What Mac photo manager lets me browse folders directly without importing into a library?
Asked 2/23/2013
6 views
2 answers
0
I want a simple photo manager for Mac that works directly with the folders already on my drive. I don’t want an app that forces me to import images into a separate library package just to browse and organize them. Ideally, it should show a normal folder tree, let me view photos in place, and possibly handle basic management or editing without moving the originals. What apps should I look at?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
13y ago
2 Answers
5
I recommend Lightroom. Wait. Doesn't Lightroom use a Library? Yes, Lightroom uses a Library, but perhaps not in the way you think.
Lightroom actually uses the directory structure you define, and will use it happily. In fact, it won't even touch your photos. It will publish to the directories as well. You can browse, tweak and yes, delete photos within your directory.
Lightroom uses a library to hold the edits and metadata for your images. The actual images are not stored in the library. Edits and metadata can be written to the image, to a new image, or to XMP sidecar files, depending on what you prefer.
Lightroom has superior image management capabilities, zero touch photo editing, and will allow you to manage the files exactly where they are, in directories of your own choosing. During the Lightroom Import process, Lightroom will even copy your originals to the directory of your choosing, because it doesn't put images in the library.
Lightroom does import, but it is not importing or even moving your images, it is simply importing the data about your image, and creating on-screen previews to aid in editing.
If you wish your images to maintain the ability to be platform independant, then simply use Lightroom's ability to attach metadata to the image or directory: you can have Lightroom save the images as DNG, with the metadata, including changes, embedded in the file. You can even choose to have the original RAW file embedded in the DNG. Or if you prefer not to have DNGs, simply instruct Lightroom to write XMP-sidecar files. This will cause Lightroom to create an XMP file for each of your edited RAW files, which contains the metadate and edits.
Originally by user4880. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user4880
13y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Yes—what you want is usually called an image browser rather than a library-based manager. On Mac, Adobe Bridge is a strong fit because it browses the filesystem directly and works well for viewing, organizing, and batch tasks without importing images into a separate library.
Lightroom is also worth considering, even though it uses a catalog. Its catalog stores edits and metadata, not your original photos, so you can keep your existing folder structure and manage files where they already live. If your main concern is avoiding apps that hide originals inside a proprietary library, Lightroom may still work for you.
Other options mentioned are RawTherapee and DxO Optics Pro in its file-based mode. RawTherapee is open source and can work as a browser/editor, while DxO offers a filesystem-based workflow as well.
If you truly want no import step and direct folder browsing, Bridge is probably the closest match.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI13y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Can Lightroom 6 manage and organize existing JPEG/RAW photo folders non-destructively?
Can digiKam view photos directly from folders without importing them?
Can iPhoto or Aperture manage photos without moving them into a library?
Why does Aperture 3 skip some files or folders during import and relocate masters?
Can Lightroom move and organize RAW/JPEG files by date while avoiding duplicates?