What do you use for photo organization on your Mac?

Picasa is the way

@DrNo
But it doesn’t run on a Mac..

@DrNo Picasa isn’t available for the Mac. I like it on a PC, but iPhoto is the closest I’ve come to it on a Mac.

I use iPhoto. You might want to use Shoebox instead (by KavaSoft).

I try to use iPhoto, but iPhoto runs so badly for me that it feels like I’m boxing with my computer. I basically don’t use anything, but I still keep my eye out for a good, free, iPhoto alternative that works well. I haven’t found one yet.

iPhoto or apeture

Adobe Lightroom

I’ve been okay with iPhoto.

I use aperture. It was free and is a nicer better version of iPhoto for the most part.

I use Aperture, but I do find it deathly slow. I like it, however. It does a beautiful job of keeping my photos in order, though sometimes I’m confused as how it’s organization system is supposed to work. I hear the new version is much faster, but tragically I lack the funds to upgrade.

Before I used Aperture, I just kept my photos in folders. That worked out OK. Especially now that OS X has CoverFlow (not just an aesthetic frivolity, it turns out to be extremely handy for browsing photos!), QuickLook, and an excellent Spotlight, that should be a reasonably solution as well.

iPhoto, but if I was a pro photographer, it’d be Aperture.

I persoanly use a combination of my camera and a sortment of scripts that send certain files to certain folders when I connect my camera. However for mass viewing I used lightroom in the past and came to hate it, iPhoto has major control issues for my liking, and apiture takes to many resorces to fast. I actually use coverflow or adobe bridge. If I find any more programs I’ll let you know.

I despise iPhoto, so I just sort them in folders on my own. It’s incredibly shitty and disorganized. I hate it. For other advice, you can see my old question on this subject.

iPhoto. The reason is that Aperture has a terribly crippled interface, like most Apple Pro-apps.

How so?

Have you noticed Aperture doesn’t use the standard Aqua theme, but something like a pre-Aqua interface. It really isn’t nice for me.

iPhoto for me. Thinking about upgrading to Aperture, but to be honest I’m too amateur-ish to benefit from it fully.

iPhoto is well incorporated into different apps on the mac so iPhoto is the way to go. Besides it comes with every Mac free.

@Klaas4, that’s for 2 reasons, 1 it looks more ‘pro’, its the software version of the brushed aluminum hardware, and also because Apple didn’t make those apps, they bought out the companies that produced them and haven’t made many changes to their overall design.

Thanks for clarifying.

@bluemukaki I’m pretty sure that Aperture and Final Cut Pro were actually mostly developed by Apple. They did acquire some applications, but those are lower profile (Logic, Shake, and Motion, I think). In either case, even if I’m wrong about that, it’s clear that Apple actively prefers the slate gray look for their pro-apps (considering that Final Cut is huge for Apple, you’d think they’d redo the interface if they didn’t like it). And they have good reason, in my opinion. I’ve definitely heard creative pros complain that the Mac OS X interface is too distracting when they’re working. I think the pro-app interfaces are an attempt to turn down that distraction.

@ukasaka Aperture has most of the same tie-ins to the OS that iPhoto has. You just have to install it before you see them.

Not that I’m in love with Aperture (as I said above) but I thought I’d clear up some misconceptions.

Aperture is quite good and professional. Now there is also BRIDGE where you can classify your pictures by… anything (by color, size, people, abstract…....).
link