iPhoto is a total letdown (as a cataloging app).
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>
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>
Comments
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
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.
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">
Jeff
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!
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
<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>
<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.
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.
<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!
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).
<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 >500 pictures and it doesn't feel slow at all ... when i move things they happen ... importing is the longest wait, 5-25 seconds
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.
<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>
<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.
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.
hehe