Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Why is it so hard to find a decent image organizer?

<< < (51/65) > >>

tomos:
I love the idea of exifPro, and bought a license. However, as I've noted elsewhere, it generates HUGE index files (almost 2GB) and two deal breakers for me:
-Darwin (April 07, 2010, 11:32 AM)
--- End quote ---

:) just in case you missed my response on last page :)

Re Exif-pro:
AFAICT it's cataloging [indexing] features are really intended for keeping track of stuff on external drives/discs
- there's no other advantage to cataloging that I can see
-tomos (April 05, 2010, 01:53 PM)
--- End quote ---
of course,
this may well be what you were using it for . . . (I've never used that feature after the first attempt; but I did use the programme just last week to sort a batch of 400 photos of a wedding & it worked very well for that.)

superboyac:
Dormouse owns this topic.  You're the man, man!  :Thmbsup:

J-Mac:
Dormouse. I was just kidding you. Look at the sentence I was talking about - I know what you meant but to anyone not reading through the thread it probably looks bewildering! No better way you could have put it though.

Personally I'm not using RAW images - like I mentioned I don’t get to take many meaningful shots anymore and mostly work with older photos; though that presents its own challenges. Have you ever tried to digitize and them repair/optimize old, old tin and silver pics?

Thanks!

Jim

cmpm:
A simple organizer - write up on gHacks.

http://www.ghacks.net/2010/04/08/digital-photo-organizer-adebis-photo-sorter/

Seems like it may be something I would use when needed.

zevel:
A cataloger stores details of all your photos, allowing very fast searches, allows you to keep lots of different virtual collections, keep track of different versions of the same thing.

A browser, sorter, tagger is like a file explorer taking in details of all the files, allowing you to browse them and add tags, ratings etc. It allows you to sort them rapidly, so that you can decide what to keep or not etc. PM allows you to add tags to the photo itself as well as to a sidecar (not many progs did that at the beginning though a number do now). Most cataloging products allow you to do all of these as well as being catalogers, but they won't (usually at least) be so fast.

You need to realise that this market is full of very, very specialised programs mostly at high prices. Adobe Bridge is another example of the same sort of product. Some progs specialise purely in downloading images from cards and cameras (eg Breeze Downloader).
-Dormouse (April 06, 2010, 05:16 PM)
--- End quote ---
Fair enough.

Let me tell you what I am looking for in a photo organizer/cataloger. I appreciate your suggestions.
I currently have about 250K images, disorganized into some 4K folders that people lumped them into, taking over 100GB with more coming once in a while.  By and large they are JPEGs with a handful of GIFs and PNGs, no RAWs.
I need to assign multiple tags to them so that I can say, for example, "give me the images tagged as sports, kids, outdoors" or be more specific and request "soccer", "baseball" or "tennis" instead of "sports.
I want the tags to be hierarchical, so that tagging an image as "dolphin" will implicitly return it when searching for "mammals" or "animals".  Ideally, it would be possible for tags to participate in multiple hierarchies so that the "dolphin" tag above will also match "marine", etc.  I expect to have lots of tags and categories, including cross-category tags.  This should probably be a feature of the search, see below.
I also need the program to be flexible: allow adding/removing/changing tags on single images, folders, folder trees or just groups of selected images; changing the tag/category structure and having the changes automatically applied; moving images between folders; etc.
And last but not least, I want it to be FAST, both when indexing and when searching.

Does such application exist?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page