Hobbyist Digital photo workflow

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by kaydot, Aug 14, 2012.

  1. kaydot macrumors regular

    Sep 15, 2011
    Hello there!

    I am looking for suggestions on Mac OS X software that will meet this workflow. I take a lot of photos with a DSLR on an SD card. I want to be able to import these into a photo management system that won't make additional copies of the files.

    Here is what I have in mind:
    1. insert SD card into Mac
    2. Copy files to a "drop" folder on the Mac
    3. View the files in program X and delete the ones from the Mac I don't want to save space
    4. Organize files into albums by Event/vacation
    5. Have the ability to move pictures around albums for various purposes like reunions, slideshows, exports for printing, exports to sharing systems like Flickr, G+, Dropbox.

    Right now I'm using iPhoto, and the first part of the workflow (deleting files) is rather cumbersome as it seems that it does not delete the picture from disk, only the import copy. Is there a feature of iPhoto that I'm missing that will work for me?

    All suggestions and 3rd party app suggestions welcome!
  2. Babyboi macrumors regular

    Mar 16, 2008
    If you wish to delete the actual file from disk:

    Open finder, navigate to your pictures folder. Right click on iPhoto library- show package content.

    This should allow you to view the original or masters folder with the actual imported pix inside. Hope this helps!
  3. TheralSadurns macrumors 6502a

    Jul 8, 2010

    If you lile iPhoto so far... I'd step it up to Apple's own Aperture found in the App Store. Alternatively you could go for Adobe's Lightroom. Much has been said on that matter which one of these is actually better. Currently Lightroom has a slight edge. It is, however, more expensive and, at least for me personally, more cumbersome.

    Concerning your workflow. (Works both in Aperture and iPhoto).
    Do it exactly as you did before, but do NOT copy the files SD Card -> Folder first. But DIRECTLY import it into iPhoto/Aperture. There is absolutely no need to put them in a different folder first.
    Then... if you delete a picture in any of these applications they are moved to the app's trash in its sidebar. Just like a normal trash you can either empty it... or restore photos.

    Flickr support is build into both applications btw. Otherwise (because the file structure is invisible) if you want to for example send individual photos per e-mail... or do something else... I just select these pictures and drag them to the desktop... so that they are momentarily duplicated (still somewhere in the respective library and 'invisible' and one copy on the desktop). I use this to do whatever I please... and afterwards delete it... with the 'master'file still in Aperture.

    Two more things to note:

    If you've come from iPhoto and like the way it works (editing and stuff) and how it organizes the photos invisibly in a library file... go for Aperture. At first it can be overwhelming with a TON of options... but you'll feel pretty much at home. It also is WAY more powerful in each and every respect plus it actually gives you the tools to work with RAW files. (iPhoto handles them, but doesn't really give you any options to develop them.)
  4. robgendreau macrumors 68040

    Jul 13, 2008
    While I agree about the utility of Aperture, and iPhoto is nice, I disagree about there being "no need" to have copies of photos outside of the iPhoto/Aperture libraries (they share them now, BTW).

    There are times when I need to access a file from the Finder for an application. If it's in the iPhoto library I have to go through two many steps to get to it. If it's where I put it, no problemo. Fortunately, both iPhoto and Aperture allow you to use their databases to POINT to these photos.

    Aperture might better suit your needs. iPhoto is nice once you get stuff in, but it imposes it's own organization. Aperture gives you much more control: YOU decide where to put the files, what name to give the folder, and other stuff. Then you can use Aperture itself to organize, view and edit; it points to the originals where YOU put them, but the photos are still in a place where you can get to them from the Finder easily.

    Another application that would work is GraphicConverter. If you haven't checked it out, there's a free demo. You can view all the photos BEFORE importing, and then decide where to send them in batches. And make changes in GPS info, names, etc etc. It's much much more than just a converter.

  5. BIS2 macrumors regular

    Jun 20, 2004
    How do you do this? I've always resisted putting pictures in iPhoto because it just lumps them into the iPhoto library and then its a hassle to get an individual pic out. So how do I go about saving them elsewhere and pointing iphoto or aperture to them?

  6. snberk103 macrumors 603

    Oct 22, 2007
    An Island in the Salish Sea
    Can I just say... you two are working too hard and don't yet understand how a Digital Asset Manager works.

    If you want to use nested folders, then you can do so with Albums and Folders in iPhoto... just like Finder. As you know, unlike the Finder you can also easily add keywords, and search on keywords. You can also now 'place' a photo in more than one folder/album without taking up more space. So, if you sort your images by family and another folder for friends, then the photo with your best friend Jennifer visiting your family at Christmas can be dragged into the 'Family' folder, the 'Friends' folder, and the 'Christmas' folder... and it's still the same photo in each. Unless you duplicate the photo any edits you make to the photo in folder is reflected everywhere that photo appears.

    I've always just dragged the photo from iPhoto to the Desktop when I used iPhoto.

    Now I use Lightroom (more editing controls - Aperture is much the same.)

    I don't need to know where my photos are, Lr takes care of that. I don't need to remember when or where I took a photo to find it, I have Smart Collections (Smart Albums in AP3 and iPhoto), flags, stars and keywords.

    It is amazingly easy to work with your photos inside iPhoto once you move on past the 'old' way of organizing. The old way mimics putting prints in shoeboxes. The iPhoto way (and AP3 and Lr) means using the database.
  7. TheralSadurns macrumors 6502a

    Jul 8, 2010
  8. MCAsan macrumors 601


    Jul 9, 2012
    Aperture has an advantage for a Mac user in now sharing the library with iPhoto.

    Look at Aperture 3.3 vs. LR 4.1, I think LR has a wider range of features and adjustments. But if Apple is serious with Aperture, then Aperture 4 could leapfrog LR.

    Going with either Aperture or Lightroom will not put you far wrong. Both can use external plugins like Nik Software and use external editors like CS6.

    The good news for us Mac users....we have a choice. The PC folks can't do Aperture. ;)
  9. flynz4 macrumors 68040

    Aug 9, 2009
    Portland, OR

    I completely agree. Just directly import your photos into a DAM (A3 or LR4).

    I have a very large photo library, and there is no reason to ever work outside of a DAM. Even when you want to edits beyond what a DAM can do, you can roundtrip into photo editor (or plug-in) of your choice and you are right back into your DAM.

    Manually using finder or MS Windows to file pictures away is like a bad drug flashback to the 60's with 8 Track tape players.

    I own both A3 and LR4 as DAMs. I exclusively use A3... I just like it better. Others will have the opposite opinion. Either choice is fine.

    For plug-ins... I love NIK Software complete collection. It works with either A3 or LR4. For photo editing I use CS6.


Share This Page