Google Photos is next generation.

[Razeus]

And it's about to get better.

http://gizmodo.com/google-search-just-got-way-better-at-understanding-your-1742330189

Google is full steam ahead on machine learning. Looks like Microsoft is doing some things too with their photos. Google Photos is head and shoulders above anything Apple can do. They've freaking nailed faces with version 1.0, and now I can associated a name to them. The search is incredible.

Apple Photos really feels very 2000's by comparison. It's a shame on their stance on privacy and doing everything on people's phones instead of harvesting the power of their servers. It simply won't carry over to your next device. Your iPhone and iPad will yield different results, and your Mac won't yield anything because Siri is STILL not available for it. It's a bizarre strategy that only tells me they are only concerned about iPhone and only iPhone. They are failing to see the bigger picture. While I love Apple hardware, every company will eventually have their weakness exposed, and Apple's is showing.

 

[762999]

I partially use google photos but for there are several things I don't like. If I go at an event, Photos will automatically upload my photos over wifi, so far no problem. When they're uploaded, I normally group them for the event, but the problem is that you can remove a photo from an event but you cannot delete them. If you remove pictures from a collection, you must find the same pictures again in the timeline and delete them time from that place. It's very inconvenient for me. I prefer to do my selections/editing from within a collection.

When you view PHOTOS, you cannot clearly see in they have been added to a collection or not. I usually take pictures of my dog, wine bottles, and put them back to distinct collections but I always wonder which one is already there.

 

[Indydenny]

So, you work for Google? I'm just not seeing what you're seeing!

 

[Paco II]

If I were to venture a guess, it's because Google does not see collections as the future of photo organization. Their search capability will get so good, you won't need them.

I partially use google photos but for there are several things I don't like. If I go at an event, Photos will automatically upload my photos over wifi, so far no problem. When they're uploaded, I normally group them for the event, but the problem is that you can remove a photo from an event but you cannot delete them. If you remove pictures from a collection, you must find the same pictures again in the timeline and delete them time from that place. It's very inconvenient for me. I prefer to do my selections/editing from within a collection.

When you view PHOTOS, you cannot clearly see in they have been added to a collection or not. I usually take pictures of my dog, wine bottles, and put them back to distinct collections but I always wonder which one is already there.

 

[762999]

If I were to venture a guess, it's because Google does not see collections as the future of photo organization. Their search capability will get so good, you won't need them.

yes and no, the search is really good, but the beauty of collections is the sharing aspect. It's way easier to manage collection sharing that individual photos.

I also have collections for the trips I do. Having to search would be a huge pain. Search is not a solution. Now I basically use it to store unimportant stuff or alternate quality versions I want to share with others.

 

[sarge]

You don't HAVE to use the free Google. You can just pay the $2/month for 100GB.

sorry = double posted

 

[sarge]

You don't HAVE to use the free Google. You can just pay the $2/month for 100GB.

But I guess everyone wants something for free. If only our economy worked that way.

Our economy did work that way for 200+ years - it was called slavery. I think the point V3rlon was making was that if you aren't careful about it, you'll be duped into putting yourself in chains and reverting to that model before you know what hit you.

 

[mcmul]

Google Photos is a brilliant product. The quality of the animations, collages, movies and stories is just incredible. I can really only marvel at the quality of their engineers because it is superb. I actually swapped my library from iCloud to Google as a result -- taking the storage plan with it. Honestly, if you take lots of pictures but aren't into all of the editing and whatnot that proper photographers do then do yourself a favour by seriously considering it. I really don't think you'll regret it.

 

[Razeus]

New feature coming in a few days.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/techn...re-that’s-perfect-for-the-holidays/ar-AAgfOtJ

I got to hand it to Google. They are on top of it.

 

[Paco II]

In the last year I made three great app decisions: dumped Mailbox, dumped Carousel, embraced Google Photos. I'm feeling 3/3 right now

New feature coming in a few days.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/techn...re-that’s-perfect-for-the-holidays/ar-AAgfOtJ

I got to hand it to Google. They are on top of it.

 

[JamSandwich]

Anyone have any insight on how to best approach backing up my photos. I had it set to upload my iPhoto library (great!). Now my iPhoto library is a "Photos" library. If I ask Google to upload that library, it wants to send thousands of images, which I don't want to do (again).

Is there a workaround?

For the moment I've just put a temp folder on my desktop that I have Google watching. So when I import, I'll just copy the originals there to upload them. It's not an ideal solution.

 

[Razeus]

Google employs de-dupe technology.

 

[Polydactyl]

Unfortunately, Google Photos seems to be a one way trip when you upload. Edits made to the Photos folder in Google Drive are not reflected in the Google Photos app when you edit them using third party apps on your computer, even though the edits appear to synch in Google Drive. Changes made to files in watched folders will also not be uploaded.

This means you can't manage photos directly on your mac/PC and expect that Google Photos will track the changes made using thrid party apps. Google drive will, but not Google Photos. Apparently Google is maintaining two seperate, and not completely identical libraries of your photos on their servers. Very confusing.

Dropbox/Carousel was much more seamless in this respect.

All that being said, the search feature in google photos is amazing, and the app is quite slick. No one else comes close to matching their features. Unfortunately, I don't trust Google to not abandon Photos in a year or two, since they have proven unafraid to kill popular features that they can't monetize.

 

[Paco II]

In regards to your ending comment, this is why I am moving away from using albums or collections, and depending on photo metadata for organization. I am spending the time updating time stamps, location info, and other core EXIF data on all other photos that don't have it. Even if GP were to go away, future alternatives will likely rely on this same data. It'll just be a matter of pulling down my photos on GP and uploading them elsewhere.

That said, I'd be surprised if GP gets killed off. It's already become a core component of Google's ecosystem, more so than Picasa or Google+ Photos ever were.

Unfortunately, I don't trust Google to not abandon Photos in a year or two, since they have proven unafraid to kill popular features that they can't monetize.

 

[Polydactyl]

I am spending the time updating time stamps, location info, and other core EXIF data on all other photos that don't have it.

Exactly. I have spent the last 10 years organizing my photos this way. Apple, Google, and the most of the rest seem to think non-destructive editing should extend to metadata as well.

Out of curiosity, what are you using to edit EXIF data on OSX these days?

 

[cipher29]

So much misinformation in this tread on how Google works and what Google does with your data.... Google doesn't sell your data, they sell the ability to put an ad in front of the right group of people... Google has never sold your personal information or anything about you.

 

[miknos]

Unfortunately, I don't trust Google to not abandon Photos in a year or two, since they have proven unafraid to kill popular features that they can't monetize.

Doubt they're going to end it. We know Google wants to gather as much information as they can about you. Having access to all your photos can give a heck of information. They algorithm is getting more and more advanced recognizing stuff.

I still hate not being able to add tags to photos.

 

[762999]

So much misinformation in this tread on how Google works and what Google does with your data.... Google doesn't sell your data, they sell the ability to put an ad in front of the right group of people... Google has never sold your personal information or anything about you.

you're completely right, I just wanted to add the official link that explains it all:
https://privacy.google.com/about-ads.html

 

[v3rlon]

So much misinformation in this tread on how Google works and what Google does with your data.... Google doesn't sell your data, they sell the ability to put an ad in front of the right group of people... Google has never sold your personal information or anything about you.

Even just that can be 'reverse engineered' to be quite useful, but you are assuming that the 1000 or so pages of data they keep on you isn't landing somewhere after meandering through a few dozen shell companies like they do to a

you're completely right, I just wanted to add the official link that explains it all:
https://privacy.google.com/about-ads.html

Yeah, they say they don't evade taxes too, but look up 'Dutch sandwich' and see that isn't precisely a fair statement. They simply use a means to do so that isn't spelled out illegal.

I can think of a few ways around what they say. I bet you can too. do you really think Alphabet can't?

Oh wait, misleading people like that would be immoral. A large publicly traded company would never do anything like that for $25 billion a quarter, would they?

 

[madeirabhoy]

couple of questions about google photos if anyone can help.

if you upload pics under 15mp do they still get reduced in quality?
if you use google photos automatic uploader does it automatically create albums by the folder names?
does it watch out for duplicates?

 

[miknos]

Google is going to be a government contractor, so expect your data to land in bureaucrat's hands in the future. Today the TSA can force you to unlock your phone in the border. I'll do my share and take 100's of pics of my penis in case the border patrol bully forces me to see my phone contents (not forgetting a dick wallpaper). I'll put all my pics in Google Photos so only Google and "The Three Letter Agency" employees can see. So when the border patrol officer swipes through my Photos App, he'll see pages and pages of dicks.
He might get aggressive. That's when I'm going to remove a giant dildo from my bag in front of everybody and scream DISCRIMINATION while I put it in the air.

couple of questions about google photos if anyone can help.

if you upload pics under 15mp do they still get reduced in quality?
if you use google photos automatic uploader does it automatically create albums by the folder names?
does it watch out for duplicates?

Yes. Google will compress your pics (thus reducing quality) for anything you put under the unlimited option. If you take pics with your phone, I guess you won't notice the difference.
No. Google won't create albums.
Yes. Google will remove duplicates.

 

[576316]

Just a company you want to avoid.

Avoid Google and Android at all costs, exactly for this reason. Android was set up with the intention of following users and scooping up personal data to sell. Talk about privacy. ;-)