or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › iPhoto is a total letdown (as a cataloging app).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iPhoto is a total letdown (as a cataloging app).

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
EDIT: I changed the title to be a little more fair and a little less critical. I realize Apple's focus may have been different than mine.

This is programming at its absolute worst. Did these guys come from the Word 6 team!?

1. Why does it have to copy all files to a proprietary database, rather than simply using file references? Not only does this slow down importing, but it is totally wasteful of disk space.

2. Even with a proprietary database, why can't I choose its location? What if I prefer to store all my photos on my iPod, f'rinstance?

3. Why does it have to load thumbnails of all the images into memory (even those not in the current window) before it can display any? Can't it display as it loads, or load only those in the current window? PhotoGrid X does this right.

4. Why can't you create a hierarchical database (same problem with iTunes)?

5. Why does it have to be SOOOO SLOOOW when you have a large image database? It's unusable with my database of 6500 images. Switching from library to roll or album view takes from 30 seconds to two minutes, during which time I can neither access the program or cancel the action. Scrolling up one page takes 8-15 seconds. Importing takes twenty minutes per gigabyte.

It's so slow I haven't even been able to explore any of its features. I probably won't. This program is a total piece of shit usability wise, no matter how pretty it is.

Apple <a href="http://www.versiontracker.com/moreinfo.fcgi?id=11604&db=mac" target="_blank">look here</a> to see how to do this right! As far as I can tell (with iPhoto's horrendous performance), the only basic feature better in iPhoto is the sliding thumbnail resizer.

[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: tonton ]</p>
post #2 of 24
Tonton, I haven't tried it, but I'll take your word for it that PhotoGrid X does the ORGANIZE function way better than iPhoto. Organize seems to be the weakest of the functions so far - the Word 6 comment is not too far off!

However, I don't think PG X has the printing, and QT exporting functions.... these are some of the most important things for a CONSUMER app. Also, 6000 catalogged photos is out of the consumer realm and pushing the edge of prosumer - don't expect a pro-level tool, especially in the 1.0 version.

Agreed with ya on 2, 3, & 4 though
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #3 of 24
It sounds to me like someone had hopelessly high standards. Maybe you forgot this app is for Joe Sixpack consumer types?

I can think of a few ways to improve iPhoto, but I'd hardly call the first version a letdown.

Also, BTW, #1 is an intentional feature, so that you can't go around deleting/losing images and breaking iPhoto's databases and whatnot.
art may imitate life, but life imitates tv.
Reply
art may imitate life, but life imitates tv.
Reply
post #4 of 24
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by FormerLurker:
<strong>Tonton, I haven't tried it, but I'll take your word for it that PhotoGrid X does the ORGANIZE function way better than iPhoto. Organize seems to be the weakest of the functions so far - the Word 6 comment is not too far off!

However, I don't think PG X has the printing, and QT exporting functions.... these are some of the most important things for a CONSUMER app. Also, 6000 catalogged photos is out of the consumer realm and pushing the edge of prosumer - don't expect a pro-level tool, especially in the 1.0 version.

Agreed with ya on 2, 3, & 4 though </strong><hr></blockquote>

You're right. I forgot about the great printing function of iPhoto, which takes the idea of Epson's PhotoPrint software and makes it super easy. I guess with this database I really need the cataloging functions the most, at which iPhoto fails miserably and PhotoGrid X excels. I'll have to use iPhoto with a small subset of my catalog to test the other features.
post #5 of 24
Programs like this intentionally omit many options to make it easier for computer neophytes to use without getting confused. You know, all files get saved to one location so there's no chance of accidentally saving a whole bunch of photos to the wrong drive and folder, and getting pissed off because they're not where they were expected.
post #6 of 24
I'm with Tonton on this one.

Go to iMovie. Try to import a picture. You will first have to go to User. Then Pictures, then iphoto library. Then you get folders that are labeled (in my case) with the year the pics were taken. Then you click on a year folder. You get more folders that are labeled with the numbers of pics inside of them. Then you click on these and you get your pics. Then you have to scroll through these to find what you want. In my case, I have hundreds of pictures in the 2001 folder.

Gawd.

iPhoto needs to have the ability to let you catalog much better so that you can find pictures in smaller folders with the names that you give them.

I don't think iMovie is a pro app so I think my complaint is valid.

This is also the same for Powerpoint.

iPhoto doesn't do it for me. It is so close. Much better than iView, or PhotoX. Hopefully a revision will be sooner than what we saw with iTunes. The equalizer was a nice touch but not in my mind mandatory. Cataloging your photos is mandatory. Can't believe they left this out.

But then again, maybe someone can tell me what I am missing. I would love to apologize..... <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
iPad2 16 GB Wifi

Who is worse? A TROLL or a person that feeds & quotes a TROLL? You're both idiots.....
Reply
iPad2 16 GB Wifi

Who is worse? A TROLL or a person that feeds & quotes a TROLL? You're both idiots.....
Reply
post #7 of 24
Thread Starter 
Okay, I tried the program again with only 50 photos.

Speed is still terrible.

I'm glad that the rotate function doesn't rewrite the file. It works the same way PhotoGrid X works, and this is one of my favorite features.

Slideshow is nice. Maybe later we'll get some different transitional effects.

Actually, after trying the printing function, I'm not so happy. You can't print contact sheets without borders between images. Orientation of images seems to be random, with some rotated left and some rotated right. Portrait orientation does not seem to be possible on a portrait page, which wastes a great deal of space.

Epson PhotoPrint, though also geared toward Joe Consumer, is a far more advanced product for printing photos in terms of features, despite the horribly annoying "wizard" style interface.
post #8 of 24
Sounds to me like Apple needs to put out Photo Studio Pro. That'll show Adobe!


Jeff
What are you up to, Norm?

My ideal weight if I were 11 feet tall.
Reply
What are you up to, Norm?

My ideal weight if I were 11 feet tall.
Reply
post #9 of 24
I love iPhoto!

I used to have to mess around with photos for hours so that they'd print with the proper colors balance. Sometimes the grass would be radioactive... Othertimes everyone would a be a tad pink...

But now with the easy Colorsync workflow in iPhoto my pictures print out perfectly with just a click of a button. Also the easy cropping (with std. photo presets) kicks azz!

So basically it's this: Why use Photoshop when I don't need to?! I will still use it, but not for this consumer-level work!
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
post #10 of 24
I expected iPhoto to replace Lemke Soft's <a href="http://www.graphicconverter.net" target="_blank">GraphicConverer</a> on my computer. But it doesn't even come close fulfilling my needs.

Now that iPhoto is out, where does Image Capture fit in?

I welcome Apple's continued focus on easy to use apps for the average consumer. I'll probably be using iPhoto for limited purposes. But it certainly won't replace any of my other graphics apps (most notably GraphicConverter).

Escher
"The only laptop computer that's useful is the one you have with you."
Until we get a 3 lbs sub-PowerBook, the 12-inch PowerBook will do.
Reply
"The only laptop computer that's useful is the one you have with you."
Until we get a 3 lbs sub-PowerBook, the 12-inch PowerBook will do.
Reply
post #11 of 24
[quote]Originally posted by Escher:
<strong>
Now that iPhoto is out, where does Image Capture fit in?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think it's dead and that's fine with me. Why would you want Image Capture now? We really do need to keep in mind that iPhoto is free, and also will be updated and improved over time.

[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: imacSE ]</p>
post #12 of 24
[quote]Originally posted by Escher:
<strong>
Now that iPhoto is out, where does Image Capture fit in?

</strong><hr></blockquote>

It has been said that iPhoto can't do the small quicktime mov's that are on some digi cameras. Therefore you need imagecapture for this.
post #13 of 24
1. Why does it have to copy all files to a proprietary database, rather than simply using file references? Not only does this slow down importing, but it is totally wasteful of disk space.

I like it better this way. Your originals are ensured. When you delete from the iPhoto library, you delete only the photos in the iPhot library and nothing else. When you augment the photo, you augment the library photos only.
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #14 of 24
Thread Starter 
FYI these responses were posted in a duplicate thread and I'm quoting them here.

[quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:
<strong>Don't expect a mini Portfolio/Cumulus yet. It will take some revisions and consumer feedback for Apple.</strong><hr></blockquote>

[quote]Originally posted by Kickaha:
<strong>Speed: You're right, it's dog slow. Too bad, really.

Hierarchical Database: What are you asking for here? Keywords are orthogonal organization, instead of the strictly linear orgnizations of a hierarchy. Of course, I'd like to have hierarchical keywords (ie, People-&gt;{Me, Wife, Family, Friends-&gt;{Mike, Renee, Lars}}, so I could tag a photo with 'Lars' and then select People and get all People, including that photo, or just Lars to get just pics with him in them. As it is, I have to add People *and* Friends *and* Lars to do this... and with only 14 keywords to play with, I quickly run out of keywords.

If they could speed it up a bit (alright, a *LOT*), and give us hierarchical and expanded keywords, I'd be quite happy.

The importing of pics into the database exclusively instead of using references is something I'm okay with now, after thinking it over... this isn't a thumbnailing app for an existing archive of hierarchical organization, it's a keyword organizational app for temporally discreet batches of photos (film rolls) that will later be grouped and cross-referenced (albums).

Personally, I like the iPhoto approach better, but the speed and flexibility need to be improved before it's a killer app in my opinion. Right now it's just sort of a mugger app. </strong><hr></blockquote>
post #15 of 24
[quote]Originally posted by Xool:
<strong>I love iPhoto!

I used to have to mess around with photos for hours so that they'd print with the proper colors balance. Sometimes the grass would be radioactive... Othertimes everyone would a be a tad pink...

But now with the easy Colorsync workflow in iPhoto my pictures print out perfectly with just a click of a button. Also the easy cropping (with std. photo presets) kicks azz!

So basically it's this: Why use Photoshop when I don't need to?! I will still use it, but not for this consumer-level work! </strong><hr></blockquote>

Printing on an Epson C80 on plain paper it turned my kids lips radioactive hot pink (on photo paper the colors are right but there is a dark tint which is universal failing with the C80).
"Moo" said the chicken
"Cluck" said the cow
Dr. Frankenstein rubbed his hands together with glee
Reply
"Moo" said the chicken
"Cluck" said the cow
Dr. Frankenstein rubbed his hands together with glee
Reply
post #16 of 24
[quote]Originally posted by tonton:
<strong>Okay, I tried the program again with only 50 photos.

Speed is still terrible.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

i'm on a g3 450/256mb ram with &gt;500 pictures and it doesn't feel slow at all ... when i move things they happen ... importing is the longest wait, 5-25 seconds
post #17 of 24
While I think iPhoto is a good idea.. I think it needed to stay in Development a tad longer. The thing runs dog slow for what it does. Not acceptable.
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
post #18 of 24
Well, After spending all week at MacWorld SF I got some info you guys should here.

Today I chated with a head engineer on iPhoto and voiced my concerns in the short comings of the app. The guy was taking notes and at the end of our 45 min conversation he had 2 good pages of notes containing good feedback he promised he would address in the releases to come.

As you might have guessed iPhoto was rushed out the door inorder to company the new iMacs debue. Because of this I am told that "tons of features were stripped out at the last second inorder to let it ship on time bug free" Some of these features included being able to search by name, naming rolls, messing with brightness and contrast and a lot of others (basicly anywhere in that app were you can not see how apple could be so stupid ot not put in that feature).

The features I asked for that the guy took down in his notes included being able to pick the location of your photo library, having a much simpler library system for the back end so that people could easily get to there photos not through iPhoto (sort of lke iTunes),and hole lot more. I just sat there and pick that app apart and gave him advice and concerns for 45 min.

Do not worry guys. Apple knows that iPhoto is not done. I was told "expect many iPhoto updates in the next coming months, we know we have a LOT to do"

one other thing. The way iPhoto works is like iMoive or FinalCut Pro. iPhoto never touches your original pic. Instead it keeps a little file that says what you did to edit the pic. this file says stuff like quardents of were you cropped images and if you turned it black and white or not. So this feature is not eating up HD space. I was also told that iPhoto is going to support o"other impute devices such as scanners in the near future"


that is to for now. If you guys have any questions I probably have the awnser. I have been very well educated in iPhoto.
post #19 of 24
[quote]Originally posted by Escher:
<strong>I expected iPhoto to replace Lemke Soft's <a href="http://www.graphicconverter.net" target="_blank">GraphicConverer</a> on my computer. But it doesn't even come close fulfilling my needs.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Why on earth would you think that? Did anything about iTunes, iMovie or iDVD lead you to believe the photo-related app would be a high- or even middle-end editing application versus a simple tool to help consumer users import, organize and print/display their photos?

You're looking for an editing application, that is something entirely different from what the digial hub thing is about. It's like saying, gee, I wish iTunes were more like Peak DV. Doesn't make any sense because the average consumer has no use for robust editing functionality and in fact would likely be confused by it.

Put another way, iPhoto is for people shooting with a Digital Elf camera, not a D-1 or Camedia E-10. Get the picture?

I want Photoshop yesterday too, and it would be great if Apple made a pro-end companion to FCP for still photos (especially if it were of that high a quality), but that's not what this product is for.

[ 01-12-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>
Aldo is watching....
Reply
Aldo is watching....
Reply
post #20 of 24
[quote]Originally posted by Michaelm8000:
<strong>Well, After spending all week at MacWorld SF I got some info you guys should here.

Today I chated with a head engineer on iPhoto and voiced my concerns in the short comings of the app. The guy was taking notes and at the end of our 45 min conversation he had 2 good pages of notes containing good feedback he promised he would address in the releases to come.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Mike, you rock.

Your drive is definitely going to get you places.

Thanks for the rundown, and for drilling that iPhoto developer.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #21 of 24
Yeah, well done once again Michaelm8000! I'm glad we've got somebody telling Apple where it's at. Just be aware your name is probably now on the security list behind the front desk at 1 Infinite Loop.

Apple certainly moved quickly to update iTunes, so I guess we should expect the same for iPhoto.

I'm hoping for a quick update to provide better hardware support - the newer Canon models aren't there yet, and I'm going out to buy a PowerShot G2 on Monday.
Chicanery.
Reply
Chicanery.
Reply
post #22 of 24
I think tonton has 6000+ images cause he uses it for his iPorn collection

hehe
I'm having deja-vu and amnesia at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.
Reply
I'm having deja-vu and amnesia at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.
Reply
post #23 of 24
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by ZO:
<strong>I think tonton has 6000+ images cause he uses it for his iPorn collection </strong><hr></blockquote>
Who, me?

Actually, I also have a 3yo daughter, live in Asia, and have a photography fetish. As soon as I can afford a digital camera with image quality comparable to my 35mm and cheap scanner, I'll jump. Actually, I'm quite satisfied with the PowerShot G2. As soon as I can afford it, I'll increase my photo collection by leaps and bounds. And iPhoto still won't be able to handle it as well as PhotoGrid.
post #24 of 24
I think iPhoto is a pretty cool little tool. But.....it need a little more. Like scanner support. Just put your pic in the scanner, open iPhoto...BAM! There you have it the pic you just scanned ready to edit. Now editing is a joke. We need a little more. I think it is cool you can do the black and white thing. But we need a little bit more. Like maybe you can add text to a pic, cutting out some things. I understand there is no way this is gonna kicks Photoshops butt, but it could do pretty well if Apple makes a few adjustments. :cool:
Think Different
Reply
Think Different
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › iPhoto is a total letdown (as a cataloging app).