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

Windows to Mac

ivanwi11iams

ivanwi11iams

Contributor
Original poster
Nov 30, 2014
4,507
3,066
Georgia, USA
Coming from Windows, I have a Pictures folder, and it has lots and lots of photo albums.
Directly from my Windows computer, I copied all the albums to the Pictures folder on my Mac.

Currently, if I want to preview the images, etc. I must open each photo, one at a time. I then open the Photos app, and none of my albums are showing there.

- do I need to import them into the Photo album?
- if I do, will it create the album names for me?
- performing the import, will that mean I'll have two copies, one in the Photos app, and one in the Pictures location?

Looking for feedback. Thanks in advance
 
The photos app have a seperate folder in your Pictures folder named something like "Photos.library". Right click on the folder and select "Show package content" to see the photos and albums in the Photos application.

I do not belive that you can just drag your photos into the "Photos.library" folder. I do belive you have to import them and then delete them from the pictures folder. You can also quickly preview a photo by selecting it in finder and pressing the spacebar.
 
It's better to open iPhoto and drag the folder onto the main app window. The app will then index the files correctly.
 
afctee said:
Hmm I don't recall seeing iPhoto. I do however see the 'Photo' app. I'll search again and try that. Thanks
Click to expand...
iPhoto was the old photos app on Macs and is now deprecated as far as I know. My Mac came with iPhoto 09.
 
Regarding previewing photos - you can use the built-in QuickLook for that; select the photos you want to preview either by holding CMD+clicking each image for preview or CMD+a for all images in the folder and then press the Spacebar once all are selected. Once QuickLook opens(a white transparent window) you can click the 4 little squares up to the top left of the QuickLook window to get an overview of all images spread out in many smaller images still contained in the QuickLook window. If that's something you already knew then disregard the advice.

Photos is somewhat a different beast in that it does not make individual folders just as iPhoto did back on earlier OS X releases.

Instead it makes a bunch of locations, dates etc. based on data imbedded in the images you have. Which is fun. Espcially if there are embedded data in those images such that location can be transferred over - makes a nifty overview as you scroll through the photos.

You'll have photos in both locations - in Finder and the Photos application. It copies them in.
 
The Bad Guy said:
Don't use Apple's photo software.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's fast, light, easy, covers everything most users will ever need, and worst of all free. Best to avoid that.

Not everyone is a pro user.
Not every pro user needs the full depth of C1, LR, or your favorite app.
[doublepost=1464558756][/doublepost]
afctee said:
Coming from Windows, I have a Pictures folder, and it has lots and lots of photo albums.
Directly from my Windows computer, I copied all the albums to the Pictures folder on my Mac.

Currently, if I want to preview the images, etc. I must open each photo, one at a time. I then open the Photos app, and none of my albums are showing there.

- do I need to import them into the Photo album?
- if I do, will it create the album names for me?
- performing the import, will that mean I'll have two copies, one in the Photos app, and one in the Pictures location?

Looking for feedback. Thanks in advance
Click to expand...


To show them in the Photos app, you have to import them into photos. Photos keeps everything in a database so that you can do keywords and other organization. It also allows you to do color correction, retouching, crop, rotate, and things like that.
I highly recommend using SOME kind of photo management software if you have lots of photos. I personally use Photos for this without much hassle. Others prefer Lightroom or Capture 1 Pro. There are other options out there, but these are the biggest 3 available for the Mac in active development.

If you just want to see images, you can set the folders to "cover flow" instead of list. You can open with preview, or whatever app you choose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Micky Do
Import seems to work. But, not for 'mass' imports. Meaning lots of folders, and keeping the same folder name, etc. Well, not unless I create a folder, and then drag and drop photos to said folder.

I have LOADS of folders! Ugh...
 
I just had a conversation with Apple Support. It appears if I want my Albums to hold the respective photos from Windows, I'd have to manually create the Album names, and then copy and paste each set of photos. This is going to take AGES!
 
v3rlon said:
Yeah, it's fast, light, easy, covers everything most users will ever need, and worst of all free. Best to avoid that.

Not everyone is a pro user.
Not every pro user needs the full depth of C1, LR, or your favorite app.
Click to expand...
Prior to being a pro photographer I worked with / for Apple for 14+ years and saw countless issues with iPhoto, Aperture and Photos.

afctee said:
I just had a conversation with Apple Support. It appears if I want my Albums to hold the respective photos from Windows, I'd have to manually create the Album names, and then copy and paste each set of photos. This is going to take AGES!
Click to expand...
No...it's fast, light and easy. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fancuku
Apple and the likes certainly don't make this easy. Is it too hard for Apple to realize that those moving from Windows and such, have lots of folders (Album names) with photo, and merely want to import them?

Honestly, this is like pulling teeth...
[doublepost=1464579652][/doublepost]I've found a script by a user on Apple Communities, called Old Toad. Testing it now. But, it seems to be doing the trick...
 
Well, first you need to understand that the folder structure you're talking about is "old school." Databases are much better. Even Lightroom does this, but it can be set up to try and hide this.

The advantage is that then your photos are organized by
birthdays and holidays like you have it
Landscapes/people/cars what have you
People in the photos
location
and any other thing you want to apply all with just one set of photos.


You put "Halloween" in the search, and all your Halloween photos show up. You want photos of John Smith, you can do that too.

Imagine trying to cross reference that in all your folders.

Now, if you need to preserve the folder names as one of the organizing factors, you can set up automator to do that. I cannot walk you through this tonight, sorry. But it isn't the end of the world. What you want is doable. The investment now (in whatever photo manager) will pay off going forward.

Alternatively, you can go shell out $160USD for Lightroom which will sort of do what you want as long as you do EVERYTHING in Lightroom. LR is very powerful. Of course Adobe software never has any bugs /s.
[doublepost=1464581517][/doublepost]
The Bad Guy said:
Prior to being a pro photographer I worked with / for Apple for 14+ years and saw countless issues with iPhoto, Aperture and Photos.
Click to expand...

As apposed to which software that never has any issues at all?

Not Adobe Lightroom.
Not CaptureOne
Not Corel Aftershot
Not Darktable

You are always just picking which features you want versus which crazy you can live with versus what you can afford/are willing to pay.
 
v3rlon said:
As apposed to which software that never has any issues at all?

Not Adobe Lightroom.
Not CaptureOne
Not Corel Aftershot
Not Darktable

You are always just picking which features you want versus which crazy you can live with versus what you can afford/are willing to pay.
Click to expand...
When iPhoto came out, it was great. When Aperture came out, it was groundbreaking.

The more features iPhoto tried to add, the more bloated and buggy it became. Aperture was dropped like a bad habit.
An issue they both shared? The proprietary database they used could become corrupt if you looked at it the wrong way.

As the focus at Apple changed, so did their software. Computer users / creatives are simply not a priority and neither is desktop software.

Photos is a joke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: montycat and MCAsan
The Bad Guy said:
When iPhoto came out, it was great. When Aperture came out, it was groundbreaking.

The more features iPhoto tried to add, the more bloated and buggy it became. Aperture was dropped like a bad habit.
An issue they both shared? The proprietary database they used could become corrupt if you looked at it the wrong way.

As the focus at Apple changed, so did their software. Computer users / creatives are simply not a priority and neither is desktop software.

Photos is a joke.
Click to expand...

Excellent suggestion. We should stop adding features to software entirely. Who needs them.

Your statement is inherently obvious. The more it grows, the bigger it is. Who knew? The bigger it is, the more things can go wrong. This is true for any and all software.

Adobe's DB can become corrupted to. It isn't even that difficult. It is more intuitive to repair common problems, I grant. Still, it happens.

"Photos is a joke." I keep hearing crap like this about Photos and other software. What specifically are you talking about? What MANDATORY feature does Photos lack that makes it laughable?
Does it process RAW? Yes
Can you make the most common adjustments to photos (crop, rotate, exposure, white balance, etc)? Yes
Can you retouch? Yes
Can you assign keywords, faces, locations? Yes
Can you copy and paste adjustments? Yes
Round-trip editing in any other software? Yes - with a $.99 extension from the App store, but it works flawlessly.

What is it actually missing that makes it so laughable? Batch processing? I will give you it isn't there, but that isn't something MOST people need. There are work-arounds if you do. For most people, that will do. If it is something you use every day, then Photos is the wrong app.

It is just a tool. Use the one that serves you best. Insulting other software is unfounded, pointless, and ultimately unprofessional. A GOOD craftsman gets the most from whatever tools they use. Al Di Meola is a better guitarist than I am. It doesn't matter if I have a custom Stratocaster and he a pawn shop special. It doesn't matter what picks, strings, strap, amp, or cord we use. You don't see him saying "Fender picks are a joke. Only Dunlop matters." He doesn't say it about guitars. Use what works for you. Make useful comparisons when needed. "x is a joke," isn't helpful to anyone.

I tried Lightroom. I tried C1Pro. I tried Darktable. I tried Aftershot 2. Of those, I even subscribed to Lightroom for 10 months and tried really hard to like it. I didn't and couldn't make myself. It was easier to get what *I* wanted out of Photos, specifically - easier to have photos on all my devices to show and share. Getting an image from Lightroom into a SMS (or any other app) on my phone, for example, meant going through Photos anyway. This had me running two DBs with the same photos in both and struggling to keep them up to date. One of them had to go. Photos could do most of what I did in Lightroom. Lightroom couldn't do ANYTHING I did in Photos. It was an easy choice for me based on MY requirements.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ivanwi11iams
In other news, the script that Old Toad presented me with, worked. Too a while, but worked regardless.

Based on other posts I've seen about this, since Photos is using a Database of sorts, it is best to simply have ALL photos imported into one folder. The application checks the metadata for dates, location etc.

Hmm, something I need to consider. Coming from Windows, mentally has to change.
 
v3rlon said:
Excellent suggestion. We should stop adding features to software entirely. Who needs them.

Your statement is inherently obvious. The more it grows, the bigger it is. Who knew? The bigger it is, the more things can go wrong. This is true for any and all software.

Adobe's DB can become corrupted to. It isn't even that difficult. It is more intuitive to repair common problems, I grant. Still, it happens.

"Photos is a joke." I keep hearing crap like this about Photos and other software. What specifically are you talking about? What MANDATORY feature does Photos lack that makes it laughable?
Does it process RAW? Yes
Can you make the most common adjustments to photos (crop, rotate, exposure, white balance, etc)? Yes
Can you retouch? Yes
Can you assign keywords, faces, locations? Yes
Can you copy and paste adjustments? Yes
Round-trip editing in any other software? Yes - with a $.99 extension from the App store, but it works flawlessly.

What is it actually missing that makes it so laughable? Batch processing? I will give you it isn't there, but that isn't something MOST people need. There are work-arounds if you do. For most people, that will do. If it is something you use every day, then Photos is the wrong app.

It is just a tool. Use the one that serves you best. Insulting other software is unfounded, pointless, and ultimately unprofessional. A GOOD craftsman gets the most from whatever tools they use. Al Di Meola is a better guitarist than I am. It doesn't matter if I have a custom Stratocaster and he a pawn shop special. It doesn't matter what picks, strings, strap, amp, or cord we use. You don't see him saying "Fender picks are a joke. Only Dunlop matters." He doesn't say it about guitars. Use what works for you. Make useful comparisons when needed. "x is a joke," isn't helpful to anyone.

I tried Lightroom. I tried C1Pro. I tried Darktable. I tried Aftershot 2. Of those, I even subscribed to Lightroom for 10 months and tried really hard to like it. I didn't and couldn't make myself. It was easier to get what *I* wanted out of Photos, specifically - easier to have photos on all my devices to show and share. Getting an image from Lightroom into a SMS (or any other app) on my phone, for example, meant going through Photos anyway. This had me running two DBs with the same photos in both and struggling to keep them up to date. One of them had to go. Photos could do most of what I did in Lightroom. Lightroom couldn't do ANYTHING I did in Photos. It was an easy choice for me based on MY requirements.
Click to expand...
I'd really love to stay and chat more about your great software Mr Cook, but I've got to deliver two dozen images to a client today. You seem busy extolling the virtues of your software in another thread anyway, so I'm sure you wont miss me too much. :D
 
v3rlon said:
Excellent suggestion. We should stop adding features to software entirely. Who needs them.

Your statement is inherently obvious. The more it grows, the bigger it is. Who knew? The bigger it is, the more things can go wrong. This is true for any and all software.

Adobe's DB can become corrupted to. It isn't even that difficult. It is more intuitive to repair common problems, I grant. Still, it happens.

"Photos is a joke." I keep hearing crap like this about Photos and other software. What specifically are you talking about? What MANDATORY feature does Photos lack that makes it laughable?
Does it process RAW? Yes
Can you make the most common adjustments to photos (crop, rotate, exposure, white balance, etc)? Yes
Can you retouch? Yes
Can you assign keywords, faces, locations? Yes
Can you copy and paste adjustments? Yes
Round-trip editing in any other software? Yes - with a $.99 extension from the App store, but it works flawlessly.

What is it actually missing that makes it so laughable? Batch processing? I will give you it isn't there, but that isn't something MOST people need. There are work-arounds if you do. For most people, that will do. If it is something you use every day, then Photos is the wrong app.

It is just a tool. Use the one that serves you best. Insulting other software is unfounded, pointless, and ultimately unprofessional. A GOOD craftsman gets the most from whatever tools they use. Al Di Meola is a better guitarist than I am. It doesn't matter if I have a custom Stratocaster and he a pawn shop special. It doesn't matter what picks, strings, strap, amp, or cord we use. You don't see him saying "Fender picks are a joke. Only Dunlop matters." He doesn't say it about guitars. Use what works for you. Make useful comparisons when needed. "x is a joke," isn't helpful to anyone.

I tried Lightroom. I tried C1Pro. I tried Darktable. I tried Aftershot 2. Of those, I even subscribed to Lightroom for 10 months and tried really hard to like it. I didn't and couldn't make myself. It was easier to get what *I* wanted out of Photos, specifically - easier to have photos on all my devices to show and share. Getting an image from Lightroom into a SMS (or any other app) on my phone, for example, meant going through Photos anyway. This had me running two DBs with the same photos in both and struggling to keep them up to date. One of them had to go. Photos could do most of what I did in Lightroom. Lightroom couldn't do ANYTHING I did in Photos. It was an easy choice for me based on MY requirements.
Click to expand...

Photos IS a joke. The way Photos organizes is nauseating. The whole collage thing is a visual/organizational nightmare. Please Apple....just give us our iPhotos Events thumbnail folders back and the ability to name them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: phrehdd and LloydChiro
montycat said:
Photos IS a joke. The way Photos organizes is nauseating. The whole collage thing is a visual/organizational nightmare. Please Apple....just give us our iPhotos Events thumbnail folders back and the ability to name them.
Click to expand...

Create Albums. Name them like you would events.
Go inside of album. Right-click on photo, select "Make key photo"
Drag Albums around to arrange in an order that makes you happy.

Close in "Album view" and it opens in Album view. You can use same album view on your iPhone.
Never look at collage of years again.

Does this help?
[doublepost=1465765533][/doublepost]
The Bad Guy said:
I'd really love to stay and chat more about your great software Mr Cook, but I've got to deliver two dozen images to a client today. You seem busy extolling the virtues of your software in another thread anyway, so I'm sure you wont miss me too much. :D
Click to expand...

No problem, Shanatu Narayen. I am sure Adobe clients are most interested in your plans to rent them their own content
as well as software.

See? Anyone can make that kind of cheap shot.

I'm much better looking than Tim Cook :p I only wish I was in that tax bracket so I could afford more camera gear.


Look, software is a tool. Do you go to your mechanic and say "you can only work on my car with Snap-on. Craftsman tools are a joke." No? Why not?

Results matter. Use the tools that work for you. If LR has some feature you can't live without, use it.

Quick Question
What makes software good?
a) Pros use it
b) It costs a lot of money
c) It has a lot of features
d) It does what you need to do as quickly and as easily as possible

The ONLY answer I care about is D. Maybe your needs are different.
I don't care what DAM anyone else uses.
I only care what it costs when I pay for it, not to brag about how much I spent. Free is the best price to me, and I don't care if people "won't take my software seriously because it is so cheap" as long as they appreciate my work.
I only care about features I need.

I am not saying Photos is the best software ever, but I am a bit frustrated by misinformation be spouted out by people who clearly never tried using it. Just last week I heard how "Photos can't import RAW images." Or really? Once I demonstrated that, it was "Photos automatically converts them to .jpgs, but it doesn't STORE RAW."

At least have the courage to TRY (really try) software before making a decision or you really are sheeple. I don't at all consider myself a Photos expert, but >95% of the complaints I hear about Photos are utter nonsense.
 
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