iPhoto users?

[DabCan10]

I'm looking to catalog my pictures a bit better in Mac os. I currently download my digital pictures into folders marked by the date, then the ones I edit are saved within that folder in another folder marked "edited".

Scanned negs go in a folder named after the camera that was used to take it, again an edited folder is within this one for pictures I do work on.

iPhoto seems like it could handle this although it seems that your files are all put in a photo library and you can't easily find the actual files on your computer without using iPhoto? Perhaps I"m missing something. Also not sure what you would do with scanned photos/negs using iPhoto.

 

[BillBingham2]

iPhoto allows you to import images into it's library. It keep the original images in one set of folders (users/username/pictures/iphoto library/year/date) updated ones are copied somewhere else. Do a search a apple support for specifics. I was able to get there once but my son has messed so much with my computer I'm either can not remember how I did it or he changed something (about an equal chance of this happening).

Importing is really easy from a DVD or a CD. File/Import, select it and go. I did it all the time for film scans.

 

[Rogier]

Don’t try to “manage” the iPhoto library like one is used to in windows.
Simply drag and drop into iPhoto and let it do its thing. Keywordig, Location and face recognition are powerful tools to organize your images and make it easy to find them. Also the description in the information field is a great place to add valuable data.
Using smart albums make it easy to organize your images.

Key thing is not to get behind in adding this data. In just 10 minutes one can add 90% of information to all the images gathered over a long weekend with the family…

With regards to the file format and size I stick to JPEG and have no problem with 12 MB filed that come from my Canon 5D or 2400 DPI scans form my medium format film.

Also one can have multiple iPhoto libraries on the same or different drives.

I used to use Aperture (currently version 3) but went back to old fashioned folder structure from where I select and edit the images and export those as JPEGs to iPhoto from where I enjoy and share them.

Hope this helps.

 

[user237428934]

The problem with iPhoto is, that you don't have a folder structure. So you can't manage files in a structure like year/month/event or something else that requires a tree structure. You import the photos in iPhoto and organize them in events. If you have a lot of events it is easy to get confused. So I don't see that you can work with an "edited" folder as you wanted.
iPhoto manages the photos in a library that is only one file. You can open the file and look inside to see how files are organized inside but NEVER change things there.
Basic photo manipulation is good but you don't have a history of changes. You can only revert to the not edited original but you can't undo single working steps.

 

[Sparrow]

I just import the draft scans for each film as an event, then name the event with the media-type/size/number (film-135-0860 or slide-135-0861 or film-120-0862)

Then file the negs in order, and let iPhoto just get on with it. The 6mp draft scans are fine for editing or interweb use, easy to find in iPhoto and iPhoto indexes the negative file.

 

[jarski]

iPhoto is nice and powerful app, but wonder how users manage their backups, also considering that they might need backup later without having iPhoto, or even a Mac ?

 

[user237428934]

iPhoto is nice and powerful app, but wonder how users manage their backups, also considering that they might need backup later without having iPhoto, or even a Mac ?

You can access you photos without iPhoto but not without a mac I think. The library file is a simple mac filesystem, that you can open via right-mouseclick-option.
If you do backup for example with time machine than it is clever enough to do incremental backup of the file so that you don't have to wait very long for the backup of a large library.

 

[Sparrow]

iPhoto is nice and powerful app, but wonder how users manage their backups, also considering that they might need backup later without having iPhoto, or even a Mac ?

Time Machine, and a 1tb remote drive, the draft CD and the original negatives, apart that no backup at all

 

[j j]

The problem with iPhoto is, that you don't have a folder structure...

iPhoto can and does create folders ordered by date.

 

[Rogier]

It depends what version of iPhoto you are on.
iPhoto 08 and newer creates a “closed” file that keeps the regular user from messing with the folder structure. Yess one can see the package content by option clicking and selecting “show package content” but it should NOT be used to organize your files. That’s how you end up with me at the Genius bar asking to fix your broken iPhoto library :bang:

One can make folders and subfolders whether or not utilizing “smart” folders. But it defeats the purpose… Just trust the keywording and utilize the tools provided in iPhoto.

iPhoto has very limited editing capabilities. That’s why approach is to only file the finished files in this app.

 

[Rogier]

iPhoto is nice and powerful app, but wonder how users manage their backups, also considering that they might need backup later without having iPhoto, or even a Mac ?

Backing up is done through Time Machine.

If you want to make a (static) back-up of your iPhoto library. Just go to

Users - User (your name) - pictures
and drag the iPhoto library to an external HD.

You can also boot iPhoto from this external stored file by holding down the Option Key while starting iPhoto. You will be presented with a Finder window to either create a new library or choose an existing one.
Pretty neat feature that also works perfect for iTunes. 😀

 

[Doug]

When it became available, I tried iPhoto... when I found that it imported/duplicated my photos into its own internal file structure, I figured I could do without. But then I already had in place a long-standing photo record-keeping and storage method.

I originally used 4x6 file cards, one for each roll of film, with all the data of interest. Later this was transferred to a FileMaker database, and that's still what I use, one record for each roll of film or logical grouping of digital shots. I use the Finder for hierarchical organizing files, a folder for each roll's scans or that same grouping of digital files. Files and folders are named according to the "roll number" which is date-based. Processed copies of the files go into folders within the roll folder.

Smaller scaled final copies all go into one big folder to be opened in a browser. There are so many of these, potentially for uploading to online galleries, that I'll often need to refer to the FileMaker database to identify the "roll" that contains a particular image or characteristic, then look there in the browser.

Photoshop has a browser feature, and so does GraphicConverter, a Mac shareware graphics editing program. I also use GC to edit scans and the TIFF proceeds of processed DNGs. I know some people find iPhoto very satisfactory, and I gather that both Aperture and Lightroom concentrate on file management... but I've got that aspect covered, I think, with FileMaker plus the Finder.

I do like the directness and simplicity of using the Finder's folder structure for this, making it easy to dive into the main "Doug's Digital" folder and find the date-numbered "roll" folder with either scanned JPEGs, or the big DNG & TIFF files to look at.

 

[Rogier]

Do you categorize all your images in filemaker?
And does the database refer only to a date/time/ or something similar or does it also display the image?

For those who would like to do a similar approach at a smaller scale there is Filemaker Bento that adds an other dimension to the existing files on your Mac.

 

[Doug]

Hi Rogier - The database doesn't show any images; it's oriented toward info on a "roll", not individual shots. I can search the database on anything recorded, including notes about subject matter, color/B&W, equipment details, film, processing info, film format, prints made/given, scanning info, etc etc. If I search the Technical field for, say, 35mm Summicron, then all rolls using that lens would be found and displayed.

The "roll" number is in the yymmddxx format with year, month, day, film code... xx = CN for color neg, CT for color transparncy, BW for black & white, and DG for digital. Then a three-digit file number is tacked on to number each file... 24th digital shot today would be named 100605DG-024, and the folder name for the files as well as the FileMaker record number would be 100605DG.

 

[Paul T.]

I am wrestling with iPhoto at the moment.

Old G4, my desktop brute, died; was given another MDD G4, but it has a slightly older operating system. Reimporting the iPhoto files has been a nightmare, even though Macs do help you echo your old file structure on a new machine. At the moment I have only blank files showing up (correct names, etc, but no picture) in iPhoto. These include all our wedding photos!. Most of my problems are to do with updating to an effectively slightly older computer. I am going to have to bite the bullet now and buy a new Mac Mini to save another two or three days messing around.

However, it's worth pointing out that the original files are all there and visible, dated by year, so it's not too hard to find the original catalogue of material.

It's an adequate filing and editing system, but really I would have thought apple should do much better. I'm not looking for Photoshop, but would be good if it had some of the capabilities of Lightroom, which I'm pretty sure I'll end up buying. Although I do now more or less understand iPhoto's filing system, which isn't entirely unlike iTunes, it does contribute to the lack of versatility of the program.

 

[user237428934]

It's an adequate filing and editing system, but really I would have thought apple should do much better. I'm not looking for Photoshop, but would be good if it had some of the capabilities of Lightroom, which I'm pretty sure I'll end up buying. Although I do now more or less understand iPhoto's filing system, which isn't entirely unlike iTunes, it does contribute to the lack of versatility of the program.

If iPhoto had more features, no one would buy Aperture anymore. Aperture is the equivalent to Lightroom.