers?'

I'd like to think there's got to be some kind of solution out there. I'm gonna give Apple credit for at least trying.

 

[jozeppy26]

iPhoto doesn't store photos in a hidden database file. Just like iTunes, the original photos are organized within folders. The difference is that Apple chose to make the iPhoto Library a PKG file (basically, a special folder), so that uninformed users didn't go in and muck about. You can easily access the files with the iPhoto Library by right clicking on the library and choosing to view files.

I'm not sure what you are referring to about duplicate files. iPhoto used to duplicate the photo when you modified it, but I don't think it does that anymore.

I know that, but yeeeeeah, the organizational sense is not even remotely comparable here. For all intents and purposes, it's a hidden useless database file.

 

[jms969]

impressive that you've worked that out BEFORE anything is actually released! personally, i'll check out Photos when it's out, see if it's something i want...or don't want...

Why would I want something eating my bandwidth and my monthly data allocation. No thanks, I am delighted that you are impressed btw :roll eyes:

In addition I do not store any data using iCloud... Dropbox yes but certainly not iCloud...

 

[fisherking]

Why would I want something eating my bandwidth and my monthly data allocation. No thanks, I am delighted that you are impressed btw :roll eyes:

In addition I do not store any data using iCloud... Dropbox yes but certainly not iCloud...

sort-of like reviewing a movie before you've seen it, but whatever works for you. no stress. and why 'certainly not icloud'? if you're using dropbox...

 

[jms969]

sort-of like reviewing a movie before you've seen it, but whatever works for you. no stress. and why 'certainly not icloud'? if you're using dropbox...

Articulated much better than I...

http://www.techradar.com/news/inter...ogle-drive-vs-icloud-1120024/6#articleContent

 

[BaldiMac]

I know that, but yeeeeeah, the organizational sense is not even remotely comparable here.

It's organized by date. I can't think of a more sensible way to do it.

For all intents and purposes, it's a hidden useless database file.

You mean other than the fact that it's not hidden, not a database file, and not meant to be manipulated directly by the user?

Your complaints ("all intents and purposes" aside) seem to be mainly misinformation.

 

[apphotography]

Does it handle RAW NEF files?

 

[robgendreau]

It's organized by date. I can't think of a more sensible way to do it.



You mean other than the fact that it's not hidden, not a database file, and not meant to be manipulated directly by the user?

Your complaints ("all intents and purposes" aside) seem to be mainly misinformation.

Speaking of misinformation, this thread is full of it.

iPhoto (and Aperture) both allow TWO types of image file storage, managed and referenced.

Although both applications are dead, it's still important that people distinguish between the two forms of storage when yakking about the applications and criticizing them. You aren't required to store your photos in either's database-like file structure. Most photographers I know use referenced photos, because they need to get at them with applications like Bridge or whatnot that do not access the libraries themselves. Or, eg, if you are trying to upload an image to some websites.

Meanwhile, it's 2015 and Apple has no info out on a flagship photo storage and editing solution. But many other software developers do have great solutions that address most all the criticisms found here. I can see waiting around if you either don't care much about photos, or use Aperture/iPhoto and have lotsa time and energy invested in your organization and especially non-exported edits, but the rest should just move on. Apple doesn't have anything but vaporware.

 

[fisherking]

Articulated much better than I...

http://www.techradar.com/news/inter...ogle-drive-vs-icloud-1120024/6#articleContent

guess a lot depends on what you use...if you own an iphone (i do), and/or an ipad, icloud is awesome, for mail/contacts/calendar/note sharing. altho google works for some, dropbox... again, whatever works. meanwhile, am waiting to SEE what "photos" is really about, and will then decide if i need it...or not.

 

[jms969]

I don't see how you can't have your music and photos in a database if you're going to do any sort of organization with them (like playlists or albums), where one particular track or photo can exist in multiple locations at the same time.

If I'm going to have one song/photo that appears in 6 different playlists/albums, then I'd prefer to have just one physical copy of that song/photo on my hard drive, and some other mechanism for making it available for the various playlists/albums that it's on. That's where the database comes in.

As for why iPhoto hides the photos, I don't know the actual answer, but to me it seems like that's required, otherwise people are likely to directly edit the photos. As you've noticed, iPhoto keeps smaller versions (thumbnails, etc) of photos, so if you're going to be editing stuff outside of iPhoto, it's not going to know that the photo was edited, and from that point on, the thumbnail that it has for that photo isn't going to be correct.

If you're not going to be organizing and sorting your photos, then why not just use Image Capture instead of iPhoto? That app will allow you to drag 'n drop your photos from your iPhone to any folder you want them to go into, where you have full control over everything.

Only iPhoto and Aperture (selectable as managed or referenced) behave this way, there is no reason to bury your photos in a database, the database engine just has to know where they are... That is how Lightroom and iTunes handles it.

 

[BaldiMac]

Only iPhoto and Aperture (selectable as managed or referenced) behave this way, there is no reason to bury your photos in a database, the database engine just has to know where they are... That is how Lightroom and iTunes handles it.

Again, iPhoto doesn't "bury your photos in a database". The are organized in the file system based on metadata almost exactly the same way iTunes does. In fact, as pointed out above, you don't even have to have iPhoto organize your photos. You can leave them organized just how you like them.

 

[jms969]

Again, iPhoto doesn't "bury your photos in a database". The are organized in the file system based on metadata almost exactly the same way iTunes does. In fact, as pointed out above, you don't even have to have iPhoto organize your photos. You can leave them organized just how you like them.

It is called managed or referenced...

iPhoto and aperture have been gone from my machine for so long it doesn't really matter to me. But there is a huge difference in managed vs referenced ...

 

[BaldiMac]

It is called managed or referenced...

iPhoto and aperture have been gone from my machine for so long it doesn't really matter to me. But there is a huge difference in managed vs referenced ...

What's your point? I understand the two different methods. I described them in my post. Neither method "bur[ies] your photos in a database" as you claimed.

 

[Joseph C]

I hope the removal of references to Photos.app for Mac on Apple.com is not indicative of anything ...

 

[apphotography]

I'm waiting for this. Sometimes I do some edits on my iPhone photos and when I sync them to the computer I want to see if I can revert to original easily.

 

[tkermit]

Anyone want to bet that iCloud Photos will be Apple's next fiasco?