Focusing On Photo-Album Software
The first time I cropped a photo, I had to use an enlarger in a darkroom reeking of developing chemicals. (Pretend you just heard me say that in Grandpa Simpson's voice.) Compared to that, almost every photo-editing program that I've used seems breathtakingly simple.
I hadn't compared these applications in a while, though, so today's column and podcast (listen/subscribe/iTunes) cover five free programs for Windows--Adobe's Photoshop Album Starter Edition, Google's Picasa, HP's Photosmart Essential, Kodak's EasyShare and Preclick's Preclick Gold.
I opted not to cover payware candidates like Adobe Photoshop Elements or Microsoft's Digital Image. I also decided against writing about a few other free programs that I tried out: Corel's Snapfire got cut when I realized it didn't have any sort of built-in Web sharing, and Shutterfly's Shutterfly Studio just lost out for its slow performance under Windows Vista and the extreme non-obviousness of its e-mailing and printing options.
We had a great discussion over the last two days about these and other programs. Many of you suggested higher-end programs to use when the editing features in a Picasa or an EasyShare fall short. I think some of the applications suggested are a little too techie-oriented (seriously, have you taken a look at the GIMP lately?), but I can second two recommendations: Paint.Net is a good, free image editor in Windows, and Graphic Converter is a near-essential shareware item on the Mac.
Speaking of the Mac--I only briefly mentioned iPhoto in the story, but after trying out these other applications I think iPhoto remains the program to beat in terms of organizing and editing capability. It is, however, weak in terms of its online photo-sharing options, because it only supports Apple's $100/year .Mac service. To fix that and easily share your iPhoto pictures on another site, you'll need to use an add-on program for the task, such as Shutterfly's Export Assistant for iPhoto, Kodak's Ofoto Express or Picasa's iPhoto plug-in.
I'd write more, but doing this column has reminded me that I really, really need to finish sorting through last year's vacation photos... before, you know, this summer's vacation rolls around. Please continue discussing your preferences in photo-album software and sites in the comments.
By Rob Pegoraro |
April 26, 2007; 7:00 AM ET
| Category:
Pictures
Previous: Vonage Vexed By Verizon. And You? |
Next: R.I.P., Jack Valenti
Posted by: Dan | April 26, 2007 11:03 AM
I agree with Rob - very nice article. However, would have liked a mention of some of the free online editors, like picnik.com, which integrate with the larger photo-sharing sites. Speaking of the larger photo-sharing site, how did the wonderful Flickr not get a mention?
Posted by: John | April 26, 2007 2:23 PM
@Dan: EXIF data is the section of a JPEG for camera related information, not annotations. There are other sections--for annotations the legacy IPTC standard is used, but XMP is beginning to replace it. Last time I checked only Photoshop Album and Picasa write IPTC data into your files for prosperity, although both have quirks.
There are various utilities around (such as MS Photo Info and iTag) that will do this separately, but that's obviously not as good as having the functionality integrated within the organisation application. If you want fully-functional IPTC/XMP annotation saving at the moment you really have to upgrade to a 'Pro' application like iView MediaPro (now MS Expression Media).
In terms of integration with photo-sharing services with iPhoto, there are many plugins. We develop PictureSync which supports many providers and also other applications such as MediaPro. It includes an IPTC/XMP editor that can also be used to save all your iPhoto annotations as IPTC. There's a free version and a Windows release is in the works. In future we'll be fleshing this out with more organisational functionality too.
Posted by: Jacob | April 26, 2007 3:56 PM
Flickr: I didn't mention Flickr because it's a site only, not a program you run on your desktop. I do use and like Flickr... but I wish the free version weren't quite so limited in its capabilities. I mean, only three sets of photos at a time? I understand the file-storage limits, but it's not like it costs Yahoo anything extra to display more sets of pictures on one page.
Jacob: Thanks for the detailed comments! You're the guy behind Holocore, right?
Posted by: Rob Pegoraro | April 26, 2007 4:12 PM
I just bought another Dell for the office and the Guy told me to get the line that still had XP because Vista is having it's problems and I don't have the time in the office to figure it out. I will get it at home where I have more time to devote to this thing. Was that bad advice?
Posted by: Ted | April 26, 2007 5:52 PM
You say that Picassa only uploads to Google's WebAlbums. If you click on the Print button, it gives you options to upload to Snapfish, Shutterfly, to name just a few. (not Flickr, or other filesharing only sites though)
You also say Snapfish requires users to login to share photos. If you are sharing an album with someone, at the bottom of the share screen you have the option to require login or NOT. It's your choice. If you click no login, when your friend clicks on the email link, they are taken directly to your album without the need for login.
I wonder how many other inaccuracies exist in this and other articles you write.
I also suggest you include a link on your blog entry to the actual article you are referencing in your blog. At first I didn't recognize that I was reading a blog entry about the column you wrote. I tried the podcast link and looked all over for "the rest of the article". Didn't find it until I realized I had to go back to the Post homepage to look for your column.
Posted by: Pete | April 28, 2007 4:06 PM
Sorry, forgot to correct another inaccuracy about Picassa. It too has a chronological feature called "Timeline". It's located in the top main menu bar.
Thanks
Posted by: Pete | April 28, 2007 4:18 PM
Picasa is OK but Google is slow to address problems with the program, like:
* Safe Delete on import is not safe, it can corrupt your memory card. Picasa doesn't check to see it has safely copied all the files before deleting from the source.
* Comments are horribly restricted: can't use regular Windows text-edit field features, and it is limited in international contexts - only ASCII characters usable
Posted by: Mike | April 29, 2007 11:27 AM
Pete: Speaking of inaccuracies, you misspelled Picasa. Notice it's spelled with one s, not two.
Of course, posting without a return link, I guess it's easy for you to hide behind the cloak of anonymity. Courage, man.
I'm sure with your wall-to-wall negative attitude, you're the life of every party you attend.
Posted by: Carmi | April 29, 2007 1:59 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
Rob, really nice article, lots of great info! One question, though--which of these will let you "tag" photos by actually writing into the exif data, as opposed to storing the caption info in some proprietary format? Since I am storing the photos for longevity, I'd like to know all my work captioning them will not be lost if I choose to switch album software. Thanks!!