[Spliff]

David Pogue has written an article comparing Google's Picasa 2 with iPhoto 5. The program looks great. Google obviously values aesthetics as much as Apple in their software design. And I really like the look of their photo sharing app, Hello. Picasa 2 is better than iPhoto 5 in a couple of ways. This quote in particular depresses me:

Picasa's standout features are its simplicity, smoothness and speed. Whereas iPhoto 5 can accommodate about 20,000 photos per library before it starts bogging down - for the true digicam fanatic, that's about one afternoon's shooting at Disney World - Picasa handily juggles 250,000 photos without breaking a sweat.

iPhoto is at version 5 and it's still much slower than Picasa which is only at version 2. Not a great showing to Apple's technology. Has anyone here had a chance to play with Picasa 2?

[brutal]

Picasa Support Forums:
Currently, Picasa is not available for Mac or Linux computers but we are noting these requests.

I sure hope they port it. I looks far better than both iPhoto and iView.

[lavar78]

I should be getting iPhoto 5 tomorrow. The original Picasa was a bit overrated, but I will be downloading the new version for a family member soon. I'm sure it's nice, but I doubt it's good enough that I'd put up with Windows for it.

[indigoimac]

The one thing I can say for it(picasa) is that it uses any folder structure meaning that a folder becomes an album, subfolder-subalbum, etc. This is very nice because u don't have to use the app(which is rather bulky,though less that iPhoto)to arrange your folders and albums, of couse u still have to use windows which counteracts all advantages!

[monkeybrain]

I tried the first version of Picasa when I had to use a wintel with my digital camera. It's pretty good, but it seemed to save the photos in quite a low quality (which made it fast) and for the life of me I couldn't find any way to zoom into an image.

[Hi I'm Ben]

ya this program looked awesome to me. I wish it was ported to mac. Ported good.

[Old Toad]

Originally posted by indigoimac:
The one thing I can say for it(picasa) is that it uses any folder structure meaning that a folder becomes an album, subfolder-subalbum, etc.

For similar applications, although at a modest price, look at QPict or iView Media.

[adam1185]

Picasa 2 is truly awesome. I loved version one but it lacked a lot of features like zooming on pictures in edit mode. Now the edit mode is very nice, and the program is ridiculously smooth.

Another feature I really like is the collage mode. You can instantly make a collage of pictures and set it as your desktop background or save it or whatnot.

Here's a couple of screenshots.

http://members.shaw.ca/adam1185/picasa1.jpg
http://members.shaw.ca/adam1185/picasa2.jpg

[lavar78]

Originally posted by indigoimac:
The one thing I can say for it(picasa) is that it uses any folder structure meaning that a folder becomes an album, subfolder-subalbum, etc.

Admittedly, I haven't used Picasa much, but I prefer it iPhoto's way. Picasa has watch folders, but it's not readily apparent how they relate to the albums within the program. My grandmother added a picture from an email into the program and she couldn't figure out where the picture was. As it turns out, it was added to the end of the second album, which wasn't intuitive at all.

I know there are lots of people who prefer it this way, but I'm not one of them.

[Spliff]

Originally posted by adam1185:
Another feature I really like is the collage mode. You can instantly make a collage of pictures and set it as your desktop background or save it or whatnot.

Here's a couple of screenshots.

http://members.shaw.ca/adam1185/picasa1.jpg
http://members.shaw.ca/adam1185/picasa2.jpg

Can you post an example of a collage, please?

[adam1185]

look at the second picture I took, it's right in the middle

I believe theres a way to move the pictures around as well

[Spliff]

Originally posted by adam1185:
look at the second picture I took, it's right in the middle

I believe theres a way to move the pictures around as well

Oops.

[Thain Esh Kelch]

Its probably pretty darn faster then iPhoto because Apple has to route everything through Quartz.

[legacyb4]

Picasa2 is pretty slick.

I only wish it had numerical input for editing light levels, etc. Dragging a slider is so 'casual' but I guess that's what it's targeted for.

[kcmac]

I use Picasa 2 at work because I have to use a PC and it is the closest thing you can find to iPhoto.

I like iPhoto so much better. You have to use it for awhile to understand. It's alot of little things. Plus, it has the worst scroll bar widget of all times. Ugly and doesn't stop anywhere near where you want it to.

And when you are used to iLife, Picasa is just another hohum app. Misses by that much. If they ported it, I don't think you would use it for long if you are an iPhoto user.

[Hi I'm Ben]

Originally posted by kcmac:
I use Picasa 2 at work because I have to use a PC and it is the closest thing you can find to iPhoto.

I like iPhoto so much better. You have to use it for awhile to understand. It's alot of little things. Plus, it has the worst scroll bar widget of all times. Ugly and doesn't stop anywhere near where you want it to.

And when you are used to iLife, Picasa is just another hohum app. Misses by that much. If they ported it, I don't think you would use it for long if you are an iPhoto user.

lol don't be ignorant. Picasa is better than iPhoto. Feature for feature speed vs speed it's all around winner. How exactly can you say that iPhoto is better?

[:dragonflypro:]

Originally posted by Hi I'm Ben:
lol don't be ignorant. Picasa is better than iPhoto. Feature for feature speed vs speed it's all around winner. How exactly can you say that iPhoto is better?

And yet after 15 minutes of Picasa 2 I still could not figure out how to make a Favorite collection.

Does that mean it's bad? No. But it makes the point that if I can't easily find what I want then it can use some help.

Is IP5 perfect. Surely not.

But I'd be mindful of who was the ignorant one. Features and Speed do not make an application. Function does. Usability does.

So Picasa wins the 5K picture scroll test and has a mind numbing number of CM selections. Big Frickin' Deal.

I guess for those that like to scroll up and down for hours are select CM options galore Picasa is for you. I'd rather just intuitively edit, archive and mange my photos into end results, thanks.

T

[brutal]

Originally posted by :dragonflypro::
I guess for those that like to scroll up and down for hours are select CM options galore Picasa is for you.

And also for those who would like to maintain their own folder-structure. I really HATE the iPhoto folder-structure, as I makes it hell to find a certain picture - e.g if you want to attach it in Gmail.

[Amorya]

Originally posted by brutal:
And also for those who would like to maintain their own folder-structure. I really HATE the iPhoto folder-structure, as I makes it hell to find a certain picture - e.g if you want to attach it in Gmail.

Drag the file to the desktop. Attach that. Then delete the dragged file afterwards. Saves a bit of time.

(If web browsers worked properly and had file browsing widgets that you could drag things onto, you could drag straight from iPhoto.)

Amorya

[sieb]

Coming to a Mac, I still prefer Picasa over iPhoto. I love having Picasa watch my pictures folder so anytime I add something to it, Picasa automatically adds it to my collections, all I have to do is go in later and organize it. I also like how it will scan the pictures folder for changes on startup. Whereas in iPhoto, you have to manage all photos from within it, it won't scan or watch folders for you. I'm sure you could applescript something though, maybe Automator something in Tiger. I also don't like how iPhoto organizes photos in directories, its as bad as the iPod. Picasa just catalogs the pics, doesn't move them unless you tell it to.

[Michael1980]

Isn't Picasa just an iPhoto clone though?

[-Q-]

Originally posted by Michael1980:
Isn't Picasa just an iPhoto clone though?

If by clone you mean 'works better than iPhoto in many areas,' then yes.

Using both extensively, they both have their pluses and minuses, but overall I'd give the overall crown to Picasa for it's ease in managing large photo libraries.

[lavar78]

Originally posted by sieb:
Coming to a Mac, I still prefer Picasa over iPhoto. I love having Picasa watch my pictures folder so anytime I add something to it, Picasa automatically adds it to my collections, all I have to do is go in later and organize it. I also like how it will scan the pictures folder for changes on startup. Whereas in iPhoto, you have to manage all photos from within it, it won't scan or watch folders for you. I'm sure you could applescript something though, maybe Automator something in Tiger. I also don't like how iPhoto organizes photos in directories, its as bad as the iPod. Picasa just catalogs the pics, doesn't move them unless you tell it to.

iPhoto's way is better for me. I have no desire to organize the pictures myself; I like that the program does it for me. Another advantage for iPhoto is that it's pretty similar to iTunes. Picasa is nice, but iPhoto is better overall because it's easier to use.

[Superchicken]

I hope they port it... Google competing with Apple would be fun to watch... I'm not sure who I'd cheer for Ultimately I'd just use the best product hehe...

[PurpleGiant]

Tried it the other day. Picasa is a very nice app. Personally, I have become accustomed to not organising my photos in the Finder at all, and letting iPhoto do it. Due to this, I prefer iPhoto. However on most other fronts, each app has pros and cons. They're pretty close.

[kcmac]

Originally posted by Hi I'm Ben:
lol don't be ignorant. Picasa is better than iPhoto. Feature for feature speed vs speed it's all around winner. How exactly can you say that iPhoto is better?

Just love that Canadian etiquette.

Somehow, I don't think you really care what I or anyone else could say here. Have a nice day. Hi. I'm kcmac.

[bobablob]

After checking out this thread, I went to my brother's house and downloaded Picasa2 on his XP-Box (yuck!). But WOW, what a program. Wish Google would port it over. Much better IMHO than iPhoto 5. I'm absolutely NOT going to trade in the Powerbook over it, but boy, hats off to the Google guys. What a great program.

[:dragonflypro:]

Actually once I realized iPhoto Libraries are just a date structure it made sense to me and just doesn't bother me anymore.

For instance:

iPhoto Library > 2005 > 02 > 01

is just the photos that were taken on Feb 01, 2005.

No, you can't change the structure, but it does make about as much sense as any other method.

Once I got a copy of iPhoto Buddy and have multiple albums, iP5 is more than plenty for me.

And I kind of get the feeling Spotlight is gonna make my OCD about folder structure at bay.

T

[Hi I'm Ben]

Originally posted by kcmac:
Just love that Canadian etiquette.

Somehow, I don't think you really care what I or anyone else could say here. Have a nice day. Hi. I'm kcmac.

Hi kcmac. I'm american.

[Boondoggle]

I've used both quite a bit and they are both nice. Picasa 2 is the best app of it's type on the PC. I still prefer iPhoto however. Picasa is faster, but it accomplishes that by not doing as much. Some of Picasa's editing tools are nice, particularly the Fill Light. I wish iPhoto had that one.

Giving a damn about the file structure of your photo library is so 90's. That is why we have computers, to keep track of boring crap like that. Can you easily find your photos? That is all that matters.

[workerbee]

Originally Posted by Boondoggle

Giving a damn about the file structure of your photo library is so 90's. That is why we have computers, to keep track of boring crap like that. Can you easily find your photos? That is all that matters.

My Powerbook crashed hard yesterday and in so doing deleted a bunch of pref files and corrupted my iTunes library beyond repair. How easy is it to reconstruct an iPhoto library in such an occurence? Just wondering...

BTW: Boondoggle: nice sig, both pic + text.

[siMac]

I saw this app for the first time today and it looks great - if it were available for OSX it's highly probable I would use it over iPhoto.

It is fast, full featured and appears to be well-thought out, plus it sports the best looking interface I've ever seen in a Windows app (it's a real interface too, none of this brushed metal BS).

Here's hoping for an OSX version...

[msuper69]

Originally Posted by :dragonflypro:

Actually once I realized iPhoto Libraries are just a date structure it made sense to me and just doesn't bother me anymore.

For instance:

iPhoto Library > 2005 > 02 > 01

is just the photos that were taken on Feb 01, 2005.

No, you can't change the structure, but it does make about as much sense as any other method.

Once I got a copy of iPhoto Buddy and have multiple albums, iP5 is more than plenty for me.

And I kind of get the feeling Spotlight is gonna make my OCD about folder structure at bay.

T

iPhoto 5 + Smart Albums + Tiger = Priceless

[SkaGoat]

There would be no difference in functionality if you just dumped all your photos into the "Pictures" folder. If Picasa is set to watch the folder it'll add the pictures itself. And you can have it show you the pictures by dates, Or create your own folders and what not, much better than iPhoto, I don't like the app organizing everything for me.

[andretan]

iPhoto is much more userfriendly than Picasa IMHO.

Tried out Picasa 2 the other day at work, wanted to crop a picture, but after 5+ minutes of fiddling around, I finally got the job done.

[mpancha]

yup, I agree. Picasa2 is a great piece of software. I use it on my PC, and wish I could use it on my iBook.

Quite honestly, i despise iPhoto 5. It works, but it doesn't fit into apple's whole theme of "it just works". I'm big on getting my friends who are in the market for a new PC, to try out a mac. iPhoto is one of the few hurdles they have. its slow, and... well, its no Picasa2.

[ApeInTheShell]

I didn't like iPhoto when it was first released because it was slow, buggy, and didn't follow any of the usability that Apple is traditionally known. Even when it became part of iLife '04 it did not look complete or appear to have features that stood out.

I think iPhoto 5 brings a lot more cookies for my milk and finally makes sense as much as cookies can. Plus the brushed metal looks more smooth.

Picasa, evil clone of Picasso sent back into the early 20th century to transform cubism into Dadaism. Dun dun dun!

[ashtoash]

I justed use Picasa2, and it's fantastic. It's how iPhoto should be PERIOD. It's so fast. Really disappointed with iPhoto and even iViewMedia pro now. I think I might just keep my images cataloged on my pc for now :-(

[mhuie]

The way it organizes is trivial, the main point that it is FAST and RESPONSIVE. It's just as user friendly, options are in different places.

I fail to see how it took someone 5 minutes to crop a file when there is a button labelled "Crop" on the left side. Once you learn the interface it is the same as iPhoto.

[ashtoash]

Originally Posted by mhuie

The way it organizes is trivial, the main point that it is FAST and RESPONSIVE. It's just as user friendly, options are in different places.

I fail to see how it took someone 5 minutes to crop a file when there is a button labelled "Crop" on the left side. Once you learn the interface it is the same as iPhoto.

Scrolling in iPhoto is painfully slow. Especially with 20,000 photos
Saving Changes in iPhoto takes forever... It even took a long time on steve's test powermac at macworld...
Scrolling, and switching between views, resizing it's slow, it feels like the computer is way way underpowered. (and this is on my dual 2.5ghz g5).

[Spliff]

Has anyone tried Shoebox? Apparently it's much faster than iPhoto, but it's also $30.

[jamil5454]

Picasa's interface took a while to get used to IMO. Thing's weren't as obvious as in iPhoto and to do simple tasks took some looking around. It's faster and very polished, but I think the real reason people like it so much is because it's running on Windows, which normally has crappily designed apps running on it. Picasa 2 on OS X wouldn't be as impressive.

[mpancha]

Originally Posted by jamil5454

It's faster and very polished, but I think the real reason people like it so much is because it's running on Windows, which normally has crappily designed apps running on it. Picasa 2 on OS X wouldn't be as impressive.

I dont know about that. I like it as a piece of software. Software doesn't make the OS, and the OS doesn't make the software.

A good piece of software shines on its own merit... and Picasa does that.

[andretan]

Originally Posted by jamil5454

Picasa's interface took a while to get used to IMO. Thing's weren't as obvious as in iPhoto and to do simple tasks took some looking around. It's faster and very polished, but I think the real reason people like it so much is because it's running on Windows, which normally has crappily designed apps running on it. Picasa 2 on OS X wouldn't be as impressive.

Bingo.

[HOMBRESINIESTRO]

I'd love to pay for good software from small developers. Not everyone can give their software away for free. $30 (or even $79 for Pro) for Shoebox isn't much for such an impressive app. I like it much better than both iPhoto _and_ Picasa. You should really give it a chance.

[tie]

Picasa rocks, and would be even better if it was cross-platform. I'm afraid that this is one case where Apple's bundling has really hurt me -- as in, why would Google release a good free program when Apple is already distributing a pretty good one?

Picasa:
- Has lossless image manipulation. I think iPhoto's repeated saving of JPEGs might give poor quality and is worse to undo.
- Allows me to manage the photos in the filesystem. iPhoto puts an enormous filesystem overhead, making it impossible to find things. Picasa just puts a single file within each folder (which is even legible if you open it in a text reader).
- Has batch output. E.g., I can batch output images reduced to a particular resolution at a particular JPEG quality.
- Has a better crop tool. The iPhoto interface for cropping images often plays games with me (e.g. jumping between landscape and portrait orientation when it shouldn't). Picasa has a better interface here. And actually, fast lossless cropping with an excellent interface is very very nice.
- Does a few more things I forget.

iPhoto:
- Has a faster way of assigning categories to images. Just click a button instead of using a contextual menu and submenu.
- Supports hierarchical folders. I don't think Picasa does -- or at least I couldn't figure it out.
- Reads RAW files. Picasa doesn't, or at least not from my camera.
- That's it. iPhoto seems to be slower, too.

I really do not want iPhoto trying to impose its filesystem choices on me. There are all sorts of reasons why I might want to manage the filesystem. For example, if I burn a DVD of images with my filesystem, I can easily browse them and find what I want with my filesystem (even on a Windows machine). iPhoto makes everything ten times more complicated.

If Google released Picasa for Mac, then also there would be a high-quality free photo program which is cross-platform. I always like cross-platform compatibility.

I looked at Shoebox, and I couldn't tell how it supports EXIF editing. Also doesn't support any basic lossless editing, unlike Picasa (or even the way iPhoto backs images up automatically). But seems like a nice program, maybe working with Photoshop. I'll look at it again, or just go for iView Media Pro.

[adam1185]

Originally Posted by HOMBRESINIESTRO

I'd love to pay for good software from small developers. Not everyone can give their software away for free. $30 (or even $79 for Pro) for Shoebox isn't much for such an impressive app. I like it much better than both iPhoto _and_ Picasa. You should really give it a chance.

Yes, Shoebox is very nice. Adding keywords is so unbelievably easy, plus the new spotlight integration is great.

[Boondoggle]

dubble post!

[Boondoggle]

Originally Posted by tie

Picasa rocks, and would be even better if it was cross-platform. I'm afraid that this is one case where Apple's bundling has really hurt me -- as in, why would Google release a good free program when Apple is already distributing a pretty good one?

Picasa:
- Has lossless image manipulation. I think iPhoto's repeated saving of JPEGs might give poor quality and is worse to undo.
- Allows me to manage the photos in the filesystem. iPhoto puts an enormous filesystem overhead, making it impossible to find things. Picasa just puts a single file within each folder (which is even legible if you open it in a text reader).
- Has batch output. E.g., I can batch output images reduced to a particular resolution at a particular JPEG quality.
- Has a better crop tool. The iPhoto interface for cropping images often plays games with me (e.g. jumping between landscape and portrait orientation when it shouldn't). Picasa has a better interface here. And actually, fast lossless cropping with an excellent interface is very very nice.
- Does a few more things I forget.

iPhoto:
- Has a faster way of assigning categories to images. Just click a button instead of using a contextual menu and submenu.
- Supports hierarchical folders. I don't think Picasa does -- or at least I couldn't figure it out.
- Reads RAW files. Picasa doesn't, or at least not from my camera.
- That's it. iPhoto seems to be slower, too.

I really do not want iPhoto trying to impose its filesystem choices on me. There are all sorts of reasons why I might want to manage the filesystem. For example, if I burn a DVD of images with my filesystem, I can easily browse them and find what I want with my filesystem (even on a Windows machine). iPhoto makes everything ten times more complicated.

If Google released Picasa for Mac, then also there would be a high-quality free photo program which is cross-platform. I always like cross-platform compatibility.

I looked at Shoebox, and I couldn't tell how it supports EXIF editing. Also doesn't support any basic lossless editing, unlike Picasa (or even the way iPhoto backs images up automatically). But seems like a nice program, maybe working with Photoshop. I'll look at it again, or just go for iView Media Pro.

iPhoto does keep a copy of your original file so that you can always back out to it the way it came from the camera. I'm not sure tha Picasa does that, I haven't checked. Lossless cropping would be nice, but I've NEVER noticed any degredation in image quality from cropping in iPhoto.

if you're haveing trouble finding things in iPhoto, you're not doing it right. You find things in iPhoto, not in the filesystem. Combining keywords, date search etc you can find any image in seconds, sometimes less. When you want the image out of iPhoto you export it to the desktop or wherever you like. iPhoto will also launch the editor of your choice such as Photoshop by double clicking on the thumbnail, which is nice. I use iPhoto for basic editing, and then use Pshop for anything reqiring more work. iPhoto is the repository and catalog of the images, and the sharing mechanism. Particularly powerful with .Mac.

iPhoto is a database, not a file system. That is it's power. It becomes very easy if you just forget about the file system. The speed benefit of Picasa gets eroded if you're spending time digging through the filesystem or even thinking about the file system. It is just a monumental waste of time. Believe me I used to do it that way, and I've been using iPhoto for several years without ever giving it any thought and I've given up exactly zero functionality or convienience. I don't have any problem burning disks with iPhoto and sharing them with my PC or with others, and it is not something I do on a frequent basis anyway thanks to that cool thing called the internet. With iPhoto and .Mac I've got about 3000 pictures at anyone's fingetips. I just send the URL.

iPhoto does have some problems though, specifically the speed, and Picasa definately tromps it there. I've got over 10,000 images in one library, and it can be a major RAM hog. I get pageouts even with 1.25 GB of RAM. When that happens, you might as well go make some coffee. Some of the editing tools are wierdly implemented, but that is true of Picasa as well IMHO. iPhoto really screams for a larger monitor or dual monitors, and can be a pain on my 15" powerbook. The get info dialog is always in the way. I wish it was in a pane or something.

Picasa is a great piece of software, and I would be happy if it were on the Mac, especially at that price, but it is no clear winner over iPhoto. It has some features, particularly the speed, that I wish iPhoto had, but I am never tempted to use it on my PC over iPhoto for my daily photo cataloging, editing and sharing. Luckily they both will continue to improve, and you're not really locked in to either. Exporting is easy from iPhoto or burning to a disk that a PC can read. You can do it by keyword and then import into whatever and assign similar keywords. It isn't like shopping at the iTMS in that way. And a similar process is available from Picasa out as well.

bd

[Boondoggle]

Originally Posted by workerbee

My Powerbook crashed hard yesterday and in so doing deleted a bunch of pref files and corrupted my iTunes library beyond repair. How easy is it to reconstruct an iPhoto library in such an occurence? Just wondering...

BTW: Boondoggle: nice sig, both pic + text.

Just like for all your data, you do it from that weekly backup you always make! You can't count on recovering files of any type after a hard crash. FWIW I have implemented the followoing strategy for iTunes: Every once in a while I make smart lists of all my ranked songs by ranking, and export the lists as xml and save them in the Music folder of my iDisk. Likewise for any playlists that I've got or eq presets. Then, if I want to recreate my library for some reason, I've got all the data. I've used this scheme for migrating my music to other systems where it was impracticable to just copy everything over. You just import the playlists and you're back in business.

thanks re the sig!