Slashdot Mirror


Picasa 2.0 Released, Reviewed

firebirdy writes "Google's Picasa 2.0 was announced yesterday (with support for RAW, Gmail integration, and uploading to popular photo services, among other things) and PC Magazine is ready with a review. Four and a half stars, and the only drawback found by PC Magazine folks was the lack of support for handheld devices."

17 of 277 comments (clear)

  1. AWESOME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    System Requirements

    Microsoft Windows 98/ME/2000/XP
    Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.0+
    Picasa 2 is available in English only.

    1. Re:AWESOME by chrisgeleven · · Score: 4, Informative

      Picasa respects what browser you have as your default. It has already launched Firefox several times when I clicked on something that launches a web browser.

    2. Re:AWESOME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Picasa 2 and your default browser

      Q: Picasa 2 system requirements state the you need to have Internet Explorer. I use a different browser. What can I do?

      A: You do not have to set Internet Explorer as your default browser to use Picasa 2. You must have Internet Explorer installed for Picasa to install and run smoothly. Most operations in Picasa 2 that call for a web browser will still bring up your default web browser, whether you are using Firefox, Mozilla, Netscape, or Opera.

  2. compared to picasa 1...... by pbranes · · Score: 5, Informative

    I used picasa 1 extensively and it was mainly a picture cataloging program - which it handled most excelently. Picasa 2 has all of those great features, plus picture touch-up features. For photo management, I give it 5 stars.

  3. Picasa by mistersooreams · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've always been a bit unsure how Picasa fits into Google's philosophy. I mean, they're all about searching, locating relevant things, organisation of data etc, right? Now I think Picasa is a decent piece of software - although the first version was a tad slow and occasionally unstable, I'm willing to give it a second try. But in terms of organisation of data, it doesn't really offer much. You can't put pictures into more than one group, for example.

    Surely the best thing would be actual image search. In other words, I give the program a picture of my face and say 'find all the other pictures with this face'. That's an extreme example and would be incredibly complex, of course, but some kind of actual picture searching capability would be amazingly useful.

    Like I say, this isn't an anti-Picasa troll because it's a decent piece of software, but it doesn't seem to be offering anything amazingly new.

    1. Re:Picasa by CrankyFool · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, I love Picasa exactly because of what it has that you don't think it has. See, it _is_ possible to categorize pictures in multiple categories. You can't put them in multiple albums, but when you highlight a media file (not just a picture -- read below) and hit ctrl-K, you get a list of keywords you can associate with it, and then easily search for all media files with the same keywords later.

      This was actually the feature that sold me on Picasa. See, my problem was that at last count, my laptop had about 25Gb of porn on it, in a whole bunch of video files. I wanted to be able to categorize my porn in ways that would allow me to slice-and-dice my collection -- show me all gay porn, say, or all het porn, or all porn that involves swallowing, etc. I had taken an awkward first step by putting the media files into folders, but that ran into that whole "hard to have a media file in more than one folder" (on Windows, where symlinks/hardlinks are not really all that useful) problem. So great, but what happens when I want to see all videos where Gwen Summers swallows? Hard to do.

      Picasa solves this problem elegantly and beautifully for me. I'm very happy with it.

      [Sigh. Since this is Slashdot and everyone thinks you're kidding if you talk seriously about porn, I should note I'm entirely serious. In fact, before I found Picasa I attempted to submit an 'Ask Slashdot' about how other people categorize their porn collection, but it got rejected as a troll]

    2. Re:Picasa by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Funny

      Heh, that's one of the reasons I'm looking forward to Mac OS X Tiger. I don't want to mix my porn with the rest of the pictures in my iPhoto library (for obvious reasons), so I'm really looking forward to the "Smart Folders" feature of Spotlight. It'll fix the "hard to have a media file in more than one folder" problem quite well -- and I can easily store the whole collection in an encrypted disk image too.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  4. Picasa 2 is the best photo program I have used by chrisgeleven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is:

    1) Easy to use
    2) Extremely fast (even when applying effects)
    3) Powerful

    Very rarely does a program combine all three of those and not feel like a bloat piece of junk. Picasa does it all.

    It can easily print photos or you can upload/order prints online.

    You can even export photos to a web page (even save as XML format!).

    It has a cool feature called "I'm Feeling Lucky" (get the Google reference) that automatically adjusts everything from color to contrast to redeye. It has worked virtually flawless for me so far on a select number of photos that I have had a chance to play along with and if there is an issue, the undo takes a second (if that) to return to the original.

    Simply amazing. Best part, it is free :)

  5. Just tried it by bogie · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Effects tools are great. Nice easy ways to fix brightness, highlights, shadows etc. This will fix most problems people have with photos. One wicked cool tool is the Filtered B&W. And you thought desaturate was how to make B&W pics...

    Problems. The Sharpeness tool is lacking and things become corse and grainy really quick. Almost all digital cameras benefit from some sharpenging, but here its below average and needs work. The only other glaring fault is the red eye tool zooms out and makes it harder to select eyes, not easier. It does work well though so its not all bad. I just wish it was easier to select people's eyes.

    Overall though a really nice consumer photo organizer and light editor app. Hell for $40 it would be a nice app. I'm impressed that they addressed some of the shortcomings from the old version and kept it free and of course Slick feeling and looking. No need to be jealous of IPhoto anymore. Nice job Google.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  6. Re:Great software.....but where's the web publishi by chrisgeleven · · Score: 4, Informative

    Click on the export button. It is all in there, even the ability to export to XML.

  7. Some thoughts by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've not used Picasa, but from the tour it seems like it is pretty similar. Some nice features of Picasa:

    * Keeps pictures in place. iPhoto puts them all in one directory structure, which some people don't like. I've been using a program that lets you keep mutliple iPhoto libraries so I don't have that problem.

    * Comments go into IPTC fields. Don't think iPhoto does that, but it's a good idea.

    * Lets you print a poster by slitting image across multiple pages.

    It is better than the current iPhoto in terms of editing tools, but about the same compared to iPhoto 5 (due out next week I think, if not already). Also, the new iPhoto supports RAW files and I think has more export options. Basically iPhoto also benefits from the good integration with other iLife apps for making slideshow DVD's and such easier and more interesting - in that respect Picasa is more stand-alone.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  8. Re:Picasa vs. iPhoto? by ztirffritz · · Score: 4, Informative

    Picasa and iPhoto are very similar. Picasa allows users to break photos into albums and stores them in a library similar to iPhoto. The biggest benefit to Windows users is that it is a simple, clean, well written program for the Windows platform. This is a rare event. iPhoto has its flaws and drawbacks, but if you use it for what it is intended for it works rather well. Apple says that it will support 20,000+ photos, but if I had that many photos, I think I'd invest in a pro-level photo management system. The same goes for Picasa.

    --
    Why doesn't anything interesting happen when I have mod points?
  9. Re:I wish they'd release a linux version by bogie · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well there are photo organizers for Linux out there. They aren't in the awesome category or as slick as Picassa but they work and you can manage and organize photos on Linux pretty easily.

    I know its not completely done but have you even looked at F-spot? http://www.gnome.org/projects/f-spot/
    how about gThumb
    http://gthumb.sourceforge.net/
    or digiKam
    http://digikam.sourceforge.net/Digikam-SP IP/rubriq ue.php3?id_rubrique=3

    Compared to what the older version of Picassa offered these aren't so aweful. Pre 2.0 Picassa sucked for image enhancement and only had a nice visual experience going for it. Its not like its organizational tools were very good so I don't know why you were so hung up on having it for Linux. With 2.0 yes, Linux users should be jealous, but pre that I thought it was just average with a gimmicky but fun timeline feature.

    Anyway, the picasa people did say to post if you wanted a Linux version of it. This is at there forums, so drop by and add to the "Picassa for Linux" thread http://forums.picasa.com/viewforum.php?f=1 Maybe they'll actually listen?

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  10. Porn = easy to find? NO. by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 4, Funny

    I want the porn on my computer to be HARD to find. That way nobody but me will find it.

    I don't really want a visiting friend clicking on the wrong icon in my Start menu and having my midget bukkake collection spread out before them (neatly catalogued).

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  11. Re:Well, guess we know where their biases are by Boglin · · Score: 5, Informative
    You actually mentioned the Photoshop? Bah! Photoshop is absolute crap compared to Mozilla. Photoshop can't handle Javascript, CSS, or even Gopher. Heck, it can't even set up a HTTPS connection. Even links can set up an HTTPS connection.

    But I'm supposed to believe that Photoshop is one of the best web browsers ever? Please...

    (Picasa is supposed to organize your photos, not edit them. Editing is just a side feature that they added in case you're too lazy to open up Gimp. So, Picasa us a crappy photo editing program, but it's pretty good at organize pictures. Good at what it's designed for, sucks at what it's not)

  12. Re:Great software.....but where's the web publishi by Agret · · Score: 5, Informative

    Right click one of your albums on the left side and then choose "Make a Webpage" no harder than that :)

    --
    Have you metaroderated recently?
  13. A few issues I've found by sixpaw · · Score: 5, Informative
    Caveat: how I browse my images may not be how other people browse their images. That said, with about a day's worth of use I've found Picasa surprisingly annoying, to the point where I'll likely be uninstalling it from my PC soon. My biggest gripes:
    • As several people have pointed out, it's highly indiscriminate. You can tell it what folders you do and don't want it indexing, but doing this is an awkward process, and setting up anything but their defaults (i.e., basically index 'My Pictures' or index everything) will take too much doing for anyone with a heavily-populated system. It might be okay for indexing photos on your grandparents' machine, but it probably won't be okay for the stereotypical /. reader's (Windows) computer.
    • Nonstandard interface. It looks to me like they're shooting for an OSX look and feel, which is all well and good but just comes out looking goofy under Windows. The right-side scroll bar is a particularly egregious example, bearing no resemblance whatsoever to the traditional, predictable Windows look and feel.
    • It's an image cataloguer; it's not an image viewer, which seems a strange distinction to make, especially for an application that lets you view images. There's no 'Browse with Picasa' option for folders from Windows Explorer, and no means of associating Picasa as a viewer for image file types, so you're stuck with using the 'Picasa Explorer' (which offers no treeview, for instance, just a flat look at all your image folders) as your browser.
    • I understand and appreciate that the image editor isn't meant to be very full-featured, just a basic picture tuner; but there are still some bizarre omissions, most notably the lack of any available resize option (that I could find).
    I don't doubt that there are people who will find Picasa a godsend, but it does virtually nothing I want to do, and everything it does do it takes a clunky approach to. It gets in the way far too often for me to ever imagine it as a power-user app.