iPhoto 4.0.2 Now Available

[AmigoMac]

Slideshow...

I got an email from Apple today saying

"Now you can use iPhoto’s onscreen controls to rotate images, rate them (up to 5 stars) and delete the ones you don’t want to keep. In no time at all, you’ll be emailing photos to friends and creating pro-quality slideshows with your top shots. "

It also had a picture of a photo with slightly transparent grey commands to do just this.

I can't work out how to activate this cool looking feature. Help?

It works when you set your whole library as slideshow and in the settings just check, show slideshow controller ... Boom, done!

 

[iMeowbot]

I'm curious why Apple seems to be putting update mechanisms in more and more of its software. Have they found out that people don't check Software update?

iPhoto has plug-in support. Perhaps Apple intend to make some more use of that feature, and Software Update doesn't maintain the right kind of information to handle this well?

Some wild baseless speculation:

• Apple were at least at one time promoting the idea that they would like to have companion products for each iApp, and iPhoto doesn't really seem to have one yet.
• The PP5020 found in the iPod has all sorts of image capabilities that the iPod doesn't use. There must have been some sort of product in mind that would make use of that stuff.
• Rumors persist of a tablet-like device from Apple.
• The AirPort Express is on its knees begging for a remote terminal.

 

[aswitcher]

It works when you set your whole library as slideshow and in the settings just check, show slideshow controller ... Boom, done!

Cool, thanks. Wish they had that in the standard editing mode as well.

 

[flappo]

i hate iphoto , it's slow , it's buggy and it's total crap

 

[happyadam]

... Compare it to comparable Windows software...

iPhoto wins in every aspect.

Not strictly true. Have you checked out Picasa (www.picasa.com). iPhoto isn't free (if like me you have an old Mac and upgraded your iLife suite). However, Picasa is - it has a good interface, it scans and gets all your photos (and doesn't re-organise your files in the process), it's performance is pretty good (better than iPhoto), offers some novel features (such as a timeline interface to your library). (it's also now owned by Google).

To be honest, if they did an OS X version, I'd probably use it in preference to iPhoto but I guess they saw no point.

I think the timeline feature would be a nice inclusion in the next version of iPhoto.

 

[CmdrLaForge]

What kind of "picture web site" and "independent slideshow" are you trying to create? Have you looked at utilities like Galerie and BetterHTMLExport?

I know these and I currently use Galerie which is really great. But still. Why can't I make it directly from iPhoto. It has the functionality built in but they want me to purchase .Mac.

 

[Kevinsunde]

ohhh, an update that tells me when there's more updates...

I'm thrilled. What's the 'minor issue' though?

AHA! Seems like I'm actually the first person to have a clue as to what they've fixed.....I ordered an album (in the “picture book” mode) last week, and noticed that when two vertically-framed pictures were aligned, there was a rather large gap between them. In version 4.0.2, the same pictures are now aligned side by side, without any space between them. That is the only noticeable difference I've registered.

I miss an option to resize and lay out the photographs on each page exactly as one wished – just like in a Word document, or Keynote presentation. I would also like support for any font I wanted for text. By the way, I made the big mistake of using the ridiculous “magic wand”-thingy to “improve” my photos, and the pictures came back - beautifully bound - with horrible JPEG-artifacts. The moral: only use Photoshop for retouching JPEG files, otherwise it’ll only end in tears. Making a DVD from your slideshow will also sorely try your CPU. I have a Powerbook 17”, 1 Ghz, 1 G RAM, and the machine very nearly had a stroke.

 

[killmoms]

Since I paid for iPhoto, on the not unreasonable assumption that photos would be displayed withou blurring them, I think I and other pople who have this problem are not out of line making our complaints known. While Photoshop is for "serious" work, there is no reason a "fun" application should provide inferior images.

In reading over the posts here, and having re-read some posts on the Apple and Macintouch web sites, I think it's possible that blurred images don't show up on every computer. But it certainly shows up on enough computers to demonstrate it's a real problem for many people.

Certainly the blurred photos do not, when sharpened by clicking on the contrast or brightness tabs, exhibit jaggies. Instead, the pictures snap into crisp focus. If these same pictures can snap into proper focus with Photoshop or GraphicConverter, they should be equally sharp in iPhoto, without having to click on tabs or use other workarounds. Photos should be sharp in the slide show mode (which CS doesn't have). At the very least there should be an option for turning the blurring "feature" on or off.

The images are not blurred—they are bilinearly interpolated to make up for the fact that you're not viewing the pixels at a 1:1 ratio with the zoom (i.e. non-standard zoom on an image). It's a kind of filtering to make the images look better when you've zoomed to something weird like 142%, and it's just a display issue. I think it makes them look fantastic. Without it, images get jagged edges, whether you see them or not. I certainly do. They're not immediately visible, but look at the edge of two clearly defined objects, like a box, or a piano against a wall, anything with a good straight edge. By interpolating at non-standard zooms you get a nice sub-pixel blending that creates the illusion of a constant line better than without it. This is even more apparent in motion—if the slideshow images were shown without interpolation as they zoomed and panned, they'd look HORRIBLE. The same technique is used on the Apple screensavers. Obviously you're simply not used to this.

--Cless

 

[Anders Agerskov]

iPhoto works (sort of)

I have heard a lot of complaints about iPhoto's slowness, but find it quite useful. I have about 10,200 pictures or 223GB, and find the launch and exit times quite reasonable. Also scrolling through the album is quite speedy. However, sometimes iPhoto hangs or goes slow. Yes, some browsers are faster, but the app is certainly faster than it was a year or so ago and is still quite usable imho.

What are the downsides? I miss more features than performance.

* I still need to store RAW files separately and convert them before import into iPhoto. This is time consuming, prone to error and requires extra back up space and a procedure to go along with it.
* Web sharing is mediocre. You are limited to 60? photos, which is no good if you want to show all of the photos from the family wedding. myPhoto or the defunct accessaphoto delivers/promissed to synchronize between iPhoto and the web. This would certainly have made things easier.
* File structure. I see this as a risk issue. Risk of not being able to recover data easily and risk of spending much time when transferring to another file management system should you later chose to do so. We need a transparent filing system (one datebase with photos in logical folders).

 

[ccuilla]

But it doesn't work cross platform from a fileserver. My wife and I share our pics on a fileserver so we both can view/edit them on our respective machines while taking advantage of the redundant drive array of the server for piece of mind (backing up to optical, mind you). She has a Sony laptop, I have my Power Book. What I've been looking for is a way to have an imaging app browse/cache the thumbnails while they sit on the server filesystem, without having to resort to the Finder... iPhoto can't do that, so I'm left with opening PSE and using their browser, which is too much overhead when I want to just sift through the year's pics...

I guess I'll be looking at some of the other alternatives mentioned in this thread...

As soon as you said Sony laptop, it occurred to me that perhaps iPhoto is not the correct solution for your situation. This shouldn't be iPhoto's "fault"...iPhoto has been designed for a certain category of users...namely Mac users...with capabilities to share with other Mac users (through iPhoto rendevous sharing). So given your scenario, iPhoto seems like a mis-match.

 

[pcharles]

I stoppded using it because of all this smart folders all over my mac.
I upload pictures every day and I edit in photoshop its just a mess finding the photos in those folders.

Besides I don't like the fact of the thumnails taking up even more space what for? I use my Nikon Viewer that came with my D70.
You guys tell me if this update is worth anything.

What language are you using? Could you try English?

 

[jxyama]

>If a user is concerned about "blurring" or resizing... they should not be using iPhoto.

I work as a graphic designer and photographer; for serious work images, I never even think of iPhoto: Photoshop CS is THE way to go.<

Since I paid for iPhoto, on the not unreasonable assumption that photos would be displayed withou blurring them, I think I and other pople who have this problem are not out of line making our complaints known. While Photoshop is for "serious" work, there is no reason a "fun" application should provide inferior images.

In reading over the posts here, and having re-read some posts on the Apple and Macintouch web sites, I think it's possible that blurred images don't show up on every computer. But it certainly shows up on enough computers to demonstrate it's a real problem for many people.

Certainly the blurred photos do not, when sharpened by clicking on the contrast or brightness tabs, exhibit jaggies. Instead, the pictures snap into crisp focus. If these same pictures can snap into proper focus with Photoshop or GraphicConverter, they should be equally sharp in iPhoto, without having to click on tabs or use other workarounds. Photos should be sharp in the slide show mode (which CS doesn't have). At the very least there should be an option for turning the blurring "feature" on or off.

yeah, i agree with you 100%. aliasing (technical term for "blurring") is nice for some, but doesn't do it for me. for a while, i had thought something happened to my camera because all of my pictures suddenly looked like they were out of focus when i went from iPhoto 2 to iPhoto 4. softening and aliasing pictures to make them look good is one thing, blurring it to the point it almost looks out of focus is quite another! at the VERY LEAST, give me an option to turn it off...

 

[FoxyKaye]

Wow - folks really seem to be bringing the hate on for iPhoto... I bought iLife '04 on sale from OWC at one point, and I have to confess I really like iPhoto. Sure, it's not as powerful as PhotoShop or other image manipulation programs, but I don't think that's what it is supposed to be.

Maybe because I'm in its target demographic: everyday users who have a collection of digital photos (I don't own a digital camera, but I get my film developed to CD-ROMs). I don't expect it to do great things, only cool things that let me look at photos, images, and other graphics in a somewhat organized fashion. In short: I think it's cute, and maybe that's what I'm supposed to think. Incidentally, my iPhoto library just crossed 1Gig in size.

Also, I did notice at one point that after I installed iPhoto (or any of the iLife applications, for that matter), my permissions got really screwed up. Perhaps this might account for the problems some folks are having with crashes and slow open/close times? I just installed the update yesterday, and before even trying to run the program I repaired permissions and rebooted. It actually opens faster than previously (which on my system is a miracle), and takes about 5-10 seconds to close completely during which I see the "spinning rainbow pizza of death" on screen. I did also notice that its utilization of my processor time seemed to increase (thanks MenuMeters!) but that's the only change I can ascertain.

 

[jxyama]

Wow - folks really seem to be bringing the hate on for iPhoto... I bought iLife '04 on sale from OWC at one point, and I have to confess I really like iPhoto. Sure, it's not as powerful as PhotoShop or other image manipulation programs, but I don't think that's what it is supposed to be.

don't get me wrong. i like iPhoto 4. i think it's fantastic. i use it every day and i wouldn't know what to do with my pictures if i didn't have iPhoto. and i certainly don't expect it to be a photo manipulation software. cropping, automated enhancement (which works great most of the time) and red eye reduction is good enough for me. i just want it to be the virtual photo album - which i believe is the point of iPhoto anyway.

that said, there are things that do bother me, mostly aliasing. that and it would really widen the user base if the file system changed to something more understandable. iPhoto Album -> import date/name -> thumbs/pics/originals. how hard would it be to change to that instead of the current version iPhoto Album -> month -> date -> messy stuff...? some of us do like to know where things are at the finder level. apple should maintain the transparency of the file organization instead of teling users to "let the files be, it's not for you to mess with."

 

[QCassidy352]

have you got something in mind, or would you like us to just randomly make stuff up?

haha, post of the week!

New update doesn't seem to do much for me one way or the other... what I want from iphoto is a hierarchy, like sub-folders within larger folders. Would that really be so hard?

 

[jhomayne]

The only thing I would like to see is nested folders, my collection is well organised in my opinion and so I have loads of albums all at the same level, which for organisational purposes I have had to call "Vacations-2002-Florida-Week1" and "Vacations-2002-Florida-Week2" and "Sports Events-2003-French GP-Qualifying" for example. Nested folders would save me lots of scrolling, but at least I can drag and drop to order the list of albums.)

that's what i crave the most from iphoto

 

[mainstreetmark]

Why is the anti-aliasing such a bad thing around here? Honestly - which one of these looks better? (and "Preview" does the same smoothy thing that iPhoto does)

(perhaps this should be one of the "daily" macpolls questions)

Ok, well, I can't attach these pics - they're too big. So, i stuck them on a webpage:

http://the-alley.net/mark/iphoto.php

 

[kb@MacRumors]

As long as we're all talking about iPhoto, I have an unusual issue with it. I've backed up my photos a few times and changed iBooks once. When I went to put my backups on the new iBook, I duplicated (sometimes tripled) the photos. Is there any way (other than by hand, I have almost 3000 photos) to delete the copies? The weird thing is, the duplicates have the same name! Why would iPhoto allow that anyway? Anyone know of a script that could manage this, or some application?

Concerning the update: iPhoto was slow to start and quit after the update. Repaired Permissions, logged out and back in again and all is peachy once again.

 

[jxyama]

Why is the anti-aliasing such a bad thing around here? Honestly - which one of these looks better? (and "Preview" does the same smoothy thing that iPhoto does)

(perhaps this should be one of the "daily" macpolls questions)

Ok, well, I can't attach these pics - they're too big. So, i stuck them on a webpage:

http://the-alley.net/mark/iphoto.php

it really depends, i think. probably may have something to do with the display size as well, but for me, aliased images look too fuzzy. instead of it being soft, as intended, they look blurred and out of focus. YMMV, indeed...

 

[jxyama]

As long as we're all talking about iPhoto, I have an unusual issue with it. I've backed up my photos a few times and changed iBooks once. When I went to put my backups on the new iBook, I duplicated (sometimes tripled) the photos. Is there any way (other than by hand, I have almost 3000 photos) to delete the copies? The weird thing is, the duplicates have the same name! Why would iPhoto allow that anyway? Anyone know of a script that could manage this, or some application?

Concerning the update: iPhoto was slow to start and quit after the update. Repaired Permissions, logged out and back in again and all is peachy once again.

you must have dragged the backed up folder directly into iPhoto? if you do that, iPhoto will grab all the pics in the folder - thumbs, modified pics and original pics. that's why it seems to have duplicates - all with the same name because they are supposed to be different versions of the same pic.

ironically, one "advantage" of iPhoto doing its own file organization is the fact it's simple to allow duplicate names - because pics aren't organized in "neat" fashion under Finder - duplicate names in iPhoto doesn't mean duplicate names at the folder level.

the way to back up is to move the folder as a whole to /user/Pictures then force iPhoto to use the copied folder as the library. i think there are two ways to do this: erase the iPhoto pref. (or some other file specifying the default library) and re-start iPhoto or use iPhoto Library Manager to specify the folder as an iPhoto folder. i recommend the latter. iPLM is an excellent app on its own - even with iPhoto 4, i split my picture libraries by year. keeps things very fast and organized. (i used to have to split each year into at least two, sometime up to four, libraries with iPhoto 2 to maintain decent speed. iPhoto 4 is a very good improvement...)

 

[brydeemer]

Wishing for Adobe Photoshop Album for Mac

I like iPhoto, however it is missing the all-important feature of tagging photos. In Adobe Photoshop Album for the PC you can tag each photo with as many tags as you want thus making searching a very simple task. For example click the tag Dad and the viewing pane now shows only pictures with Dad in them. Then click the camping tag and now only pics of dad camping show in the pane. Now click the Maine tag and now only pics of dad camping in Maine show in the pane. This is an unbelievably awesome feature and allows you to find any photo is mere seconds. Either Adobe needs to port this app to the Mac, or iPhoto needs to add tags. I just can't live without it.

Bry

 

[tf23]

I like iPhoto, however it is missing the all-important feature of tagging photos. In Adobe Photoshop Album for the PC you can tag each photo with as many tags as you want thus making searching a very simple task. For example click the tag Dad and the viewing pane now shows only pictures with Dad in them. Then click the camping tag and now only pics of dad camping show in the pane. Now click the Maine tag and now only pics of dad camping in Maine show in the pane. This is an unbelievably awesome feature and allows you to find any photo is mere seconds. Either Adobe needs to port this app to the Mac, or iPhoto needs to add tags. I just can't live without it.

Bry

Couldn't you use keywords to do the same thing? Just create a smart albums for keyword(s) that you want or don't want.

 

[kb@MacRumors]

you must have dragged the backed up folder directly into iPhoto? if you do that, iPhoto will grab all the pics in the folder - thumbs, modified pics and original pics. that's why it seems to have duplicates - all with the same name because they are supposed to be different versions of the same pic.

ironically, one "advantage" of iPhoto doing its own file organization is the fact it's simple to allow duplicate names - because pics aren't organized in "neat" fashion under Finder - duplicate names in iPhoto doesn't mean duplicate names at the folder level.

the way to back up is to move the folder as a whole to /user/Pictures then force iPhoto to use the copied folder as the library. i think there are two ways to do this: erase the iPhoto pref. (or some other file specifying the default library) and re-start iPhoto or use iPhoto Library Manager to specify the folder as an iPhoto folder. i recommend the latter. iPLM is an excellent app on its own - even with iPhoto 4, i split my picture libraries by year. keeps things very fast and organized. (i used to have to split each year into at least two, sometime up to four, libraries with iPhoto 2 to maintain decent speed. iPhoto 4 is a very good improvement...)

Yep, what made things worse is my backups were on cds. Every now and then I'd make new backups, duplicating my backups. When it came time to reload, my discs weren't labeled right and I ended up dumping duplicates into iPhoto. I started with something like 6000 photos. I have about 500 more to delete. Let's just say I've learned my lesson. Thanks for the organization tips, jxyama.

 

[jxyama]

Yep, what made things worse is my backups were on cds. Every now and then I'd make new backups, duplicating my backups. When it came time to reload, my discs weren't labeled right and I ended up dumping duplicates into iPhoto. I started with something like 6000 photos. I have about 500 more to delete. Let's just say I've learned my lesson. Thanks for the organization tips, jxyama.

man, sorry to hear that...

i went through a bit of trouble when i consolidated 8 or so libraries into 3 when i upgraded from iPhoto 2 to 4, so i know how much of a pain it is... good luck.

 

[Snowy_River]

>i'm so sick of people complaining about how it supposedly "blurs" pictures in edit mode. for those who know nothing about megapixels and screen resolution - what iphoto is doing is zooming in or out on your photo so that it fits to screen.<

What iPhoto does is blur your photo and there's nothing "supposedly" about it. I work with megapixels and screen resolution for a living. In fact, iPhoto doesn't "fit" a photo to the screen except in slide show mode, where it's also a failure at creating a sharp image. No matter what size a picture displays in initially, it quickly "pops" out of focus in iPhoto. When its in focus, I don't see jaggies, I just see a sharp picture.

>iphoto is really NOT blurring the photos in a permanent way, it only displays them that way in the program. drag them to your desktop, open them in another app at 50 or 100% and they'll look fine.<

No, it doesn't blur them permanantly, and clicking on a brightness/contrast tab will pop them into proper focus. But why should I have to do that to obtain a sharp picture? Btw, my kids are perfectly aware when photos are out of focus and more than happy to let me know that iPhoto sucks.

Why should I have to look at a photo at 100%? Not much of a 5 megapixel image would be visible and I don't image grandpa or the kids would be amused.

And why should iPhoto blur photos in its slide shows? Why does Preview blur pictures? None of my other programs that work with photographs have that problem, and iPhoto shouldn't, either.

Strictly speaking, it's not 'blurring' your photos. As it's not able to display each and every pixel of your photo (got a mega-pixel monitor?), it has to make some choices. Editing programs like PhotoShop choose a given pixel to display in place of many. iPhoto, on the other hand, leverages anti-aliasing techniques to try to smooth transitions. The difference is appealing to most consumers. Why? Well, take the attached picture, for example. If you were to zoom in, you'd see a smooth line along the edge of her hand. However, in the zoomed out state, PhotoShop's method presents the appearance of 'jaggies' along the edge of her hand, whereas iPhoto presents the appearance of a smooth line. So, in that sense, iPhoto does a better job of showing you what's there.

Now, as a photographer, I know the difference between what iPhoto is showing me and what PhotoShop does. I happily use iPhoto to keep track of photos and put together slideshows, but I only use PhotoShop for the actual editing of the photos.