popmoose

Give Photo Mechanic a look.

BatManPete Loc: Way Up North!

==========
Here's an idea vv ¿? ¿? ¿? ¿?
Ever hear of MicSft EXCEL ¿? ¿? or any spreadsheet. U can have as many "sort" vertical columns as U desire. . . . 2, 10, 50 or 100 sort" columns. [depending on how U name the sort columns... Date; Time; Location; Weather; etc. or maybe U like the A;B;C option. First alpha character [A waterfalls; B sun,] or use #1 waterfalls; #2 sun; etc. for column names.

If U go over #9, I suggest U number vertical column names as: #01 name to #099 name. . . If U go more columns, start with #0099 name.

The last vert. column in file could contain a "text" box feature for notes/description of item/ etc. Text boxes don't have to show until clicked upon. That way all vertical/horizontal rows/columns will be the same height/width.

No MicroSoft products on Ur' system.... Head on over to GOOGLE. They have ideas for just about anything. Good Luck!

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

Certainly, this is an approach to a poor man's DAM (Digital Asset Management) system, but it can soon show flaws if you are dealing with many thousands of images. Not that it isn't possible to use a spreadsheet (after all, database tables are essentially defined as consisting columns (fields) and rows (data entries), but it can be quite cumbersome to track and update when everything is done manually in a standalone spreadsheet as compared to a program designed to handle the kinds of workflow photographers use.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Moose, I ended up designing my own SQL data base for this. Between that, php, and thumbnails of my images, I can search, sort, and retrieve images quickly.

There are some public license document control programs out now that will do similar, or better in some cases.

The nice thing about this setup is that it is independent of the imaging software used.
--Bob

--Bob

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

You can only state this if you have used every other existing photo database program.

I use ACDSee. Is it better than Lightroom, I have no clue because I never used Lightroom. Have you used and become familiar with ACDSee?

ACDSee has been doing it a lot longer than Adobe has been doing Lightroom, so it has experience on it's side. ACDSee18 is also cheaper, and can be had on sale for under $50 quite often.

I've so far only read one post by someone that used both Lightroom and ACDSee and he said ACDSee was better. So, that is 1 vote for acdsee and 0 votes for lightroom, whatever that is worth :-)

I might add that the catalogs are not interchangeable, and I know of no way to import one to the other, so whichever one you use, you will quickly be stuck with it unless you want to redo all your keywords, ratings and so on.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

I use Windows Explorer and Adobe Bridge. Many people don't realize that Bridge does cataloging extremely well because they don't bother to learn everything about Bridge. But that's the case with most software out there. Personally, I find Bridge to be a better file cataloger and manager than Lightroom.

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

I haven't used Lightroom, but have looked at Bridge, and ACDSee eats Bridges lunch. There is no comparison, so if Bridge is better than Lightroom, I would highly recommend ACDSee.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

LOL. Adobe has been doing photographs for about 16 years longer than ACDSee since Photoshop came along in 1990. Lightroom was released on February 19, 2007, although a beta version was released to the public on January 9, 2006. Interestingly, ACDSee Pro Ver. 1 was released to the public on January 9, 2006, too. So I'm going to go ahead and give the experience factor to Adobe.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Therein lies the problem. You've only "looked at Bridge." When I looked at Bridge the first, second, and third times, I went back to Lightroom and Photoshop. Then, after spending several years digging deep into Bridge, Photoshop, Lightroom, GIMP, ACDSee, PaintShop Pro, Photo-Paint, IrfanView, and Picasa, it was pretty obvious that Bridge won the cataloging and management war. But I'm not the one to do the tutorials to convince everyone, mainly because I have work to do using all those programs to create my Photographic Art to sell.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Adobe might been doing photographs for about 16 years, not photo cataloging. ACDSee was doing photo *cataloging* since the mid 90's, so it has 10 years more experience than Adobe.

You can give the experience edge to Adobe if you want, I don't particularly care.

I used Bridge, have you used ACDSee?

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

:-) Yes, it truly is amazing. I've recommended it too many times to count. Folks come to this forum for guidance about such issues, but have no clue about the level of expertise, nor mindset, of the folks giving the advice. Presents somewhat of a quandary for them.

My statement has consistently been that, for the money, you cannot acquire a better product than Lightroom for managing an image library. This first assumes a person WANTS to manage their photos efficiently. If not, then everything else is a moot point. It's obvious that Adobe has a commitment to the product, which means it's gonna be around for a long time, thereby eliminating obsolescence. A very important consideration.

There is an abundance of training available for the product, much of it free. This is important to me, and likely is to many others.

It interfaces directly with the defacto standard, Photoshop. This is akin to having the cake and eating it too.

None of this is to say there aren't alternatives, and some of them are pretty good, but determining which one is better for a given situation could prove to be an expensive, and time-consuming, endeavor.

What do I know about any of this, you may ask? I've worked in a software development shop for the last 25+ years, and our number one rule is "don't re-invent the wheel". If there's a product available that will satisfy most of the requirements, there's no reason to build another one. Our time is as important as our money.

Lightroom works, and not one of the versions has disappointed me over the years. Hope you find my words helpful.

jcarlosjr Loc: Orange County

Already said, PSE uses pointer not copies.

shirleyhogan

TO: MORNING STAR
Thank you for that information. "Learn how to Add Tags to Photos in Windows" has been on my to do list for a couple of years now. I did not know that simple fact.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Not only have I used it, I have been using it since 2006. The nature of my businesses is that I need digital imaging software of all types, and I have everything on my computers, even those that are not very popular. I have to know them just in case a prospective Client comes along with questions.