Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Try Kodak EasyShare, a possible iPhoto replacement' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Try Kodak EasyShare, a possible iPhoto replacement
Authored by: pkishor on May 13, '04 12:26:59PM

I should also point out a few more things... I have been a longtime user of the most excellent iView-Multimedia Pro from the time it was real shareware at around $40 or so. Upgraded once and am now at v 1.5.7. Now iVMP has become way too expensive for me ($72 upgrade... $199 full price), so I have been looking for alternatives.

iPhoto has great features, but two things suck about it -- its insistence on moving the pics in its own fold (yes, there are workarounds, but they are all kludgy); and its lack of speed. I can't use it, esp. because of its slowness.

QPict is very fast, and is affordable. But, it lacks some significant features such as print layouts and html exports.

I even tried writing my own with Perl and ImageMagick and html, but I really need something on the desktop, not a web based program.

Yesterday I tested EasyShare against iPhoto and a trial version of iVMP 2.5 on my G3/600 iBook with 640 Mb RAM. I dropped a folder with all my digital images on these apps, about 3000 images, about 1.4 Gb.

iVMP was blazingly fast.... at least seemed so. It built a list view in about 1 minute and then another 10 mins or so to read all the info and complete a 15 Mb catalog. But it will cost me $72 to upgrade, and I have to make a decision in the next few days. After that the upgrade price goes up to $99.

iPhoto was the dog, as expected. About 35 mins later I killed the process. It had imported about 150 images, moved them, and built its complicated db structure of various files and folders.

Kodak EasyShare took about 1 hour to import everything. Once it was done, the performance was still snappy.

Yes, the interface is a bit amateurish, with some silly icons, but all in all, I recommend this as a pick-of-the-week program. Keep in mind, it seems to be anonymous -- no mention of this program on Macupdate. Surprising. So, spread the word.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Try Kodak EasyShare, a possible iPhoto replacement
Authored by: allanmarcus on May 13, '04 02:24:07PM

VersionTracker Link: http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/17221 (since 2002-09-15)

I have no idea why it's not on MacUpdate.

I have to admit that I like iPhoto cus I can share using MyPhoto. The ability to create albums in iPhoto and have the albums instants available in myPhoto is wonderful. I have friends that love Gallery (http://gallery.menalto.com/) and I admit that i haven't played with it. Maybe some combination of easyshare and gallery would work.

BTW, if you want to print your photos, check out http://www.winkflash.com/ - hard to compete with their prices. Good quality too. No mass upload tool for Mac, but if we keep asking, they might build it. They do supply a SASE for CD-ROM submissions for people with tons of pictures or slow connections.

Cost Per Print
4x6 18¢ each
3x5 actual size 3.25x5
18¢ each
5x7 29¢ each
6x8 79¢ each
8x10 $1.99 each
10x13 $4.50 each
Wallets(4) 39¢ for sheet of 4

Digital Sizes
Size Cost Per Print
4x5.3 18¢ each
5x6.6 29¢ each
6x8 79¢ each
8x10.6 $1.99 each



[ Reply to This | # ]
Fast at what cost?
Authored by: puggsly on May 14, '04 01:35:07AM

Yes, it can take some time to import a large database into iPhoto on a system with a slow drive (a laptop) as it is actually making copies of the files into it's own storage structure (which by the way, unless you don't trust it, who really cares?). But once there this version is actually very fast for what it does.

There is one thing that has always amazed me about iPhoto. The quality and flexibility of it's organize mode. Many people will say it is slower than others, well what a shock! it actually previews photos and not thumb nails. Most other applications limit how large of a preview they will give you because they simply stretch the thumbnail which is virtually useless at anything over 2X.

You can checkout what I mean at this address.
http://homepage.mac.com/puggsly/PhotoAlbum17.html

It is also important to understand this is no a "Mac" application. The interface is really bad! When editing you can't use cmd-z to undo (you can't even use the edit menu). The print option is only available from a single location and I could not for the life of me figure out where I had to be to enable the "send message" command in the file menu.

It also has a lame email interface instead of using your preferred mail client. It's weak attempt at address book integration just sucks (just try to email to a alternate email address for someone).

This may be a good option for some people with slower hardware but it is no iPhoto killer. BTW, one other option is good old graphic converter. If you really like to keep your photos in your own folder system. The browse feature of graphic converter is not bad. And it does very good slide shows and has some killer editing tools.

But for me, it is iPhoto.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Fast at what cost?
Authored by: rlapka on May 14, '04 12:22:38PM

The thing I like best about EasyShare is its organization. It organized the photos by year and by date of import before that feature got into iPhoto4. I still use EasyShare instead of iPhoto because of ease of use. The only issue is when you use iMovie or iDVD, they only look at the iPhoto directory, so sometimes I have to import.



[ Reply to This | # ]