Same for Photos, although Photos can either reference like Lr (turn off the "copy into." option in its prefs, or store in a package, which is just a date-based hierarchy pretty much. It references all images and never changes the files themselves except for metadata appended thereon or in sidecars. You need to realize that Lr is a parametric image editor (PIE) and that it keeps all the changes in a database for the purpose of being able to quickly change images, have lots of iterations of them without saving/reproducing copies, and to publish and maintain a continuing relationship with the images. For those of us who worked with light tables and developing and then printing/publishing (now exporting), it's more intuitive. I think that whether you get used to Lr depends a bit more on photo experience than computer experience. More evidence that what is intuitive for one person is a complete fail for someone else (I hated Picasa.sorry). I had a chuckle at Lr being a bad user interface, but that you liked Picasa. Happy to spend some money, but don't want to break the bank.Īny suggestions would be gratefully received. I do have and use Afinity, which is fine for editing one or two photos, but not got for going through a few hundred photos. I don't really need lots of artistic features, just file management and basic editing (crop, straighten, light, sharpen etc.), and want to be able to import the RAW files and save as JPG, or import JPG and save/replace them. After Shot Pro 3: Similar to Lightroom, the process of having to export, not save.Plus there's no 'save' button - it's all about exporting, and it's a real pain Plus others in my house who are less experienced in IT use it, and it just seems far to complex. I just don't have the time (nor the inclination) to do so. Lightroom: I understand a lot of people like this, but since I work in software myself, I strongly believe that if you have to sit through >3 hours of introductory videos to 'learn how to use it' then it's poorly designed.Plus it's a single point of failure, and I've spent many hours fixing a relative's broken store This is an issue as for me, JPGs are usually my final output, which can be easily shared, emailed, put on other devices etc. Apple Photos: Strong dislike, main reason is because it stores all the data in one large repository.My overly critical view of some of the competition are: I've looked at some alternatives, but have so far drawn a blank. Google no longer support it, and I'm now trialing MacOS High Sierra, and it's sadly a little unreliable (particularly around saving files), so I'm looking for alternatives. I value it's simplicity, file management, the fact there's no proprietary databases created etc. As for retrieving pictures out of it's filing system without using iPhoto, Forget about it.I've been an avid user of Picasa (Mac edition) for many years. It's just flawed software engineering and iPhoto should be overhauled entirely to rectify it. You load in too many Pictures, even a full blown G5 can end up struggling to efficiently render access to it's own thumbnail library. IPhoto is great for showcasing a moderate selection of your favourite photos, but I would never recommend it for archiving purposes. Obviously though, this is how Picasa works so effectively and probably worth the potential inconvenience. The only issue I find bothersome with Picasa is that its thumbnail database is kept in order by invasively leaving tracking files in every folder on your Hard Drive/s that contains a picture image. Picasa is simply excellent FREE software, and I'm sad to say Windows users do have a one-up against us with this program. She now loves her PB, but refuses to transfer her archive of photo's until a Picasa for Mac (or equivalent) becomes available, I can't blame her. I've recently converted my mother to a Mac from Windows - well, mostly. iTunes allows this type of option with MP3 Libraries so why not iPhoto? The problem could simply be solved if iPhoto gave you an option not to import pictures into it's filing system, but rather keep them where they are. iPhoto's nonsensical filing system is just ridiculous. This is precisely the concern I have had too, ever since iPhoto was introduced.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |