Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iphoto vs picassa

W

whyrichard

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Aug 15, 2002
1,729
13
hello people,


i use both windows and mac's. well... i've had eight macs (apple 2c-macbook pro) and one pc. but my girlfriend just bought her first mac, a macbook, after a lifetime of windows pcs, and she exclaims "iphoto sucks compared to picassa!"....


... and i kinda think that between the two programs, i actually prefer picassa. but i can't tell if it is because i use it on a fast monster pc desktop, whereas i use iphoto on my macbook...

but all things being equal, how does iphoto stack up against picassa?


r.
 
I personally think Picasa's better in some ways. For one, it has a dynamic library so whenever you download a new picture and put it anywhere (and you have that folder 'watched') then on the next launch of Picasa, it will be added to the Picasa library automatically. The other thing I like about it is that it doesn't have a central library - Pictures can be anywhere and however you want them organized and they'll still be in Picasa. iPhoto can't do any of those things, and that's what I liked about Picasa the most. Don't get me wrong, I like iPhoto and all it's Apple goodness and stuff, but personally, I like Picasa better.
 
i'm probably in the minority here, but i think iPhoto's organization is better. i like not having to worry about folders - all my pictures are there.

i'm first to admit, though, that iPhoto is lacking some features - like metadata editing and more advanced photo editing options.
 
pianoman said:
i'm probably in the minority here, but i think iPhoto's organization is better. i like not having to worry about folders - all my pictures are there.

i'm first to admit, though, that iPhoto is lacking some features - like metadata editing and more advanced photo editing options.
Click to expand...

i think iPhoto's photo management structure is very weird and difficult to use.
 
Never used picassa, never owned a windows machine.:D That said, it shouldn't be very difficult to make a better app than iPhoto imop. Been hating it since it was born.:rolleyes:
 
pianoman said:
i'm probably in the minority here, but i think iPhoto's organization is better. i like not having to worry about folders - all my pictures are there.
Click to expand...
No, you are not in the minority.

pianoman said:
i'm first to admit, though, that iPhoto is lacking some features - like metadata editing and more advanced photo editing options.
Click to expand...
One of the secrets of the success of Apple apps is that they don't try to have every feature known to man. iPhoto is photo-management app with a few editing features. I don't know if it still does, but Apple bundled GraphicConverter with the last Mac I purchased. This baby Photoshop can navigate your photographs, convert their file formats, and edit your images.
 
clevin said:
i think iPhoto's photo management structure is very weird and difficult to use.
Click to expand...

i thought it was, too, at first. but then i realized i had to stop thinking of things in terms of the way Windows did it. all my pictures are in iPhoto - not different folders on my hard drive. i can't really explain why this is better, but it is to me, and obviously not to others.
 
pianoman said:
all my pictures are in iPhoto - not different folders on my hard drive. i can't really explain why this is better, but it is to me, and obviously not to others.
Click to expand...
Yep, I have no desire to keep every picture I've ever taken on my hard trive taking up space, when the only way to possibly find them without using iPhoto is to guess what day, month, and year they were taken! Why wouldn't they at least keep the folders organized in finder windows the same way I have them organized in iPhoto?

Sorry, I'm doomed to rant every time I think of how much I hate that app.:eek:
 
I also loathe iPhoto for it's stupid file-duplicating structure. I can organise my own files perfectly well myself, thank you, Apple.

I suggest the OP tries out Graphic Converter and Phoenix Slides. Either one might suffice, depending on what you actually want from your photo-program.

The Void
.................
Blue spun me out.
 
The Void said:
I also loathe iPhoto for it's stupid file-duplicating structure. I can organise my own files perfectly well myself, thank you, Apple.
Click to expand...

i guess this is what i like about iPhoto - i don't have to organize the photos. i add it to the library and it's there. i don't have to keep track of folders and such.

i can understand the complaints, though, and don't misconstrue my remarks: iPhoto definitely needs to be revamped.
 
iPhoto needs to be revamped, I agree. When it came out, it was revolutionary -- it singlehandedly motivated me to switch to Mac OS X. I'm used to it's organization system, so it doesn't bother me. But it would be better if it didn't reorganize photos for you.

Imagine if it had the same interface it does now, but you could put the actual photos in any folder you want. Wouldn't that be better? Isn't that how Picasa works?

What I'd really like -- even more than the file organization thing -- is some kind of image recognition system. So if you had a couple pictures of a particular person, it could automatically find other pictures of them. Or if you're looking for *any* photo, all you have to do is find a couple of photos similar to the one you want, and it will show you a few dozen that are possibly the one you *really* want.
 
iPhoto is just way too slow and laggy..I've only used Picasa for a couple minutes, but I noticed that it was very smooth. I don't use iPhoto very often anymore, only if I want to browse through all my photos. If I want a specific photo to show someone or to e-mail I'm not going to wait a minute for iPhoto to open, and then have it crap out when I try to scroll through my 6000 photos, I go to the specific folder the photo is in.
 
CrzyCanuck72 said:
iPhoto is just way too slow and laggy..I've only used Picasa for a couple minutes, but I noticed that it was very smooth. I don't use iPhoto very often anymore, only if I want to browse through all my photos. If I want a specific photo to show someone or to e-mail I'm not going to wait a minute for iPhoto to open, and then have it crap out when I try to scroll through my 6000 photos, I go to the specific folder the photo is in.
Click to expand...
What version of iPhoto are you running? I have over 7000 pictures in my iPhoto 6 library. It only takes 3-5 seconds to open and it doesn't lag at all. :confused:

srf4real said:
Why wouldn't they at least keep the folders organized in finder windows the same way I have them organized in iPhoto?
Click to expand...
http://www.apple.com/ilife/tutorials/iphoto/ip3-1.html

If you haven't already seen it, click the "Play Video" button on that page.

For better or worse, that's how Apple intends on people organizing their pictures in iPhoto.

To answer your question, if iPhoto kept the folders organized in the finder windows the same way you had them organized in iPhoto, since you can put the same picture in multiple Albums, that means that you'd end up with the same picture copied all of your hard drive!

Image if iTunes created a folder for each of your playlists and put duplicate copies of your MP3s in each folder! :eek:
 
I prefer picassa myself. It's a very fast program, with the ability to structure your folders the way you want, and it has very decent editing tools. I was very jealous when I first used it: it was how iPhoto SHOULD work.

To add to my rant: my iphoto library is getting larger and I'm getting very slow performance, so I am now using Phoenix Slides, which, IMO is a great simple program to view pictures.
 
aristobrat said:
What version of iPhoto are you running? I have over 7000 pictures in my iPhoto 6 library. It only takes 3-5 seconds to open and it doesn't lag at all. :confused:
Click to expand...
iPhoto 6. It's better on my Macbook than it was on my old eMac, but using it to find just 1 photo is not as efficient as just going into the folders (I organize my own photo folders)
 
wordmunger said:
Imagine if it had the same interface it does now, but you could put the actual photos in any folder you want. Wouldn't that be better? Isn't that how Picasa works?
Click to expand...

If you go to Advanced prefs in iPhoto and unckeck the option to copy files into the iPhoto library, doesn't that allow you to have the pics in any folder you want? [i am not entirely sure, since i import all of mine directly from my camera].
 
I love picasa, have been using it for years and before it was bought by google. I too have iphoto, maybe we should start a petition towards google for an os x version. They did come out with google earth for mac.

- James
 
wordmunger said:
What I'd really like -- even more than the file organization thing -- is some kind of image recognition system. So if you had a couple pictures of a particular person, it could automatically find other pictures of them. Or if you're looking for *any* photo, all you have to do is find a couple of photos similar to the one you want, and it will show you a few dozen that are possibly the one you *really* want.
Click to expand...

http://www.riya.com

Used it last year when it first came out. Have all my photos uploaded. It is pretty cool. Recognizes peoples faces and even text in a photo and you can search by name. You need to train it a little, but works very well.

- James
 
clevin said:
now thats a big stretch, its <2% of photoshop.
Click to expand...

Except that it supports probably twice as many formats as Photoshop does.

GraphicConverter is probably 80% of photoshop at 5% the price. And unlike PS, it's been Universal for months.
 
portent said:
GraphicConverter is probably 80% of photoshop at 5% the price. And unlike PS, it's been Universal for months.
Click to expand...

The original figure of <2% was correct. However, GraphicConverter isn't an attempt to be Photoshop...the name is pretty accurate. It does support lots of formats; the purpose is to convert graphics from one format to another, with some editing functions thrown in for convenience. In no way does it have anything like the functionality of Photoshop by some orders of magnitude, nor is it intended to.

As for iPhoto, it works for me and I don't personally have the need for anything better, but then I don't have that many photos either....

--Eric
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back