These are displayed at a relatively low resolution, but Quick Look is utilised to provide better quality with only a small delay. The main section of Photosweeper’s interface is taken up with a grid of image previews. Other than those light grey squares, the interface very slick. Photosweeper follows the trend, although it can’t quite match the polish of Adobe’s app. However, the (ironically) dark interface of Lightroom seems to have caught on as a template for other apps in the genre, and it works reasonably well. I have never been one to preach a right or wrong approach to presenting images. Inevitably, RAW and video files - both of which are fully supported - take significantly longer to process, but even these multi-megabyte files do not cause an unexpectedly long delay. My test folder of approximately one hundred large JPEGs took under ten seconds to load and become workable. Alternatively, any folder can be dropped in.Īfter that, the scanning process is impressively speedy. Any libraries you may have lying around on your hard drive are scooped up into the in-built media browser, and from there they can be dragged into the main window in order to load their contents. As a result, there is very little setup required, post-installation. In fact, it is designed to work as an adjunct to iPhoto, Aperture and Lightroom, simply speeding up the particular task for which it was designed. Unlike those library apps, Photosweeper does not have a library. Not everyone takes dozens of similar images, and given that all the major library apps have batch sorting tools, Photosweeper really must dominate the narrow gap it occupies. But does the simplicity equate to an overly limited workflow? I went hands on to find out… Setup Although it visually resembles the behemoths of image sorting, its functional scope is actually quite restricted - this is purely an environment for comparing images and removing duplicates. That’s where a third-party app such as Photosweeper (£6.99/$9.99) comes in. ![]() Soon, Yosemite will bring along an all-in-one Photos app, but the likelihood is that it will be even bulkier than the already hefty iPhoto. ![]() The Bottom Line: A little expensive, but if you regularly need to perform the task of duplicate deleting, you won’t find a better app for it.Īs Apple finally calls time on the long-ignored Aperture, the options for organisation are narrowing for budding photographers using OS X. The Bad: A bit pricey, could be a fraction more polished. The Good: Efficient, well designed, speedy, uncluttered.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |