Organize Keywords into Groups (Like Aperture)

I haven't found an obvious way to group keywords together like I had them in Aperture. I have a lot of keywords. Am I missing anything?

Am I missing anything?
Nope. The keywords are just what is available in Photos.
Tell Apple what additional features you want in Photos via both http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html and http://www.apple.com/feedback/iphoto.html since they don't have a feedback page for Photos as yet.

Similar Messages

Is there a way to organize keywords into folders?

Hi there,
I currently use Adobe Bridge to tag and rate my 61 GB (and growing) Photo Library but I love iPhoto (ease of exporting, some editing capabilities, smart folders, ordering options, and all just ease of use) and am wondering if there's a way to have a folder system in the keywords area so that I can organize my keywords into logical groupings as you can do in Bridge. This is really the only reason why I don't have all of my photos in iPhoto right now but it's a biggie for me.
Thanks!
Lisa

Lisa
Check out Keyword Manager, which supports nesting keywords.
Regards
TD

How to organize contacts into groups?

Is there any support to manage contacts to organise them in groups ?
[Topic title updated by moderator to be more descriptive. Original topic title was: "Skype support groups"]

Hi and welcome to the Skype Community,
Yes, that's possible. Please take a look here to learn more about managing your contacts: https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA3281/how-do-i-add-contacts-in-skype-for-windows-desktop
Follow the latest Skype Community News
↓ Did my reply answer your question? Accept it as a solution to help others, Thanks. ↓

Is it possible to import photos automatically into the organizer in elements 11, like picasa does?

Is it possible to import photos automatically into the organizer in elements 11, like picasa does?

On Windows open the Organizer and from the menu click:
File >> Watch Folders
Then check the radio button for automatic.

How can I organize my contacts con the iphone into groups

hi
Need some help!!!! on my outlook i have all my contacts organize on groups but when i sync into the iphone the groups doesn´t appear, what does i have to do to make appear my groups? by the way i have a pc saddly

Since you have Windows, one way to organize your contacts into groups is to sync them with MobileMe and create the groups there. Presumably the groups you have created will transfer to your iPhone when you sync with MobileMe. (I would presume that groups in Outlook would get copied to MobileMe).
As for me, I have a Mac, so I only have create groups in my address book on the iMac. It syncs them with MobileMe, which syncs them with my iPhone. Simple.

I would like set up my contacts into groups.

I would like set up my contacts into groups.
There seems to be no way to do this in either iOS or OSX. Android figured this out and I see no reason why Apple can't give us the capability to group medical contacts for example into an easily accessible group without having to resort to using Dr. as the first part of the last name in order to have them in a convenient group.
There are many posts that ask for this and Apple seems to have no desire to give us something useful in the entire spectrum of software while fiddling around with watches etc.

In the Contacts app in OS X click the "+" at the bottom and choose New Group. Once groups are created just drag the entries into the group list on the left in the Contacts app. You may have to go to the Contacts View menu and click Show Groups.
You cannot create groups in iOS, or assign contacts to groups using the built-in Contacts app. However, there are several 3rd party apps that allow you to move contacts among groups. I use Speed Names, but there are several others that people have told me are easier to use.

Copy Organization Data into People Group Field?

Hi All,
In Assignment screen,we have organization and business group fields.when i enter data in organization filed like 'India.Mum' same data needs to copy in business group field when i use tab.
Is it possible through form personalization? If yes, please give me your suggestions:
Thanks,
Visu

Yeah, it's very much possible using personalization. Just open the personalize screen, give a name to the personalization, choose trigger event as when-validate-record of the assignment block, put a condition when you would like it to fire, in the actions tab enter the details what should be done (in this case assign a value to a field).
If you want the basic details about personalization, refer to the following metalink docs.
279034.1 (most useful), 456407.1, 456407.1, 421010.1
But I wonder why would you like to change the person's business group based upon his organization. Organization is always a subordinate of BG. Thus you can have many organizations under a BG. And in that case changing BG with Organization does not make sense.
Make sure that your design is correct before going ahead.
Thanks.

Move keywords from group

I have keywords in a group where I don't want them. I can't find a way to move them out of the group. Aperture 3.6 on iMac with Yosemite OS.

Dunno about Capture One (I have C1Express, but it keeps crashing on import so I've given up on it on my new iMac since it isn't supported anymore...lucky me), but it's easier to keep track of keywords if you write them to photo metadata. I seem to recall C1's organizational structure was inherited from Expression Media, or somewhere, and they used the "|" character to delimit a hierarchy. Lightroom can interpret that, and some others.
Keywords in hierarchies get flattened in IPTC (dc something or other), but LR and others can write them to another area in XMP. If you keyword using the delimiter even in a flattened keyword list in some application, and that gets imported into LR, it will generate the hierarchy. So "plant>tree>pine" is generated from "plant|tree|pine." That might work with C1P.
In any case, if you write the hierarchies to metadata but import a text hierarchy it might get sorted. The point (finally) is that the info goes with the photos and even Spotlight can use it, so you don't have to keep sorting it. After all, plant>tree>pine is really just (plant AND tree AND pine) in a search.

What is the best way to organize photos? iPhoto or Aperture?

I am a mom taking tons of photos of my young children. On my old PC I used to organize everything within "My Pictures" by Month & Year (May 2008). I am a very organized, linear person and don't like to change the way I do things midstream so I am having a hard time figuring out how to organize our family photos now that I have switched to a Mac with iPhoto and Aperture. In the future I hope to learn about Aperture's professional tools (which as a mom & not a professional photographer I currently do not use). I would love to take photography classes at a local community college someday...
My questions are as follows:
1) What is the better way for ME to store our photos? Should I be uploading to iPhoto or Aperture? I basically want all of my "master photo images" in the same location in an organized fashion. I am hoping to do this without clogging up my computer. At this point I am thinking at the end of each year I will burn the year's photos to a disk for save keeping. But until then...
2) Is the "library" the over-arching place where all photos are stored? In general, I am having a hard time following the hierarchy of where my photos are being stored, how to organize them and how to completely delete bad photos.
3) Can I do everything I can do in iPhoto in Aperture? Obviously I know I can do more but is it as easy to edit/fix up photos?
I have listened to/watched several tutorials on both programs and have read through many other folks' questions/answers but I am still not sure of what to do.
I really appreciate any help/advice anyone is willing to give!
Thanks!

I'm not a professional either, just a grandma with a love of digital photography who takes lots of photos. We used to live in a motorhome full time, so we had lots of opportunities to take many photos.
I personally like Aperture better than iPhoto because I like to use some of the NIK software/plugins where I can do the adjusting right in Aperture and don't always have to send the photos to PhotoShop. Also you have a bit more flexibility as to file set ups with Aperture. In iPhoto you don't have as many nesting capabilities. iPhoto is great, but pretty basic.
I had my photos set up as files on the PC, long before I got my first Mac. So I set them up the same way. I'll try to explain
In Finder:
Pictures (in side bar on left in Finder)
Folder - My Photos
2nd Folder - by year
In the year folder I have a folder by date ie: 20000722 (year,month,date) and the photos from that date in there.
Once I got to using Aperture, I have my years set up as "projects" and the dates set up as "Albums". When importing the whole set of photos into Aperture, it was easy. I highlighted the "library", then did a right mouse click and selected "import folders as projects". That imported the photos into Aperture the same way I have them in finder.
Once everything is in Aperture, and you have new photos to add, I make an album under the corresponding year and import.
I do all my photos as referenced and don't duplicate them again, as I have them backed up in a couple of other places.
IMHO you can't back up enough! Don't wait and do it only once a year! Hard drives have a way of crashing and you'll loose all your photos. Use DVD's, thumb drives, ext. hard drives or what ever works for you. But always back up.
When I take my photos off of the memory card, I immediately send a copy to the back up external HD. Once the photos are adjusted etc. I make sure I have a copy elsewhere too. Only then do I erase them off of the memory card. Might be a bit redundant, but I'm not about to loose any of my photos. When we lived in the motorhome we were always aware of the possibility of theft or fire. So I got in the habit of taking some time to reduce the size of the photos and keep them on a thumb drive that I kept out of the RV. If anyone broke in or we had a fire, I'd still have the photos. Maybe not the originals or the bigger size, but we wouldn't loose them either.
If you want more info on non professional filing, send me a PM and I can send you a photo of my file hierarchy . (suemach (at) mac (dot) com)
Allie

Query HUD not listing Keyword Parent Group

I've been using keywords through grouped sets. For instance. Same guy (John Doe) under two seperate parents:
Family > John Doe
Work > John Doe
This typically produces a result in the query (search) HUD like:
John Doe (Family)
John Doe (Work)
However, I have two names that are not doing this. They Display like:
John Doe
John Doe
If you check one or the other and look at the individually files with the inspector the keywords do list thier proper group. Additionally, if you go to the project itself...and use a query...in one project it may work and the other it may not.
I've tried rebuilding the library but can't figure out why these are caching differently.
Anyone have any ideas?

Well...after much research, this seems to be a bug in the HUD.
After rebuilding did nothing...I started a new library and did some experimenting while looking at the actual 'version-1.apversion' file that is stored with each photo. (Apparently, this is the data that is parsed to rebuild the database.) The file structure of the displaying groups and non-displaying groups seems to be indentical. Therefore, I began to suspect that this was a problem with the way Aperture was displaying them.
Indeed it seems to be. I began testing by making identical keyword of 12 letters and 1 space under multiple parents named
1
12
123
1234
12345
123456
1234567...so on
Once the combination of Keyword and Parent contained more than 20 letters, it ceased to work properly. BUT THIS IS THE STRANGE PART...if the combination of keyword and parent was more than 25 letters, Aperture will begin displaying an abrevated version. For instance...
Gymanstics >Lauren Hodges
will display 'Lauren Hodges'
but
Gymanstics A > Lauren Hodges
will display 'Lauren Hodges (Gymn...)
This also explains why sometimes using the library search HUD vs. a project search HUD yields different results. The number of items helps detirmine the size of the HUD list and therefore column widths, i guess.
There you have it. Don't rebuild for this issue.

Sharing PSE7 Organizer keywords with Bridge?

I want to share my existing PSE7 Organizer keywords with Bridge. I searched the forums and found an some answers to use PSE7's "File/Write Keyword Tag and Properties Info to Photo" menu option. I did some tests with that option, and it appears to only do what I'll refer to as "additive writes," meaning it will add keywords in PSE7 Organizer for a particular photo, but it will not remove any keywords which are presently in the photo file but not in Organizer's informaton for the same photo file.
I'm guessing this is the case because PSE7 Organizer cannot assume the keyboard already in the file originally came from Organizer itself, or that the user (regardless of where an existing keyword came from) wants to remove a keyword if it's not in Organizer for the same file. It would be nice if there were a preferences option which one could select such as "Replace all keywords when writing to file" so that a user like myself could make Organizer's keywords the main keywords.
Does anyone happen to know if I understand this correctly, or is there a way to remove a PSE7 Organizer-written keyword from a file (based on its non-existence in PSE7 Organizer for the same file)?
If there is no way around this, I'm wondering if it may be better to do things the Bridge-way (which seems more like the general standard) since it seems to always keep the current info in the file, so the state is always with the file itself. Even if some features are missing, it may be better than dealing with this sort of PSE7-only feature. Any comments on this would be great to hear.
Thanks for any insight on this,
Tom

Okay, that makes sense on the Albums. I wasn't aware that Albums were ordered.
I was using Bridge some more after my post yesterday, and I was seeing that with PSE7, both Albums and Keyword items seem more readily accessible regardless of location of the items (photo files) because there isn't an extensive file system search required since the DB provides a quick search (assuming first-searches and no pre-existing caching in Bridge).
I started testing Collections with Bridge, and realized that it was sort-of doing that. This is another aspect of Bridge which is sort of a "db" aspect of Bridge in that it requires the browser to persist data seperate from the photo file. .
What can be a little frustrating about any browser-persisted informaton (such as that for Collections) is to not find anything in the docs about how to ensure one gets a good backup of that info. PSE7 does a great job of providing a feature to do just that. Recall this is one thing I really liked about PSE7 when I was unaware of the benefits of Bridge's "minimalist db" approach (where a "db" in Bridge is anything persisted by itself such as Collections).
The "how to" backup app-persisted information (aside from docs a user saves, where the user knows the location) is a must for any pro-am or pro person, if not an end user. People don't want information that is key to something they're building over time to be persisted in some mysterious unknown location. I couldn't find what I wanted in Bridge docs, so I did my own hunting, and found Bridge Collection information hiding in "%APPDATA%\Adobe\Bridge CS4\Collections" (i.e., c:\Users\<user_name>\Roaming\Adobe\Bridge CS4\Collections" on my laptop) in files named "<collection_name>.filelist". But even with that info, I, as a user, would still have to test to ensure I could get a backup good enough for disaster recovery / restoration. I'm a relatively technical user so I cannot imagine what "Dad" or "Mom" would do. This sort of thing is bothersome only because it's remedied with at least a small paragraph in the docs. What would it take to say "Backing Up Bridge Information: If you have a backup program which backs up the "%APPDATA%\Adobe\Bridge CS4" you will have all necessary data to restore the information that Bridge maintains. You must ensure you backup your photo files..." etc. etc. Without that, I have to do a bunch of hunting and testing.
All that said, I see how Collections, maintained by Bridge, offer some of that PSE7 power where you don't have to search for files in various locations to find what is already noted in a central Bridge file or "db" such as a Collection for which Bridge has a list of files in the Collection itself. (If Collections could contain other Collections, that would be a nice touch. I didn't see that ability.)
What I still like about Bridge's approach is that while Albums don't exist, and while Collections are hierarchical, there's a feeling that Bridge is not taking things over where you are forced to use that app. It persists some items relating to its organizational features, but keeps the rest of the info right in the photo file. Still a nice balance. Another nice thing about this minimalist approach is that there's no importing per se. Everything is browseable/maintainable since the file system is the photo db.
All that said, I can see where PSE7 does things for the non-power user such that they can just use, say, an Album, which has a familiar name, and behaves like an Album with ordering and whatnot. A user like me doesn't need that since I can use tools to create an Album like effect, so the Bridge approach wins since I can fend for myself in areas were I don't see PSE7 to hand hold.

Why does Discoverer put my custom function into GROUP BY

To make things clear with simple example:
I have 10 id's from people (people.id) and sum function on their salary [sum(people.salary)] during a period of time that i set in my parameters.
The sql looks something like this:
SELECT PEOPLE.ID
,SUM(PEOPLE.SALARY)
FROM FRS_PEOPLE
WHERE [MY CONDITIONS]
GROUP BY PEOPLE.ID
I registered a function that uses people.id, and some other parameters to calculate something for each people.id!
I made a calculation:
MY_FUNCTION(people.id,'xxx','yyy')
,so my sql looks like this now:
SELECT PEOPLE.ID
,SUM(PEOPLE.SALARY)
,MY_FUNCTION(people.id,':xxx',':yyy')
FROM FRS_PEOPLE
WHERE [MY CONDITIONS]
GROUP BY PEOPLE.ID,MY_FUNCTION(people.id,':xxx',':yyy')
It runs but never finishes....?!
When i run my sql in sqlplus i do not put my function into group by, but discoverer does so, despite it already has people.id item in GROUP BY!
And if i put instead of people.id an actual id it works correctly and does not put my function into group by!
The sql i am looking for and works correctly is:
SELECT PEOPLE.ID
,SUM(PEOPLE.SALARY)
,MY_FUNCTION(people.id,'xxx','yyy')
FROM FRS_PEOPLE
WHERE [MY CONDITIONS]
GROUP BY PEOPLE.ID
Please someone help!
My select clause is much more complicated, with many outer joins so i made the above up just to explain to you what my problem is!
I hope i made my self clear!
Help would be very appreciated.

Hi,
I think there is a problem with your function. That fact that the report completes when an actual id is used must not when a people.id is used suggests that it works when the function is called once with an actual id but not when it is called many times with a people.id.
If the function is doing complex lookups and calculations to obtain a salary for each people.id then often this type of report will run quicker with the salary calculation is brought into the report SQL using joins etc.
Tracing the Discoverer session running the report will show you all the SQL processed by the database and the execution plans used. It will show you how often the function is being called and what SQL is being run by the function.
Rod West

If exporting images for backup, to reimport into a clean aperture or other program, is it best to use 72 dpi or 300 dpi, or does it matter?

If exporting images for backup, to reimport into a clean aperture or other program, is it better to use 72 dpi or 300 dpi, or does it matter? I want the best quality for any future unforeseen use.

I am somewhat reluctant to answer your questions after Frank Caggiano's excellent advice, but I really do not like to leave the question open, for there will be many occasions when you will need to export images and to understand how it works.
But please, follow Frank's advice, right now you do not need to worry about pixels and dpi. That is exactly what I meant, when I suggested to you to make sure you keep a copy of your Aperture Library and to back it up with all your other data, before you erase your disk for a clean reinstall.
DPI revisited:
So, is the dpi setting only for exporting to print?
The dpi settings are necessary to define the size of a digital image, since pixels don't have any dimensions. And since you cannot print or display an image without knowing its width and height, you will need to specify dpi when you are printing or scanning.
If I leave it at the default 72dpi will there be any problems getting quality prints in the future from jpeg versions exported with that setting?
Not if you export with the original size - the maximum number of pixels available. That will ensure the maximum print quality.
The dpi settings are required to export versions; versions are derived from the masters and new image files are computed. When you export masters you get a copy of the original file that already may have a dpi setting.
If I choose "export masters", will aperture will export my masters just as they are?
yes, and you may add IPICT data if you choose
Pardon my thick skull--I'm an old dog trying to learn new tricks in this digital world!
No apologies necessary, we were all beginners once
Here is another example, maybe that helps a little:
I exported an image (jpeg) with three different setting: export masters, a version with 72dpi, a version with 300dpi and inspected the files in Graphic Converter:
The master was exported like this:
Notice, the master had already dpi settings, although I did not specify any on export.
The size is 51,48 cm x 38,61 cm.
The 72 dpi Version has larger dimensions, but also 10 Megapixels.
and here the 300 dpi version: smaller dimensions, same amount of pixels.

How to import keywords into Bridge CS6?

I have hundreds of keywords I've included in Templates and I want to add the keywords to the Kaywords panel in cs6 bridge. How can I import them so they appear as individual keywords which I can then categorize into groups and subgroups? Thanks from Kodiak, Alaska.

Hi Marion,
Have you seen this help document? It goes over the basics of Bridge keyword support.
http://helpx.adobe.com/bridge/kb/nested-hierarchal-keywording-bridge.html
And here's quick post that walks thru importing steps (I think it's still relevant to Bridge CS6).
http://jenniferbrowndesigns.blogspot.com/2011/06/importing-library-in-bridge.html
regards,
steve

Formula for putting in phone numbers into numbers like (444)333-3333

Need formula for putting in phone numbers into numbers like (444)333-3333

Drag and Drop Groups Application from the App store. It ROCKS! It even syncs your groups from the application to the regular contacts application on your phone. Best app I ever bought.

Organize Keywords into Groups (Like Aperture)

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for