What is a better program to replace Apple Mac OS X 10.5.7's iPhoto?
in [Mac Applications]
|
Prev: 3-D font programs?
Next: iMail Rejecting Password
From: erilar on 19 Dec 2009 16:10 In article <isw-A697A2.09462519122009@[216.168.3.50]>, isw <isw(a)witzend.com> wrote: > I hope you, or somebody, is scanning (and annotating) those old photos > before they get too damaged. Someone is doing it with the ones that get forwarded to me. My own are in albums, but many are also on the computer because I scanned them in to send to my sister. -- Erilar, biblioholic medievalist http://www.chibardun.net/~erilarlo
From: erilar on 19 Dec 2009 16:14 In article <hgje2j$euv$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Wes Groleau <Groleau+news(a)FreeShell.org> wrote: > erilar wrote: > > The thought of an iBooks for my thousands of books is simply beyond > > comprehension. I'd need one of Asimov's self-aware robots to catalog my > > books! > > Each time you read or consult a book, catalog it. Actually, most of my nonfiction reference books that do get consulted now and then are cataloged on librarything, which does all the database stuff for me. Fiction is simply alphabetized, but most is 4 deep. I can dig things out on the rare occasions when someone in the family wants to borrow or I want to reread a series. > > If you never touch it, then why do you care whether it's cataloged? See above. -- Erilar, biblioholic medievalist http://www.chibardun.net/~erilarlo
From: erilar on 19 Dec 2009 16:15 In article <isw-D44587.10085019122009@[216.168.3.50]>, isw <isw(a)witzend.com> wrote: > In article <drache-2EB16C.10182819122009(a)nothing.attdns.com>, > erilar <drache(a)chibardun.net.invalid> wrote: > > -- snip-- > > > The thought of an iBooks for my thousands of books is simply beyond > > comprehension. I'd need one of Asimov's self-aware robots to catalog my > > books! > > Not so much for books (though I think it would probably work fairly > well), but for all the other random documents I've acquired over the > years, I finally gave up on trying to create (and actually use) a > structured filing system, and just let Spotlight take care of it. I can > always recall one or two words, or a phrase, to search for that will > give me a tolerably short list of documents to look at. Spotlight does have its uses, doesn't it? I do something like that at times, too. -- Erilar, biblioholic medievalist http://www.chibardun.net/~erilarlo
From: Richard Maine on 19 Dec 2009 16:20 erilar <drache(a)chibardun.net.invalid> wrote: > The thought of an iBooks for my thousands of books is simply beyond > comprehension. I'd need one of Asimov's self-aware robots to catalog my > books! I'm currently using BookCollector (collectorz.com). It handles thousands of books quite nicely. So do quite a few competitors. As did the homebrew book cataloging system I did about a decade and a half ago in Turbo Pascal; it was only a year or two ago that I gave that up for a commercial product. I was getting tired of having to fire up VMWare to use my homebrew one, plus it was pretty crude in most ways. The one thing that held me back for so long was handling contents of anthologies and the like. I wanted to be able to do things like find out what anthology or magazine I might have copies of a particular short story in. To me, that was one of the most critical elements of a book cataloging system for home use. I can find the books easily enough by looking on my shelves, where I keep them organized by author. A few things such as Ace doubles can be a slight issue, but not a big deal. Finding a particular short story is a whole different level of difficulty, though. My homebrew system handled contents fine. Most commercial options don't even try. I've seen recommendations on support forums to do things like enter the table of contents all into a comments field, which is a pretty half-assed solution. Might as well just enter the whole database into a big text file (which would sort of work in a pinch, but you loose a lot of capability and convenience that way - at least it is portable). BookCollector is about the only comercial option I found that explicitly handles contents. You do have to manually enter them, which does make for a bit of a "project" as I've only got a few thousand books, but probably more like 10,000 contents items. -- Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience; email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment. domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
From: AV3 on 19 Dec 2009 16:46
On Dec/19/2009 12:0350 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > isw<isw(a)witzend.com> writes: > >> In article<drache-6C85CB.17250918122009(a)news.eternal-september.org>, >> erilar<drache(a)chibardun.net.invalid> wrote: >> >>> In article<jollyroger-974D11.22503417122009(a)news.individual.net>, >>> Jolly Roger<jollyroger(a)pobox.com> wrote: >>> >>>> In article<hgemlt$78i$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, >>>> Wes Groleau<Groleau+news(a)FreeShell.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> AES wrote: >>>>> (in defense of Finder as a better organizer than iTunes or iPhoto) >>>>>> The key aspect of my use of a Mac laptop as the core of my personal and >>>>>> professional life is precisely a file/folder structure which organizes >>>>>> all the varying topics (professional projects, hobbies, interests) in >>>>>> which I'm interested -- a structure which I've created myself, so that >>>>>> I >>>>>> therefore know exactly how its organized. >>>>> >>>>> I have to agree. iTunes insists that artists have albums and albums >>>>> have songs. Want to keep several versions of the same song together? >>>>> Nope. Several artists collaborate on an album? Pick ONE. >>>> >>>> Couldn't you just as well use the Grouping and Composer fields, or >>>> playlists, for that? >>> >>> I do strange things to "genre" so I get different combinations on my >>> iPod. Example: I have one playlist labeled "Classical" but within it the >>> "genre" specifies violin, piano, flute, cello, etc. >> >> To the best of my ability to figure it out, if your music collection is >> nearly all "classical", iTunes is totally incapable of managing it by >> itself. I use an external structure of directories and subdirectories >> there, too. And it only barely works. > > My music collection is nearly all classical. And yet iTunes manages > it fine. I want to keep track of composer and performer(s) (most), then > title of work, date of recording. > > iTunes keeps track of all of this, and allows me to search or order by > any of these things. > > I don't make much use of genre (though if I needed to invent my own > categories, I suppose I could). > > In the old days, I had my LPs along shelves in order by composer. > This worked OK too, mostly, though it is inferior to iTunes > because it's hard to search by performer (for example) and it was > unclear what to do with albums that had works by more than one > composer on them. > > This is still how my CDs are arranged. (People who listen to > classical music still buy CDs.) > > Anyway, I'm mystified by why one would assume that a classical music > collection on the computer can't be organized with iTunes. > It can be, but it is a lot of trouble, because when CEED identifies a CD, the information is often inconsistent and/or erroneous. I find it particularly aggravating that the term "Artist" means 'performing artist(s)' to some and 'composer' to others. I attribute that to different meanings for the word "artist" in different languages, but I don't exclude mistaken interpretations. Just today I imported a 2-disk opera, disk 1 going into "Compilations" and disc 2 going into a file starting with the first initial of a singer. It would be a lot easier to be able to choose "Album" as the first category of classification. -- ++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====++ ||Arnold VICTOR, New York City, i. e., <arvimideQ(a)Wearthlink.net> || ||Arnoldo VIKTORO, Nov-jorkurbo, t. e., <arvimideQ(a)Wearthlink.net> || ||Remove capital letters from e-mail address for correct address/ || || Forigu majusklajn literojn el e-poŝta adreso por ĝusta adreso || ++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====++ |