The Download Blog
advertisement
January 5, 2009 2:05 PM PST

Hands-on with Picasa for the Mac

by Rafe Needleman
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 47 comments

I'm a somewhat dissatisfied owner of a new MacBook. One of the things I was looking forward to with the computer was the vaunted easy photo management I kept hearing about. But I found the Mac's free photo management app, iPhoto, frustrating to use, compared to the product I had become accustomed to on Windows: Google's Picasa. I didn't like the fact that I had to manually import photos into the product--even photos already on my Mac--and that the import process made duplicates of my photos when I did so. I much prefer Picasa, which simply scans your computer's directories and shows you the photos it finds on your disks.

Monday, Google is releasing Picasa 3 for Mac OS X (download). I got an early look at the new product, still marked "beta," and found it a faithful port of the PC version (Picasa is also available for Linux), minus a few features like the timeline view and geotagging (the former is probably gone for good; the latter is coming in a subsequent build). Picasa lacks some of the fun features in iPhoto, too: It doesn't take full advantage of the multi-touch trackpad features in the new MacBooks, like zoom and rotate. It does, though, read ratings and tags from iPhoto libraries, so it would be easy to use Picasa alongside an iPhoto library. But as it doesn't export back to iPhoto; it's a one-way trip for the metadata.

Picasa organizes the photos on your hard disk. It also manages importing from your cameras and memory cards.

The two programs are much the same in features, although some of the differences may matter greatly to certain users. iPhoto, for example, has a slick way to batch-edit photos, including the capability to update dates and times embedded in photos and to apply the same custom image corrections to several shots at once. Picasa also has batch-editing features, but it doesn't give you as much control. In single images, though, Picasa lets you insert text directly into photos, and offers a few handy enhancement tools missing in iPhoto, like graduated tints (useful for improving landscape shots). But overall, both products offer flexible image correction and enhancement, including variable rotation for out-of-kilter images, red-eye correction, and white-balance correction.

iPhoto currently offers much better support for printing books, calendars, and cards through Apple. Picasa should get the capability to print similar services later. iPhoto's on-screen slideshows are also better; it lets you use the "Ken Burns effect" to make watching stills more compelling.

On the other hand, Picasa lets you pin photos to the "photo tray" for batch operations like e-mailing, uploading, or making items into a collage. You can multi-select images in iPhoto to do the same thing, but the intermediate tray concept in Picasa is much easier to use--one stray mouse click won't undo your selection.

As Stephen Shankland reports, Picasa also integrates with the online Picasa Web Albums photo-sharing site, just as the Windows version does. Changes made on the sharing site (captions or name tagging) don't migrate back into your computer's library, though. iPhoto, of course, connects to Apple's Mobile Me service for online, shared galleries. Picasa Web Albums is free, though. Mobile Me costs $99 a year.

Other features coming over to Picasa Mac in the future include Webcam capture, screensaver control, and the photo preview feature from Windows (which I believe is superfluous in OS X, given its strong Preview app).

Even though this early build of Picasa is missing some features, I'm going to use it and not iPhoto. It has a cleaner and less intrusive organizational system, stronger photo-editing features, it's fast to use, and setting up online albums is free. When I want to print calendars and books I'll drop back to iPhoto, but Picasa's feature set makes it a better day-to-day product.

The editor in Picasa lets you add text and graduated filters to images.

Rafe Needleman writes about start-ups, new technologies, and Web 2.0 products, as editor of CNET's Webware. E-mail Rafe.
Recent posts from The Download Blog
Woo-hoo! Simpsons Arcade game coming to iPhone
Adobe adds raw support for newer cameras
Mozilla releases fifth Firefox 3.6 beta
What's next for social gaming on the iPhone?
Fences Pro: New ways to conquer clutter
TomTom slashes iPhone GPS app to $49.99
Hands-on: Bing for iPhone
Firefox 3.5.6 patches critical security holes
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 2 pages (47 Comments)
by Hep Cat January 5, 2009 2:29 PM PST
Hey, now all you have to do is get Microsoft to rewrite Office for the Mac so that it makes sense for you, and you'll enjoy your Mac OS X experience!

Because different is only OK if it's the kind of different that happens to be exactly the same as what you were used to.
Reply to this comment
by backslashtech January 5, 2009 2:38 PM PST
I am SO excited about this! I, too, am a recent switcher but I've had a great experience... until I found that Picasa wasn't available. I can't wait to install this.

I'm interested in how people plan to use the two tools together to accomplish more. It sounds like Picasa isn't going to be as feature-rich as it is on the PC side, so I'd like to use iPhoto to do some of the batch editing, etc.
Reply to this comment
by itsawhat January 6, 2009 11:43 AM PST
I'm right there with you backslash. I will be downloading tonight. Glad to see other new Mac users as excited as I am. I'm tired of the yawners and complainers.
by kcotham January 5, 2009 2:42 PM PST
I fail to see the problem with going to File>Import to Library in iPhoto. Granted, iPhoto isn't perfect, but that seems like a really silly reason to pooh pooh it like you have. If you want iPhoto to find every image on your computer, it'll do it, just choose Macintosh HD after you tell it to "Import to Library" which, by the way, can be initiated with shift-command-I. If you just want the images in your Photos folder, choose it. Any time you connect a camera, it can be set up to automatically launch and import. In fact, it asks you if you want to do this the first time you connect a camera!

It's a matter of personal taste Mr. Needleman. I personally like the ease of use of iPhoto for day to day photo browsing. I use Photoshop (with Bridge), Aperture, iPhoto, Olympus Master, and Picasa (on a PC). I'll be checking out the Picasa for Mac version now. Oh, and important to note, none of the afore mentioned programs are in beta except for your precious Picasa!
Reply to this comment
by kelmon January 6, 2009 1:31 AM PST
I suspect that the problem is that pictures were already organised under Windows into separate directories and that importing them into iPhoto (probably) won't maintain that organisation. This was the same issue that photographers had against Aperture 1 and which was addressed in later releases by giving the opportunity to either import pictures into a managed Aperture library or maintain them as linked pictures in their existing location. I've never had an issue with iPhoto since I didn't have any existing pictures when I moved to the Mac but I can see how its way of working could be an issue for someone who has already organised their files. I think the same argument applies to iTunes and its way of managing your MP3 files.
by b_baggins January 6, 2009 7:09 AM PST
kelmon,

what you have just described is classic Windowlerium: a state of confusion brought on by things being too easy. You see, he had to organize his photos by folder in Windows because of limitation in the software and OS. When he gets to the Mac, he can't shake his brain free of the fact that the computer can do all that work for him; he's been trained that he has to do that work himself.
by BenzTech January 6, 2009 2:39 PM PST
For me, it's not that you have to import the images manually (only really have to do that once, then just hook up your camera from then on), it's that iPhoto completely changes the directory structure of the photos. When sharing your photo album across a network and editing it on multiple computers running multiple platforms* it's easy to make a change to the directory structure or filenames that iPhoto doesn't like. Why can't it just read the photos from where I leave them? Well, okay, it can, but then once you edit anything it imports to it's own iPhoto directory anyway... grrrr...

Helllllo, Picasa for Mac!

* Yes, iPhoto seems like a great program, and is probably wonderful if you're only sharing your library with other Macs. Throw in a couple Linux machines, and even the one XP machine I have, and it just gets too messy.
by kcotham February 19, 2009 7:28 PM PST
@Benz Tech, what you are doing is something that most general users will never do, and thus iPhoto was never meant to address. There may be a way to do it, but honestly, I don't really care to explore it. iPhoto is not made for professionals, neither is Picasa, and it seems that only professionals or advanced amateurs would want to do what you are doing.
by lkrupp January 5, 2009 2:43 PM PST
You've already switched back to Windows, Needleman. You said so in your Mac hit piece earlier today. So the OS X version of Picasa should not concern you at all. Right?
Reply to this comment
by Hep Cat January 5, 2009 2:43 PM PST
Rafe, I think you miss the point of why iPhoto does things the way it does.

First, iPhoto doesn't "require you to manually import your photos". iPhoto is geared toward people getting photos from devices. Not people who are sucking up existing libraries of JPG, BMP, PNG, etc. files. That doesn't mean iPhoto can't handle that task, but when connecting a device that contains photos, it is indeed automatic.

Second, iPhoto makes a copy of manually imported files in its own directory tree within a user's home folder so that it can easily revert to the original file without the wonderful "where's that file again?" errors that are common on programs that use a file systems as a database. It would be dumb to treat the entire hard drive like a database of photo locations. If you're going to use the file system to keep track of photos, I know I'd rather be assured that they're all in a single structure protected from other users for ease of backup and retrieval.

Finally, it's clear that years of using Windows have gotten you used to files that are scattered all over user, global, and network directories. That's fine. I prefer to have MY files kept in MY directory with MY permissions - by default - whether that directory is on a share or my local disk. iPhoto's sharing, reversion, and other useful features would be far less reliable and more complicated if Apple didn't insist on storing a copy of every imported file instead of simply referencing files after an automatic import.

I will say that I wish there was an easier way to dump the files from my iPhoto directory/database into a single directory somewhere and choose that as the default way of managing photos, but that would add a lot of complexity to what is a nice, simple, compact photo organizer geared (again) to an audience attempting to move photos from devices onto a computer, and to organize those photos/media in a forgiving environment that easily allows reversion.

I hope you have a better understanding of why iPhoto does some things the way it does, and you're certainly welcome to your own preferences.
Reply to this comment
by Renegade Knight January 6, 2009 3:25 PM PST
"Finally, it's clear that years of using Windows have gotten you used to files that are scattered all over user, global, and network directories. That's fine. I prefer to have MY files kept in MY directory with MY permissions"

Any computer user above the level of neophite organizes their files the way they like. In other words a program needs to work with My files kept in MY directory with MY permissions, regardless of what that really looks like on a hard drive.

I'm suprised you can't see that. While I don't need a photo program to slurp up all the files on my computer I do need one to work on them where I tell it to look. If it want's to back them all up, then thats ok as long as it does it MY way.
by typefighter January 5, 2009 2:44 PM PST
I've been with iPhoto since the beginning, but I'd be happy to see Apple get a run for it's money in photo and movie editing and management. iLife '09 should be announced tomorrow at MacWorld, so we'll see what Google and Adobe are up against. Free is a tough price to beat, however.
Reply to this comment
by kcotham January 5, 2009 2:49 PM PST
It's doubtful that they'll release a new version of iLife. It has coincided with new versions of the OS historically. And since Snow Leopard isn't too far off, it will most likely be released with it.

I agree about competition being good. The better Windows and Google, and Adobe, etc. get, the better that Apple's offerings will get. Everyone wins, especially the consumer.
by kelmon January 6, 2009 1:47 AM PST
@kcotham

I'm trying to remember a release of iLife that has coincided with an OS release and I can't think of one. Historically the iLife updates appear in January while OS releases happen later in the year, often around the summer. iLife 08, for example, appeared back in summer 2007 while Leopard was not released until later in the year.
by Luapen January 5, 2009 2:46 PM PST
I am still wondering if Picasa for Mac is any good. You have not done well in your transition to the mac so I doubt your opinion. I guess you should stick to reviewing applications for PCs.
Reply to this comment
by kcotham January 5, 2009 2:54 PM PST
Geotagging is in the Tools menu. I don't have any geotagged photos to test it with, but are you sure it isn't working in this version?
Reply to this comment
by wtkamp3 January 5, 2009 2:57 PM PST
Your article makes no sense. You state how much you like Picasa, then proceed to state how iPhoto beats Picasa on almost all important and time saving features. Then, at the end, you go back and basically concede that Picasa is a less powerful application than iPhoto, but because you like the familiarity, you will continue to use it even though it is stripped down.
Reply to this comment
by kcotham January 5, 2009 3:06 PM PST
I agree. It doesn't make sense. It took me all of 20 minutes to see that it is a stripped down version of iPhoto on the Mac. The PC version is little better so I wasn't expecting much in the first place. All in all, Picasa's design is clunky and rather inelegant. You can see how they attempted to fit it in to the Mac UI guidelines, which is more than most companies do when they port over a PC application, but it still falls short. Possibly it might improve to the point being on par with iPhoto in coming versions, but by that time, iPhoto will have "out evolved it". Why any Mac user would chose Picasa over iPhoto is beyond me. Especially since iPhoto is included with every Macintosh. Maybe if you had a really old Mac and it was running a very, very old version of iPhoto, you might want to use Picasa.

I'll stick with iPhoto for day to day browsing and e-mailing of photos, use Aperture and Photoshop for serious stuff, and just play with Picasa until I need the disk space back ;-)
by rafe January 5, 2009 3:23 PM PST
Different strokes. For me, the killer feature of Picasa is that I don't have to "import" photos. Now, either iPhoto or Picasa are find for offloading pictures from a camera or memory card, but i get a lot of images through other routes, like screen captures and emails. I don't want to have to import them each time and create dupes. It slows me down and wastes space.

I also like Picasa's single-image editor better.

When I want to create books and calendars then I'll run iPhoto and import the photos I need.
Reply to this comment
by gefitz January 5, 2009 3:39 PM PST
Rafe, if people don't understand that your take is actually valid as a Windows user, and that you are actually speaking about experiences that MOST computer users that switch to Apple from Windows/Linux/or any other commonly used platform also experience...I'd just ignore them.

For me, being able to do work from my computer at home (when my workplace is a Windows shop) is a very important factor in whether or not I would switch, so keep up the good work!
by kcotham January 5, 2009 3:52 PM PST
I see your point now. You are looking at using iPhoto in a way it wasn't really intended to be used. iPhoto is not an "image browser/editor", it is a photograph browser and editor. It is geared towards digital photography.

A program that comes with Photoshop Elements (and may be available separately) is Adobe Bridge. That would be perfect for you for image cataloguing. You might also want to check out GIMP for image editing and creating. It is free and has Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X ports. It does just about everything Photoshop does, but for free. The drawback is a more clunky user interface (although it is constantly getting better).
by Hep Cat January 5, 2009 6:19 PM PST
So, it comes down to:

1. Apple makes a device-to-digital-hub photo organizer, not an image editor.
2. Rafe thought iPhoto was an image editor.
3. Rafe is disappointed that Apple didn't write and include Adobe Bridge for free.

You must seriously be kidding if you expect me to believe that Rafe is a tech journalist. If he is, he must be new to the craft or exceedingly naive; who would expect Apple to whiz all over Adobe by including a free copy of software that obviates the need for Bridge/Photoshop Elements with every Mac? Does Rafe not understand the dynamics of the software industry?
by xxmjumpman23xx January 5, 2009 3:35 PM PST
I agree with a lot of the other comments on here. You switched from windows to OS X and now you are complaining about everything that is different between the two systems and want all the same programs you had on windows. Your complaints about iphoto are frivolous, just press file-import to library and stop complaining. Its a great application. All your complaints about os x have been based upon it being different than windows. What did you expect?
Reply to this comment
by Renegade Knight January 6, 2009 3:33 PM PST
A computer is a computer. They have a job to do regardless of what OS you have on it. My experience is closer to Rafe's than the fairy tale "like a fish to water" stories that were all I could find on the net. It's only afer the switch when I had specific problesm taht I found that I wasn't alone, that OS X wasn't perfect, and that folks had to solve problems to get their Mac "to just work like it should".

Get past the hype and you are left with the real world. It's not so much "what's different" as what's harder, missing, or goofy. Different you can learn. Missing and harder to do? What's to love about that? I'm eagerly looking for the "easier to do" things. They haven't yet cropped up.
by random truth January 6, 2009 10:57 PM PST
Well, Renegade Knight I think this is more acurate...
A computer is a computer, Regardless of the os they will figure out a way to **** you off.
by Pishkado January 5, 2009 3:57 PM PST
There's another point that's been missed so far. We're a multi-platform family: I prefer Mac, but use Windows for part of my work (Microsoft Access training). She prefers Windows, but uses Macs because they're the standard at one of her jobs. She uses Picasa and can't use iPhoto on her preferred platform. I use iPhoto and couldn't, until now, use Picasa on mine. This gives us a cross-platform app that, based on everything said so far and our own experiences, isn't a great deal better or worse than iPhoto. To us, absent huge differences in functionality, ease of use or performance, being cross-platform is the deciding factor. I doubt we're the only multi-platform household around.
Reply to this comment
by dgsilverberg January 5, 2009 3:58 PM PST
It looks like the ability to tag photos by your subject's face is only possible with the web-based "web albums" rather than this new Picasa program for mac. If so, that's a very big omission. I would happily use Picasa over iPhoto if I had the ability to quickly catalog my photos by subject. Has anyone found a way of doing this without uploading all your photos to your Picasa web album?
Reply to this comment
by kcotham January 5, 2009 4:16 PM PST
If you have added keywords to your photos in iPhoto, you can almost instantly sort your photos by keyword.
by toosday January 5, 2009 4:28 PM PST
Holy crap, it's fast! Much faster than iPhoto 08
Reply to this comment
by kcotham January 5, 2009 4:43 PM PST
I didn't notice that much of a speed difference after launching. Picasa was faster to launch. I tested it on a MacBook (early 2008) 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, Mac OS X 10.5.6
by g rippy January 5, 2009 8:05 PM PST
I recently switched from Win to Mac OS X. I love photography, so one of my bigger concerns was the use of iPhoto to keep track of my rather large photo library. I have to say, I wouldn't switch now that I'm used to all the tricks of using iPhoto. It does everything i need it to do, and it does so with great ease and speed. It just works. I will say this - it took about 3 months of constant use before I felt really comfortable with the software though.
Reply to this comment
by jdukvoac January 6, 2009 5:27 AM PST
@"g rippy" - I switched from Win to Mac about 2 1/2 years ago, and I too love photography and have a rather large library of photo's. I started to use iPhoto, and it's very very good, but I started using Aperture (version 1.5 and then 2.0) and it has been nothing short of wonderful. I tired using Adobe Lightroom, but didn't like it as much. The single biggest advantage of using Aperture over the rest of the applications is that Aperture stores all your photo's that you import into a database type of file. Everything within the application can be organized however you like, by folders and projects, as well as smart folders and projects, but when it comes to backup your library, you only have one (1) file to backup, then one called "Aperture Library". I think Apple has a 15 or 30 trial so you might want to give it a try. Also, Nik Software is starting to make several of it's photo editing plug-in's available for Aperture also.
by steveyu32 January 5, 2009 9:21 PM PST
There are of course pros and cons to each application, but I for one am extremely excited about having Picasa on the Mac. Perhaps I didn't take the necessary time to learn iPhoto's ins and outs when I migrated to the Mac a year ago, but I've managed to learn far more complex applications like FCP and Motion...yet still I do get confused as to what iPhoto is doing in terms of managing my files.

Picasa on the other hand, is lightning fast to learn, as well as to scan through thousands of photos...if you're a long time iPhoto user and haven't tried Picasa for any length of time, I'd suggest you give it a couple weeks. I believe it will increase my productivity finding the photos I'm after by an order of magnitude. I'm sure there are some more advanced features in iPhoto, but that's what I'd use Photoshop for I suppose.

I really do consider myself a fast study, and I'm always after doing things faster and more efficiently with keystrokes (if you don't use Quicksilver yet and consider yourself a power user, GET IT!) -- so my vote is for Picasa for now. From an intuitive standpoint, Picasa really shines. I was really disappointed by iPhoto overall, because I really expected it to be far slicker like many other OS X applications are.

Have an open mind if you haven't tried Picasa. It really is pretty slick, but you'd have to put it through its paces first.
Reply to this comment
by random truth January 6, 2009 10:59 PM PST
Yes options are always good.
by jdukvoac January 6, 2009 5:44 AM PST
I should be shocked that you have persisted with complaining about your switch to Macs over the holidays, especially after the responces you got from your previous article you wrote. I will say that first off I was a Microsoft user for about 20 years and have switched to Mac only 2 1/2 years ago, but since then have never wanted to own another Windows computer. Did it take some time to get used to it? Yes. Was I able to get all the same programs for Mac that I had for Windows? No. Did I manage to find applications that would do the same as their Windows counterpart? For the most part, yes.

Just a bit of friendly advice, try to put aside the "Well with Microsoft I did it this way, but it's disapointing on my Mac because it's not like Microsoft" mentallity, and stop, breathe, read and learn. I know it's hard for guys sometimes to stop and read something like a manual to help us better understand how to do things. Hell, it's in our genetic makeup not to read manuals, but I promiss you that if you take the time to pick up a book, a manual, read a PDF, you might actually start to enjoy your new Mac.

So, my advice? Ditch the "well on my old system I did this" mentality, and when you are having some quality alone time in the washroom how about openning up that manual you should get and read a little. Odds are, that you will find your user experience much nicer.
Reply to this comment
by Renegade Knight January 6, 2009 3:35 PM PST
Would you settle for the "well I have a job to do, and need to figure it out on this new bucket of bolts" mentality?
by saundy39 January 6, 2009 8:00 AM PST
I have been using Picasa 2 on the windows side of my Mac. I downloaded Picasa 3 and lost every picture that I had. I have not been able to retrieve any of them. Because of this, I am afraid to download Picasa on my Mac side.

Does anyone have any advise as to what I can do?
Reply to this comment
by Heyju January 6, 2009 8:42 AM PST
Basically iPhoto sucks because it tries too hard to hold your hand and hide details. It only works great if you don't have too many photos and don't try to do too much. It still gets slow and funky when you have a large library. It precludes any use of the photos directly as files. It gets easily confused if any of the photos move of the names change from under it. You can't easily split your photo library into separate disks.
I was an iphoto user before I was a picasa user. In general I think apple software is great. Iphoto still sucks
I am very glad to see picasa on the mac.
Reply to this comment
by Wilts09 January 6, 2009 9:02 AM PST
A couple of minor comments that you made about iPhoto that ought to be corrected.

Firstly, you do NOT have to copy all your existing photos to use iPhoto - there is an option under preferences to just use the existing copies. The only extra "duplicates" that iPhoto uses are those where the photo is edited and an edited copy saved in the iPhoto database. Editing in iPhoto is non-destructive hence the need to keep a copy.

Secondly, you can always create a temporary album for batch editing/exporting etc - I do this all the time. It should give you the same effect as the photo tray in Picasa.

Finally, there is a nice plug in for iPhoto which will upload your photos directly into Picasa web pages as an export. From what I can see, it does exactly the same as using the Picasa application.

I've no major axe to grind but I thought that these points should be cleared up.
Reply to this comment
Showing 1 of 2 pages (47 Comments)

Search Download Blog posts

advertisement

About The Download Blog

Download.com editors cover the world of downloadable software and beyond.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Download Blog topics