[kman42]

Did anyone get a chance to play with it? How was the performance?

kman

[Axo1ot1]

slow as all hell

[TC]

Read this:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/2567

[mitchell_pgh]

I just don't get it... What is it doing that makes the app so slow. Isn't it basically a web browser for more file types?

I can't wait to get my hands on iPhoto 2, and yes, I use it as my digital shoebox of choice, but I still think it's VERY slow.

Than again, I guess you don't need raw speed.

Just my 2¢

[mbryda]

Doesn't make sense - iPhoto is a HUGE memory hog, and that's where the performance hit comes from. On launch it takes like 64MB and goes up and down like crazy - I've seen it at over 300MB of RAM browsing the library. That's INSANE for what it does.

We should all write Apple and tell them this - I know I have, but maybe they don't know the extent to which it sucks memory....

[mattmarshall]

can you share libraries with different users in iPhoto2?

[laxthxdude]

Consider the files that its using (an average 500K a picture) times the number of pictures (Say 500), thats about 250MB of pictures your asking iPhoto to chew through. Add in thumbnails, dynamic resizing of the thumbnails, etc. and its not hard to see what it takes some resources to keep iPhoto going. The only thing they can probably do is send the graphics though the OpenGL pipe line, which maybe they already are doing??? All I know is open more than 10-15 or so decent size pictures on my Dell P4 2.4Ghz machine with 512MB and it starts churning and comes to a crawl.

Use my iMac 800 with 500 photos with 768MB and it goes pretty well.

All in all, I think Apple did pretty well with the performance. About all you can do is add more RAM or archive to DVD or CD. With 2, this will be a single click, so it should be a piece of cake!

[TC]

I wish that Apple had beaten Adobe to the interface they used for Abode Photoshop Album.

The way you can choose ranges of dates or look at a specific date is fantastic. It also allows you to leave your files organised as you want.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/adob...asp#findphotos

I don't understand why Apple didn't leave files in their original position and just store away thumbnails in their folder structure. They could then store away originals if an image gets modified but not before.

I think the slow speed of iPhoto has a lot to do with the live resizing they use. I'm sure if they just displayed a fixed size of thumbnail it would be a lot faster. At the larger sizes it must be scaling the original file and not using the thumnail.

[::maroma::]

Originally posted by laxthxdude:
Consider the files that its using (an average 500K a picture) times the number of pictures (Say 500), thats about 250MB of pictures your asking iPhoto to chew through. Add in thumbnails, dynamic resizing of the thumbnails, etc. and its not hard to see what it takes some resources to keep iPhoto going. The only thing they can probably do is send the graphics though the OpenGL pipe line, which maybe they already are doing??? All I know is open more than 10-15 or so decent size pictures on my Dell P4 2.4Ghz machine with 512MB and it starts churning and comes to a crawl.

Use my iMac 800 with 500 photos with 768MB and it goes pretty well.

All in all, I think Apple did pretty well with the performance. About all you can do is add more RAM or archive to DVD or CD. With 2, this will be a single click, so it should be a piece of cake!

I'd have to agree here. iPhoto is a very pretty app. All that prettyness comes at a speed price. I think that if they treated iPhoto more like say iView Multimedia, then it would gain a lot of speed. Maybe Apple could give us an option of live resizing or no live resizing. That would be nice for those of us with older machines.

Just a thought.

[mishap]

Let's wait until the 25th to see what iPhoto's speed really is.

Somehow... i have a feeling it will be much better...at least on my Powerbook 800

[mbryda]

Shouldn't be that bad - they could store thumbnails and then only access the data on demand. Sort of the way iView works - it gives you instantaneous access to the photos, yet uses lots less memory.

Live resizing looks hokey anyway - go from a small size view of your library to a bigger one (full screen) - notice how it snaps into place and goes form pixellated to a clear picture? Clearly they are working from some low-res picture, so it shouldn't be that bad.

We won't talk about how opening a picture kills the memory usage, something that even Photoshop would be ashamed of!

[MickS]

Must ... have ... more ... speed ...


Oh well, the good things is that I can archive off to DVD. I wonder if that burns all of the copies of the images (original and current) as otherwise we are throwing data away when archiving and deleting.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Ya rumor has it that it is just as slow as 1.0.

[TC]

Originally posted by mbryda:
Shouldn't be that bad - they could store thumbnails and then only access the data on demand. Sort of the way iView works - it gives you instantaneous access to the photos, yet uses lots less memory.

Live resizing looks hokey anyway - go from a small size view of your library to a bigger one (full screen) - notice how it snaps into place and goes form pixellated to a clear picture? Clearly they are working from some low-res picture, so it shouldn't be that bad.

They are using thumnails and that is exactly why you see the pixellated image. When you first resize above the size of the thumnail they just do a quick n dirty enlargement of the thumbnail and then replace it with a resized version of the original image.

They should give an option to turn off live resizing and just use the thumbnail size. But then they should allow us to choose the size of the thumnails stored just like iView, maybe theis is starting to make it too complicated?

[Group51]

Originally posted by TC:
They are using thumnails and that is exactly why you see the pixellated image. When you first resize above the size of the thumnail they just do a quick n dirty enlargement of the thumbnail and then replace it with a resized version of the original image.

They should give an option to turn off live resizing and just use the thumbnail size. But then they should allow us to choose the size of the thumnails stored just like iView, maybe theis is starting to make it too complicated?

Basically, I just went and bought iView Media Pro. And I'm very happy with it. I saw it demoed once and its an incredibly powerful program. I'm just disappointed that the one click fix has made it to iPhoto rather than iView. Still, I'll have PS Elements soon to cover the bases.

[mattmarshall]

what about the library-sharing?

i can't instal iPhoto on my family's imac because it has no way to share libraries.......for the whole family to have all the pics in their library, i'd have to copy a couple gigs of pictures to their personal folders.

(i know about those programs that allow you to switch.....i'm waiting for the solution from apple....)

-matt

[kman42]

Originally posted by mattmarshall:
what about the library-sharing?

i can't instal iPhoto on my family's imac because it has no way to share libraries.......for the whole family to have all the pics in their library, i'd have to copy a couple gigs of pictures to their personal folders.

(i know about those programs that allow you to switch.....i'm waiting for the solution from apple....)

-matt

I haven't heard anything about Apple providing this solution, but it is easy enough to put your photos in a shared folder and have each user link to that folder. It works great for my wife and I.

kman

[Silky Voice of The Gorn]

I have iPhoto2..it's a..uh...demo..uh...evaluation copy..yeah.

Anyway, the thing is a bloatmonster. It's 104mb. Huge. Speed still sucks. The new features work pretty much as Steve showed them. The iTunes playlist with slideshow works, pretty slick.

Overall tho, not much to see here. It's still a big, slow and strangely inefficient means of dealing with image directories. Apple should seriously think about their database structuring, as iPhoto and iTunes do NOT scale well. They have got to do something about this and now. Yes, it's the show version, not release, but honestly, how much do you think it will change in 15 days?

For me, I'm sticking with iView.

[MikeD]

This is bad for me... On my DP 1.2 MDD w/1gb ram, it's slow to get my 3200+ photos up and showing..

Mike