Page 1 of 2

Photos versus iPhoto

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:49 am
by JerryFreilich
I am disappointed, dismayed, and frankly, grossed out, by Apple's new Photos app. I think it's yet another inexplicable example of dumbing down to the point of complete uselessness. Whoever designed it must have been drunk, incompetent, or actually psychopathic. I'm trying to be polite about this but maybe some day over a few beers I'll tell you what I REALLY think about it.

At any rate, following a post on a website somewhere, I learned that iPhoto is not removed when Photos is installed with Yosemite. So on my MacBook Pro, I very quietly went about opening iPhoto and bringing in all the most recent pictures that had been in Photos... and I've gone back to using the older software which I like very much.

But here's the curious thing. For whatever reason... on my home iMac I see that iPhoto is still in the Applications Folder, but it is grayed out and covered by the circle/slash symbol meaning it is unavailable. When I click on it, a box comes up saying that I need to have "the most current version" of iPhoto. There is a button that says "Find latest version" (or words to that effect). But then it goes to the Applications Store which says that no version of iPhoto is available. So I cannot use if on the iMac. Why not?

I am puzzled by WHY my MacBook Pro had a perfectly current version of iPhoto which continues to work perfectly. Whereas the iMac has some issue with opening iPhoto. I thought that both machines were current and up to date and don't really see why either one should be different from the other. So that's the first question.

The second question... is there any source anywhere where you can download iPhoto? Could I actually COPY the app from my MacBook Pro to the iMac?

Re: Photos versus iPhoto

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 12:54 pm
by Richard Serkes
Amen to that, Brother Jerry. Photos is just awful! I really can't help you with a source for iPhoto but I can tell you two things.

First, when you save photos to Photos they also appear in iPhoto. In fact, if you create an album of new photos in Photos the album also appears in iPhoto.

Second, if you want to use Aperture (as I do) and you save your new photos to Aperture to can't import them to Photos without manually loading them into a desktop temp album and them manually importing them to Photos. However, I just discovered that loading new photos in Photos will allow you to use the SHARE feature in Photos to automatically send the new photos to Aperture. Why go to all this trouble, you ask? Because I want to use Aperture but I'm afraid that there will come a time when I won't have a choice and all my photos in the Aperture library won't be easily transferrable to whatever Apple has in store for us.

I understand why Apple wants the photography applications on both the Mac OS and iOS to be as similar as possible because the great unwashed wants things as simple as possible. But I defy anyone to do serious cataloguing and editing on an iPhone so why should they be the same? I would have updated iPhoto (it needs it) for most users and continued to update and support Aperture for those who want/need a little more. Apple has abandoned Aperture.

Re: Photos versus iPhoto

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 3:10 pm
by Stephen Hart
Jerry, do your two Macs have different operating systems?
I'm using Yosemite (not the beta) and iPhoto 9.6.1 works fine. (Not that I use it. I've been using Aperture for years.)

Installing Photos doesn't delete anything, nor does it prevent you from carrying on just as you have.

Since Photos happily imports Aperture or iPhoto libraries, I can't see any reason not to keep using your old software (I'm still using Aperture) and then just start fresh if you want to switch to Photos.

The maker of iPhoto Library Manager is paying attention, and may well have a way to consolidate various libraries.

Note that if you import to Photos (and that includes shared Photos slideshows), you will have to export those photos to Aperture or iPhoto before starting over.

What I've seen is that users of Aperture will be disappointed with Photos (mostly because of the metadata handling and some missing editing tools) but users of iPhoto will be happy. What's missing for your uses?

Maybe what you're searching for is just the right word: Verschlimmbessert, something simultaneously improving and getting worse.

Re: Photos versus iPhoto

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 3:35 pm
by Richard Serkes
Ooooooo, cool new word.

Re: Photos versus iPhoto

Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 10:33 am
by Jay Cline
Photos is an entry level app. I use it because I'm too frugal to pay for Lightroom and I do all my editing in CS5 Photoshop.

If you are a serious photographer you should be using Adobe Lightroom. I'm hoping Apple updates the Photos app with serious editing tools to be more like the recently retired Aperture. Not sure why Apple retired Aperture, maybe they want Lightroom to be successful on the Mac. Never run out of business a company that made you successful and that can make you more successful.
Awaiting announcements at WWDC 2015 of 10.11

Make the move from Aperture to Lightroom for only $9.99 a month ... tcher.html

Re: Photos versus iPhoto

Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 4:25 pm
by Stephen Hart
If you are a serious photographer you should be using Adobe Lightroom. I'm hoping Apple updates the Photos app with serious editing tools to be more like the recently retired Aperture. Not sure why Apple retired Aperture, maybe they want Lightroom to be successful on the Mac. Never run out of business a company that made you successful and that can make you more successful.
From my reading of Macintouch and other postings, I gather that Lightroom is, er, lightweight on database functions--people seem to like it less than Aperture for database and organization--and mostly praised for channeling Photoshop photo editing tools (obviously). Note that if you switch to Lightroom, you will have paid as much as Aperture cost (past tense) in 8 months. Then twice as much 8 months later... ad infinitum.

(I say this as a CC subscriber, for the moment at least. It'll take two years for me to pay Adobe as much as I paid for CS 6, then I can revisit the decision. I also use Dreamweaver a lot.)

What editing tools do you think Apple should add to Photos? It has much of what Aperture has--you can add some tools to the list--and much more than what iPhoto has. Furthermore, it's built on a new foundation, with the programmers fully aware that people will have libraries of tens of thousands of originals (or more). When Aperture debuted, that figure was an order of magnitude smaller.

All that said, I agree that Apple's intention was not to replace Aperture, but to replace iPhoto. The replacement for Aperture, when that's necessary, may well be Lightroom, but we would probably lose something in the transition. (For me, that would be extensive text notes on thousands of photos.)

I use Aperture only for light photo editing: cropping, shadow/highlight, exposure, white balance, etc. Photos has all that and more. Anything requiring more finesse goes to Photoshop. And there are much less expensive alternatives to Photoshop now.

So my thought is that if Aperture won't work in the next version of OS X, and I just have to upgrade the OS, I'll use Photos and Photoshop while evaluating alternatives for both.

Re: Photos versus iPhoto

Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2015 12:34 pm
by macnikon211
I just looked on eBay. You can always buy old apple software there. I saw several auctions for iLife which contain older editions of iPhoto. You can usually pick up install discs for older operating system there, too. 12:330pm June 25, 2015

Re: Photos versus iPhoto

Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2015 9:04 am
by Stephen Hart
I read on Macintouch today that two full-fledged photo editing apps now have plugins for Photos. This is so you can use them as external editors like you can in Aperture (and iPhoto, I think).

Affinity looks pretty slick, but I haven't tested it.

macphun has FX Photo Studio and some other filtering and touchup apps with plugins for Photos. ... fgodAsoEqA

Re: Photos versus iPhoto

Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:44 pm
by JerryFreilich
Continuing in the quest to understand Photos (and its complicated and incomprehensible relation with "The Cloud") I noted this series of questions on today's Macintouch. Here is a link to the whole topic: ... d04jan2016

But if you think you understand these things, have a look at these questions. I confess that I don't understand ANY of this!!!!

Item #220966
Joe M
I'm usually pretty good with figuring out these things, but Apple "Photos" has me stumped. Am hoping someone the savvy folks here can explain how this all works. My image library was originally transferred from Aperture (I know... just haven't gotten around to finding a good replacement, and I don't want to lock in with Adobe on this).
My Photos problem revolves around workflow and where pictures come from/go to. At the moment I am sorting through dozens of duplicate images. Images taken with my "real" camera are not a problem. It is only a problem with iPhone photos. The various sharing scenarios are a bit convoluted.
I have "My Photo Stream" and "iCloud Photo Sharing" turned On. iCloud Photo library is Off.
So I take a photo with my iPhone. It appears in the album "Camera Roll." It also appears in the album "Photo Stream." The same photo also shows up in the desktop version of Photos. Seems simple, but here are the questions:
1. Does that transfer from iOS to desktop take place without needing to launch Photos (desktop)?
2. Does the full size file transfer from iOS to desktop, or is it a reduced size file?
3. The transferred photo appears in the "My Photo Stream" section of the desktop app. Does the actual file now live in my desktop library? Or does it live in the "cloud?" If I delete it from the "My Photo Stream" album on the desktop, is the _file_ deleted? Or just the reference to that file in the stream album? Does the same apply when deleting the file on an iOS device? (i.e. if I delete a stream photo on an iOS device, is the actual file deleted from all devices, including the desktop library?)
4. If I drag a file from the from "My Photo Stream" on the desktop to another album on the desktop it now resides in both albums (as a reference) - as expected. Does subsequently removing from the photo stream affect it in any way?
5. Importing photos (created from outside the "Photos" ecosystem) to the desktop app sometimes adds them to the photo stream. This has happened on some recent photos imported as files from the desktop (as opposed to an SD card). Why did these photos end up in the stream and not others imported in the same way? How can I stop (or at least control) this behavior?
6. Similar questions about the "shared" items section. All photos in a shared album are seen by all those sharing the album - understood. However, where are the actual files? Are physical copies in my desktop library? Do they get permanently deleted if someone else deletes from their version of the share? Does that affect only the photos they shared or any photo in that shared album?
7. Duplicates - in addition to duplicates seemingly created by my misunderstanding of the above, there are other duplicates. Many files are identical, but have different names. One copy will have a sequential name (i.e. IMG_4450.jpg" and another will be named by date (2015-04-30 14.55.43.jpg). Aside from the name, they are the same file. What am I doing wrong to make this happen? I have 3, 4 and sometimes more duplicates for some of these.
Any help as to how all this is supposed to work is much appreciated.

Re: Photos versus iPhoto

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2016 8:02 am
by Stephen Hart
Over the holidays, my son set up iCloud photos in Aperture so he could show us a slideshow. Turned out he didn't need that, and I later turned it all off in Aperture. The only downside we could see was that iCloud sucked up a lot of bandwidth uploading images. That stopped once I turned it off.

I haven't gone through the whole list of questions, but it looks like there's some confusion between what in Aperture is called Projects (like Finder folders with files in them) and Albums (like Finder folders with only aliases in them). That may be where the "duplicates" come from. Of course, there are various scenarios where you can get actual duplicates of original files. That's always been the case, and is why iPhoto Library Manager and Duplicate Anhilator exist.

I haven't tested, but I'd assume that if you rely on iCloud to transfer photos from your iPhone to your Mac, you'll get original files. That's good and bad. The bad is that you're moving big files to iCloud and from iCloud.

My thought is that very few people who take a lot of images will want iCloud to contain all of them. Sharing a subset of photos with select friends seems like a good idea.

BTW, as far as I've read, Photos doesn't require iCloud syncing. You can proceed in Photos just as you have in iPhoto copying images from your camera(s) and iPhone(s) to Photos. I have an album (aliases) dedicated to images I want copied back to my iPhone, and that gets updated each time I sync.