Organizing and Filing Digital Images on a Mac: Is iPhoto powerful enough?

David Enzel , Aug 30, 2003; 07:14 p.m.

I am an amateur photographer new to digital. I probably will shoot 500 to 1,000 images a month. I use a Mac with OS X. To store and catalogue images I am using iPhoto, My question is whether iPhoto is powerful enough to store thousands of images over the years. Should I buy a third party software package to store and catalogue photos and if so which one? At the moment I find iPhoto very intuitive and easy to use. I just set up albums and use key words. I guess I'm asking whether I am overlooking functionality I will need down the road.

Responses

Bill Mitchell , Aug 30, 2003; 08:31 p.m.

I bought an eMac just for that purpose. I think it was a mistake. Mac designers just don't seem to think like photographers. iPhoto2 isn't much better than the original. Right now, Windows XP handles photos and cataloging them much better than OS-X. Maybe OS-11 will be improved.

David Enzel , Aug 30, 2003; 09:45 p.m.

Just to clarify, I like iPhoto but am not sure what features I may be missing. At the moment my digital image library is small but it is growing rapidly and I want to be well equipped to find the images I want when I want them. In other words, what is iPhoto lacking that I might find uselful in another program? I plan to stick with Mac.

The Macman , Aug 30, 2003; 10:03 p.m.

iPhoto is powerful enough but doesn't seem to be able to handle catalogs with originals found on other volumes or virtual catalogs with originals on non mounted CDs.

I use Cumulus, this is what the publishing world relies upon.

The Macman , Aug 30, 2003; 10:04 p.m.

>>>>>> Right now, Windows XP handles photos and cataloging them much better than OS-X. Maybe OS-11 will be improved.

MacOS X wasn't intended to handle photos and catalogs. Softwares running ON IT are expected to do so :-) Garnish your OS with what's necessary and the Mac becomes an unbeatable workflow powerhorse.

The Macman , Aug 30, 2003; 10:10 p.m.

>>>>>> Mac designers just don't seem to think like photographers.

Yeah, not really :) Only as much as Ferraris are built from a racing viewpoint :)

Carl Smith , Aug 30, 2003; 11:09 p.m.

I have used Cumulus in the past, and sometimes it comes packaged with things in a light version thats better than iPhoto or most other things as well. I don't know the cost of it new.

To an extent I agree, Mac doesn't think like photographers. Most of their systems come stock configured with too little RAM and then they overcharge to add more. Then again most companies do. :)

Adobe doesn't understand photographers either, Photoshop should have had better 16 bit support long ago for one thing.

Nicholas Wybolt , Aug 30, 2003; 11:26 p.m.

David,

Two recent articles that might be of interest are "How to Manage Large Image Libraries with iPhoto 2" at http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2003/06/17/iphoto2.html and "The Digital Shoebox: Organizing Images on Your Computer," that appeared in the Aug/Sep 2003 issue of Camera Arts.

You might also want to get a copy of "iPhoto 2: The Missing Manual" by Derrick Story.

-Nick

Steve Rosenblum , Aug 31, 2003; 12:04 a.m.

I would check out Q-Pict

The Macman , Aug 31, 2003; 12:26 a.m.

Cumulus is $99. Check also Portfolio from Extensis.

The Macman , Aug 31, 2003; 12:27 a.m.

neat... http://www.extensis.com/demos/portfolio/portdemo.html

Fazal Majid , Aug 31, 2003; 02:11 a.m.

The iPhoto database reportedl has scalability problems. You would be well advised to use Canto Cumulus or Extensis Portfolio.

jim Heathcott , Aug 31, 2003; 02:11 a.m.

A couple of other programs to check out for Mac:

Iview Media Pro

Disktracker

Brad - , Aug 31, 2003; 02:48 a.m.

Check out a trial version of iView Media Pro. I have thousands of images cataloged with it. You can also set up slide shows and generate very quick web page frameworks like this.

Benjamin Pierce , Aug 31, 2003; 08:30 a.m.

I found iPhoto to be quite unstable with even moderately large (couple of thousand) sets of images.

After trying several others (including Cumulus and Portfolio), I finally settled on ACDSee as the best tool for my relatively simple needs: it's pretty cheap, fast, offers convenient full-screen slideshows, allows images to be dragged around between folders easily, and doesn't crash. It doesn't do fancy cataloguing or searching.

Regards,

Benjamin

David Enzel , Aug 31, 2003; 09:07 a.m.

Thanks for all the helpful suggestions. I downloaded iView Media Pro to try it out. I'm not sure what a catalogue in iView Media compares to in iPhoto. Is it the same as an album. Or is each download a catalogue the way each download is a roll in iPhoto? Is there an instruction book if I buy the iView Media Pro? Couldn't find a help function in the software.

Thanks for your help.

Tomek Gooseberry , Aug 31, 2003; 11:00 a.m.

How about FileMaker -- any good?

Has anyone used FileMaker Pro for the purpose of cataloguing? While it's not a purpose-built software for photo-libraries, I've heard that, being a flixible database management tool, it can serve the purpose very well (including keyword search capabilities); no clue wheather it would allow to display images and to drag-and-drop them from one folder to another though. Any first-hand experience to verify its usefulness?

JMW _ , Aug 31, 2003; 11:30 a.m.

Use iView Media Pro. It's simply the best-- all the features, plenty fast and flexible. Great support for all types of metadata, and they seem to issue updates and new versions on a regular basis, unlike iPhoto.

Neil Parker , Aug 31, 2003; 12:45 p.m.

Filemaker is a great database, but I vote for Portfolio for image management. I've used it since it was called 'aldus fetch'. It has all the cataloging and keyword capability you could ask for, and it has also great 'interactivity', you can easily drag and drop files between photoshop and an html editor like Golive or Dreamweaver or other graphics software. Plus manage files and folders, build web galleries etc.

Bob Krueger , Aug 31, 2003; 12:48 p.m.

Do any of these software packages (Cumulus, Portfolio, iView Media Pro) have OS 9.X versions available? Or will the OS X versions function in 9.X as well? Some of us Mac users are still stuck comfortably in the past (I'm still using 9.1 - what the heck, it's doing what I need done, it isn't crashing, and Canon and its drivers can't seem to keep up with current Macintosh operating systems anyway).

Brad - , Aug 31, 2003; 01:01 p.m.

Bob, iView also works in OS-9 (which I use at home, OSX at work). It's rock solid, been using it for two years.

Neil Parker , Aug 31, 2003; 01:21 p.m.

Portfolio 6.01 works w/ OS 8.6-9.2.2, and Portfolio 6.12 is for OSX. I was just noticing on the Portfolio web site that they now have a 'photo raw' filter that lets you catalog raw camera files from high end DSLRs.

Portfolio is pricy though, $200 -ouch! Which is why I haven't upgrade from vers 3 yet!

David Enzel , Oct 22, 2003; 05:43 p.m.

I just wanted to thank everyone for your help. I bought iView Media Pro and I really like it. Just what I needed and their tech support is very helpful. A very powerful program.

Notify me of Responses