MacInTouch Amazon link...

Apple photo software/alternatives

Channels
Apple, Troubleshooting, Products, Questions
I'll be doing more extensive field testing tomorrow on a hike.
Halfway through today's outing I noticed my Imaging Edge Mobile app wasn't connected to my Sony [RX10]. iOS Settings > Bluetooth also showed the camera as Not Connected.

The camera Bluetooth was turned on. No amount of fussing with the app made it connect.

I turned off "control with app" on the camera and clicked connect in iOS Bluetooth. The camera connected but still took about a minute before the app location service connected.

I'm not sure if it was the "control with app" feature that prevented the location Bluetooth function from working (probably), or if it just didn't like the ~12 hours since the last connection.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
Focus on the difference between Folders (just an analog to the Finder structure), and Projects, Albums, and Smart Albums. Those three are your main tools. I can offer more if anyone wants.
I'd be interested in hearing about how you use those organizational tools.
 


I guess I'm different from many of you on the photos things. I don't use Apple Photos and never used iPhoto for anything other than random slide shows from time to time. I use Aperture for its printing capabilities, as I do a lot of middle school sports packages. I haven't found anything that will gang-print wallets, which I like to do for the kids.

I don't shoot a lot of raw, but I have Capture One Pro to handle the raw processing when needed. It has a learning curve, but I know enough to do what I need to do with it. I'm still using Photoshop 6 to do what I need with it. I have my own way of keeping up with photos, so I don't depend on the catalog feature of Capture One Pro or with Aperture.
 


A reminder that the excellent, fast cataloging application NeoFinder can create catalogs of drives, folders, etc. I use it to catalog my image files.

I’m a satisfied user since back when it was CDFinder and I was using it to catalog CD and DVD media backups from various Power Macs running Mac OS 8 and 9.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
A reminder that the excellent, fast cataloging application NeoFinder can create catalogs of drives, folders, etc. I use it to catalog my image files.
Thanks for mentioning it. There's a new version just out, too:
Norbert M. Doerner said:
New features and enhancements of NeoFinder 7.4:
• Catalogs “People" fields in Adobe XMP and IPTC data (and data written by Picasa and Mylio)​
• Search for People metadata, and add them to photos and movies in the XMP Editor​
Web Gallery now uses beautiful HTML templates, and you can even design your own! Or use your existing iView Media Pro gallery templates (with some small changes)​
• AutoTags: Use ML [machine learning] scene detector engines to automatically detect scenes and items in thumbnails. NeoFinder currently offers two different engines, more to come. This requires macOS 10.13 or newer​
• AutoTags: Search a catalog for thumbnails with a particular automatically detected Tag​
• AutoTags Inspector shows the detected Tags, and allows you to place them in the file directly​
• NeoFinder reads iView MediaPro CatalogSets from XMP records and builds albums and album folders for these automatically during cataloging​
• Massively improved handing of XMP keywords for multiple selected files. NeoFinder now​
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
Just for curiosity and the sake of discussion, is anyone here a software coroner with knowledge of what other "technical reasons" will keep Aperture from running in macOS 10.15?
I don't know, but I'd guess that Aperture relies on graphics libraries that Apple is eliminating for one reason or another.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
(By contrast, I didn't find Aperture's model natural or easy to use, personally...)
But I did find its photo book printing to be superb for two books that I created and printed from the program. Unfortunately, Apple abandoned both that service and Aperture itself (killing Aperture before I had a chance to upgrade to Version 2).
 


Losing Aperture is a big deal for me - I've never had a single software change be so disruptive. It also removes what is probably the single "Mac only" tie in my home workflow. Anyway, moving forward, here are my rough - not yet fully planned - next steps.

1) Luminar 3 is likely to be my main solution going forward, but I'm not yet certain. Lightroom just doesn't work for me. ACDSee Pro would possibly/conceivably be a solution for me - I like the software overall, but I am not comfortable with the company's history of multiple upgrades, one of which in the past broke and stopped working. I hope my higher faith in Luminar is justified. I have yet to find the best/equivalent process for Aperture's 'copy/pasting adjustments' - at least in terms of ease of use. There are a lot of related capabilities I need to figure out, like uploading to Flickr, that I still use in Aperture.

2) Transition from Aperture (existing photos): I have experimented with and will likely export my projects and folders (edited photos) to jpeg exports in structured folders that correspond to my Aperture libraries and projects. This will basically let me browse the 'final version' pictures in any program. It will be less than ideal for cases where I want to go back and edit from the originals, but hopefully infrequently enough that it will be manageable.

3) It likely won't be practical to go back and re-process the originals (mostly RAW) from scratch. I may do that for more recent libraries, partly as a learning process.

4) I have one older MacBook Pro that can't run Mojave even, so will have that as a backup to run Aperture when needed.

5) I will never, ever again trust a program to run imports and use its own library / file structure on its own. I'll revert to using my own folder structure - it may be oldschool but I won't be stranded again. For the same reason, I won't use Photos for anything except phone snaps, and actually that's not the primary library even for those. Everything on cameras will be kept separate. Likewise, this upcoming new Mac system is really the first that I'll likely delay 'up'grading to - for quite some time at first, possibly as long as possible or even indefinitely. My next Mac purchase is also going to be pushed out until I'm settled and comfortable - and I'm not even sure I'll be buying any more in future.
 


I've been following this topic since Aperture came out, as it seemed like a grown-up version of iPhoto, but with the one feature I'm looking for: storage of photos onto a server volume, but its metadata and previews would be local, leaving precious disk space available. At the time, I was unemployed, and when able to purchase Aperture, it became unavailable.

I'm not necessarily looking for a 64-bit app, as this MacBook Pro will stay on High Sierra until it gives out. Will Lightroom store the high-res images onto a server? I'd be fine with Photos if it will not store high-res images locally. I prefer images to stay in my LAN, so iCloud storage isn't my preference.
 


I've been worrying about Lightroom for quite a while (since they went subscription-only) and about a year ago decided to give Luminar a go. The concern is multiplied by Mojave telling me Lightroom (6.1.4) won't run in [macOS 10.15]. They've just released Luminar version 3.1. Point it at your folder structure (the folders holding your images), and it identifies all the images therein and presents them to you with a filmstrip down the left-hand side of the screen (leaving more space than with a filmstrip at the bottom, plus Lightroom-like access to the the folder structure. So you can get at stuff. It will import new images from media.

It's different enough from Lightroom that it takes some learning, but my standard workflow with new images is: apply lens corrections; set white balance; slide the "AI image improver" until I like the result. The result's generally pretty good.

Niggles: you apparently can't tell the thing to apply lens corrections on import or when an image is first encountered.

Bottom line: give it a try. It's cheap enough and has a free trial period.
It has promise, but it’s painfully slow. And it lacks lift and stamp, and in the latest release they actually took away the ability to copy a crop and apply it to another image. Lots of poor UI decisions. For example, if you crop and select a ratio like 4:5, the next time you crop, you have to set it again, resulting in tons of unnecessary clicks. Aperture was so nice....
 


I'd be fine with Photos if it will not store high-res images locally. I prefer images to stay in my LAN, so iCloud storage isn't my preference.
Photos doesn't force your library to be on the local volume.

If you hold down Option when launching Photos, you will see a dialog letting you select a library, giving you the option to create new ones as well. (See also this Cnet article). You can create libraries on any storage volume you like, including remote ones. For subsequent (non-Option) launches of Photos, it will open using whichever library you were last working with.

You can also launch Photos with a specific library by double-clicking the library in the Finder.

If you like, you can drag/drop to copy/move a library to another location as well.

There are only two issues I know of when using multiple libraries with Photos. One is that there doesn't seem to be any easy/good way to move/copy photos between libraries. You can export/import them, but that is slow, uses a lot of disk space, and will likely lose your editing history.

The other is that only one library (the "system library") can be used for iCloud services like the Photo Library, shared albums and Photo Stream. You can select which library this is, but only one can be selected at a time. To select which library should be the system library, open it in Photos (see above) and then use the Preferences window to make that library the system one.
 


There are only two issues I know of when using multiple libraries with Photos. One is that there doesn't seem to be any easy/good way to move/copy photos between libraries. You can export/import them, but that is slow, uses a lot of disk space, and will likely lose your editing history.
Actually, copying between multiple libraries is easy with PowerPhotos, from FatCat Software. Their previous software, iPhoto Library Manager, works really well with iPhoto. I continue to use iPhoto so the situation with PhotoStream isn't a problem.

PowerPhotos also lets you copy, merge, split, search, and find duplicates. It also will help you migrate from iPhoto and Aperture. PowerPhotos is $29.95, but there is an unlimited trial version that allows you to do most activities with limits (no merge/split, limit on copies, etc).

I have no connection with FatCat but am a long time user of iPhoto Library Manager (and the license for one of the apps is valid for the other).
 


DvW

It has promise, but it’s painfully slow. And it lacks lift and stamp, and in the latest release they actually took away the ability to copy a crop and apply it to another image. Lots of poor UI decisions. For example, if you crop and select a ratio like 4:5, the next time you crop, you have to set it again, resulting in tons of unnecessary clicks. Aperture was so nice....
I ran into a serious problem with the Luminar 3.1 release. And, if you look at their user forum, a lot of other people did, too. In a nutshell, it failed to update previous catalogs, so all previous edits were lost.

Also, the DAM is very rudimentary at this point. I love its editing methodology, but at this point, committing to it as an Aperture replacement would be an act of faith in its future....
 


It's definitely dependent on personal preferences and workflows, and the good news is that you have choices!
Sessions workflow, much like shooting tethered, may work best for those whose imports are closely tied to a particular project, job or client shoot. The entire project can indeed by handled as a whole.

For those whose shooting tends to cross many different subjects over time and across different import sessions, catalog workflow will likely be better.

Regardless, it's the best strategy to be sure that originals are located outside of the catalog file (same as with Aperture) to ensure access and direct backup, no matter what needs are in the future.

Capture One is all about choices and a staggering amount of customizable options. You can choose subscription or full license, different workflow options, complete customizing of the interface and tools, precision level of edit functions like color, keyboard shortcuts, and more. There's nothing dumbed-down about this program. Unlike certain others.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
I have yet to find the best/equivalent process for Aperture's 'copy/pasting adjustments' - at least in terms of ease of use.
FYI:
Capture One User Guide said:
Copying Styles between images
Styles can be quickly copied between images using the usual copy and apply commands (i.e., from the contextual menu, the adjustments menu, and from the copy icon in the tool bar). In addition to applying Styles, any individual adjustments made to the primary variant are also copied to the selected images.
Re:
2) Transition from Aperture (existing photos): I have experimented with and will likely export my projects and folders (edited photos) to jpeg exports in structured folders that correspond to my Aperture libraries and projects. This will basically let me browse the 'final version' pictures in any program. It will be less than ideal for cases where I want to go back and edit from the originals, but hopefully infrequently enough that it will be manageable.
3) It likely won't be practical to go back and re-process the originals (mostly RAW) from scratch. I may do that for more recent libraries, partly as a learning process.
This may be helpful:
Capture One User Guide said:
Importing catalogs from Media Pro, Lightroom or Aperture
In addition to the typical workflow of importing image files from various sources, you can use a Capture One Catalog to import previously made catalogs of images from third-party applications. A Capture One Catalog can import Lightroom Catalogs and Aperture Libraries, albeit with some restrictions. Images are not moved or duplicated but referenced in their original location, including any images stored physically inside the Aperture Library. You can also import Phase One Media Pro and Media Pro SE catalogs.
 


But I did find its photo book printing to be superb for two books that I created and printed from the program. Unfortunately, Apple abandoned both that service and Aperture itself (killing Aperture before I had a chance to upgrade to Version 2).
Podcaster Allison Sheridan is a satisfied customer:
Mimeo Photos said:
What is Mimeo Photos?
Mimeo Photos is a powerful new extension for creating photobooks, cards, and calendars within Photos for macOS.
 


But I did find its photo book printing to be superb for two books that I created and printed from the program. Unfortunately, Apple abandoned both that service and Aperture itself (killing Aperture before I had a chance to upgrade to Version 2).
I totally agree. With Aperture, I could create custom template pages, which I then used in multiple projects. After Aperture's book printing demise, I moved to Apple Photos book printing, which was of comparable quality but without the ability to customize templates. With Apple no longer supporting photo printing, I have moved to Motif as a plug-in to Apple Photos. I don't find its templates as nice as Apple Photos (too much blank space between photos for my taste,) but it works well enough, is being actively developed, is easy to use, and output quality is comparable to what Apple provided. As I understand it, the actual printing is done by the same company.

Since I do all my photography work in Capture One Pro, I just select the set of images I might use in the book, export them as high quality jpegs, and then import them into Apple Photos. Metadata (keywords, ratings, EXIF) come across, so I can search (using smart albums) in Apple Photos if necessary.
 


What blows my mind is that there's still not a single multi-user, shared photo library solution for keeping photos on a home server and having all your family members have access to use them, edit them, sync their photos, and so on. I want all my family members' cameras' photos to automatically sync to a central server, tagged by who took them, and let us manage them all together, see each other's pictures (possibly with the ability to mark some private but that's optional), that kind of stuff.

But there are no solutions like that, and that confuses me, because there are so many families with multiple cameras across multiple family members who would like to be able to do exactly this, or something very much like it.
 


Interestingly, I have had the opposite experience. After a fairly short startup period - using the 30-day demo, manual and available tutorials - I have found Capture One compelling and encouraging to do more photography with its excellent results, responsive performance and organizational features, all of which have made it worth the puchase price for me. (By contrast, I didn't find Aperture's model natural or easy to use, personally, although you and others obviously feel differently.)
Aperture was always fun to use [for me, with] a very elegant UI/UX design that just kept me going. Capture One is very rewarding when you're doing edits, enjoyable and efficient. Where it gets clunky is having to continually switch tabbed panels, unless you go through the extra steps of moving them to a second monitor. And the import process, at least for what I've found to be a good workable solution, is more convoluted than Aperture. But Capture One can run rings around any other program for speed of processing and image quality
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
Capture One is very rewarding when you're doing edits, enjoyable and efficient. Where it gets clunky is having to continually switch tabbed panels, unless you go through the extra steps of moving them to a second monitor.
I don't understand your issue here, as switching between tabs is a trivial click, and they seem logical in what each does: Library, Color, Lens Correction, Exposure, Details, etc.

Or, if you're talking about the panels within a tab, it's trivial to rearrange them by dragging, to put your most important ones conveniently at hand, and to hide or show details for each one. I suppose if you're working with a small screen (e.g. on a small laptop), that might be a bit of a bother, but that's true for most photo editing apps.
 


Where it gets clunky is having to continually switch tabbed panels, unless you go through the extra steps of moving them to a second monitor. And the import process, at least for what I've found to be a good workable solution, is more convoluted than Aperture.
I agree with both points. My pet hate with Capture One is the black import window - black window on black window making it almost impossible to differentiate the import window from the main window. Truly stupid design. Why not just two different shades of grey?
 


[Luminar] has promise, but it’s painfully slow. And it lacks lift and stamp, and in the latest release they actually took away the ability to copy a crop and apply it to another image. Lots of poor UI decisions. For example, if you crop and select a ratio like 4:5, the next time you crop, you have to set it again, resulting in tons of unnecessary clicks. Aperture was so nice....
It was painfully slow but has improved markedly. Seems about as quick as Lightroom moving from one 42Mp RAW image to the next (not blindingly quick) and about the same on corrections. But most certainly, the 'fine structure' of the interface is... annoying.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
I agree with both points. My pet hate with Capture One is the black import window - black window on black window making it almost impossible to differentiate the import window from the main window. Truly stupid design. Why not just two different shades of grey?
You can change the background in Preferences > Appearance to your choice of lighter shades (including white).
 


What blows my mind is that there's still not a single multi-user, shared photo library solution for keeping photos on a home server and having all your family members have access to use them, edit them, sync their photos, and so on. I want all my family members' cameras' photos to automatically sync to a central server, tagged by who took them, and let us manage them all together, see each other's pictures (possibly with the ability to mark some private but that's optional), that kind of stuff.

But there are no solutions like that, and that confuses me, because there are so many families with multiple cameras across multiple family members who would like to be able to do exactly this, or something very much like it.
I completely agree! And the closest thing Apple once offered, iPhoto library “sharing” (the ability to access someone else’s iPhoto library and view or copy photos) was unceremoniously dropped.

I know a few people who use Plex servers, but to my ears, it sounds like the owners have to do a lot of work and it still doesn’t do the “simple” function Eric describes.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
What blows my mind is that there's still not a single multi-user, shared photo library solution for keeping photos on a home server and having all your family members have access to use them, edit them, sync their photos, and so on. I want all my family members' cameras' photos to automatically sync to a central server, tagged by who took them, and let us manage them all together, see each other's pictures (possibly with the ability to mark some private but that's optional), that kind of stuff.
I completely agree! And the closest thing Apple once offered, iPhoto library “sharing” (the ability to access someone else’s iPhoto library and view or copy photos) was unceremoniously dropped.
Apple obviously wants everyone to Use Shared Albums in Photos, one of its high-priority and profitable services businesses.

I'm also very interested in finding a family sharing solution that maintains privacy and security controls (users, groups, and permissions) and doesn't turn over all the content to third parties (e.g. Facebook et al) for their AI/data/profit mining, but, hopefully, also could serve as a backup system. I haven't gotten very far in this project, but here are a few potential platforms/systems:
I'd be very interested in hearing other ideas.
 


Apple obviously wants everyone to use its Use Shared Albums in Photos - one of its high-priority and profitable services businesses.

I'm also very interested in finding a family sharing solution that maintains privacy and security controls (users, groups, and permissions) and doesn't turn over all the content to third parties (e.g. Facebook et al) for their AI/data/profit mining, but, hopefully, also could serve as a backup system. I haven't gotten very far in this project, but here are a few potential platforms/systems:
I'd be very interested in hearing other ideas.
I was wondering whether a source code or version control system could be adapted to this purpose.

I know there are systems for code, binary files and data, written and other productivity documents, publishing, archiving, and so on. And version control applies to edited photos, too, permitting rollback and access to un- and partially edited versions, and even branches and “builds” for different purposes and projects.
 


I'm also very interested in finding a family sharing solution that maintains privacy and security controls (users, groups, and permissions) and doesn't turn over all the content to third parties
The past couple of months I've been using a Synology to share photos amongst family. The Photo Station package isn't perfect but does allow password-protected web galleries, full-size downloads and access for users to upload images. It's reasonably fast and trivially easy to set up.

Clearly, you'll need a solid Internet connection to make it available, but it's certainly worth looking at. I suspect most NASes would have a similar package.

Synology also have a package called Moments, but I've never tried it, as the reviews have generally been poor. I believe it's more an iPhoto/DAM-type thing for personal management rather than family sharing (although it may be able to share as well).
 


I'm also very interested in finding a family (photo) sharing solution that maintains privacy and security controls (users, groups, and permissions) and doesn't turn over all the content to third parties (e.g. Facebook et al) for their AI/data/profit mining, but, hopefully, also could serve as a backup system.
Ric, I just tried to share an album of photos to you from my Synology at home. Did not go well. I created the album, added some beautiful photos, then chose the link to share. (That's while I'm logged in to the remote Synology and know it works.) It spun until it timed out, though at one point Firefox asked if I wanted to authorize Adobe Flash. I couldn't find on the Synology site if Flash is required to view shared photo albums but presume the request didn't pop up out of nowhere.

I am using my home Synology to store my photos. I've extracted them from the old iPhotos blobs, old Windows backups, and my newer time-staged Carbon Copy Cloner Mac clones, and I store them in the Synology Photo Station application (though it is possible to just stash them in folders accessible by Finder or another file manager),

That part works well. Synology does allow user accounts and their management through permissions. I'm just not real sure it will work well for a family sharing service. You'd have to really trust people you "let in" not to inadvertently blow the whole schema up - that is, if you want to let them save, view, copy, etc.

I'll try setting up a user with limited access to photos on my Synology and see what kind of trouble I can cause. What I'd suggest at this point is to keep Synology as a backup possibility, in case you can't find another.

Synology also offers "Moments," a Google Photos-like application for mobile devices. I haven't installed it to test, since reviews on Google Play for Android are rather discouraging.

Long ago and far away I used the Mac application, Syncovery, to stash encrypted photo backups in Amazon's S3 cloud. It certainly wasn't family friendly, but it was inexpensive.

SmugMug? I know some serious photographers who use it. Just skimmed through their privacy policy. Seems as benign as a cloud service is likely to get but not as private as keeping your photos on your own systems.
 


Amazon disclaimer:
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Latest posts