and accessing this on a local network via wifi or ethernet.
iPhoto needs to have the Library sitting on disk formatted Mac OS Extended (Journaled). Users with the Library sitting on disks otherwise formatted regularly report issues including, but not limited to, importing, exporting, saving edits and sharing the photos.
See this article
for more. Note also the comment:
“Additionally, storing the iPhoto library on a network rather than locally on your computer can also lead to poor performance or data loss.”
As for wireless access:
A strong warning: If you're trying to edit the Library (that is, make albums, move photos around, keyword, make books or slideshows etc.) or edit individual photos in it via Wireless be very careful. Dropouts are a common fact of wireless networking, and should one occur while the app is writing to the database then your Library will be damaged. Simply, I would not do this with my Libraries.
Thanks Terence, apparently you can format a Drobo 5N to Mac OS Extended (Journaled) using disk utility, so if connected via gigabit ethernet that should overcome any risk of dropout? Not as good as being directly attached to an external drive but I'm looking for a balance between having everything accessibe on a network drive (pictures, music, movies, documents etc). Unfortunately storing / editing pictures (iPhoto) and movies (iMovie / FCP X) seem to be the limiting factor.
No, as stated above, it must be on a Mac OS Extended (Journaled) drive.
Apple infuriates me with these folder systems.
I have abandoned iPhoto and Aperture because of my DROBO and this stupid file system.
Adobe's programs are much better for using standard file system that aren't proprietary.
Hello Lightroom, good-bye Aperture.
My point is to think twice about continuing to use iPhoto for large libraries. The nonstandard file storing is a disaster if you have huge libraries of RAW photos.
I can't use any NAS RAID device for my library due to Apple's foolish structure. I exported 40,000 RAW photos from Aperture and it will take me hours of work to get it properly organized.
So if you just use you iPhone for some photos go ahead and use iPhoto or Aperture. If you are a heavy user, you are making a HUGE mistake.
Humm -- I guess you need to learn a lot about iPhoto - I have 65,000 photos mostly RAW i my library and no problems - it works fine - and others here have as many or more
And if you are a heavy user you are making a giant mistake to try to organize files rather than us a database like iphoto that organizes photos
And interesting that nothing in your post mentions size - so you not only do not understand iPhoto but yo do not even understand how to post coherent information - if you were warning about large libraries you not only are totally incorrect about iPhoto's capabilties and strengths but forgot to mention the premise of your post - pretty lame
My point is this.
If you use iPhoto or Aperture you are stuck with Apple only and Mac OS Extended.
If you use Adobe Lightroom, you can use MAC OS Extended, NTFS, ExFat, Ext4, etc. It doesn't care.
So what is more flexible?
I jumped from Adobe to Aperture. My colleagues said I was crazy. No matter how good Apple is, why marry yourself to their hardware. They stuck with Adobe to use both OS X and Windows.
Now who is the smart one?
I guess you have never worked in a multi-computer office?
Stop being an Apple fan boy and realize there are limitations to iPhoto and Aperture.
I am NOT a Adobe fan boy. There are limitations to their workflow as well. You just have to pick what is right for you.
iPhoto or Aperture is NOT right for large databases.
You have three choices.
1. Keep the large database and have storage and speed issues.
2. Split your libraries and have to remember were you photos are located.
3. Go to a software program that uses stardard (not container) folder structures.
So, now the name calling starts, just because someone disagrees with you? All I'm doing is correcting inaccurate information for the benefit of future readers.
Of course neither iPhoto nor Aperture are appropriate for every set up. But frankly, at 40k images you don't have a large library. There's a user over on the Aperture forum who has a 400k library that works fine. So, no you don't have to have speed or storage issues, nor do you have to split libraries. And, hate to break it to you, but both iPhoto and Aperture can work with "folder structures" since - oh, 2006 if I recall correctly in the case of iPhoto and since its release in the case of Aperture. Of course - and this is true of LR as much as Aperture and iPhoto, all there'll be in the folder structures are the originals. And yes, Aperture can even store the Originals on a NAS if you want that (so can iPhoto, but I don't recommend it).