will iPhoto work with El Capitan ?

Also, what is missing is the ability to easily move photos to easily create groupings by Subject matter. Date and location are not how I organize my photos. I create Subjects.

That's pretty much exactly what Albums are for. There is no duplication with Albums and they are far more flexible than events ever were.

But as I said above, that's the one difference. You can't manually add photos to a Moment like you could to an Event.

As for quickly creating Albums.

Select a bunch of Photos, command-n. Done. How hard is that?

And, of course, if an app doesn't fit your requirements, use another one. For instance, keep using iPhoto.

And you're criticising Apple for what? meeting the bulk of their customer's needs?

Point of information, for me the king of the elephants in the room: the image naming and 5-star rating that many users have relied upon for years and years. I have yet to see any recognition that switching from iPhoto to Photo (using existing catalogs) does NOT retain any of the 5-point ratings which were assigned over many years (another option for "organization). Nor have I seen any easy workaround for the lack of labeling the file name what the camera called it (DSC_1, DSC39999, etc.). Having a background in logic, there is no way I see ANY of the suggestions having any bearing on the fact that the 5-star rating system has no work-around which is anywhere as easy at it simply being built-in, as it was in the days of Steve Jobs recognizing the value of ease and the philosophy of "it just works". It - iPhoto - does NOT just work for existing, well-organized, large iPhoto catalogs organized over years. d

Granted, the masses have spoken and "demand" (as Apple and others nicely profit) inter-device applicability as top priority. It may be that only old fogey photographers, present day image pros, and others who cannot reduce their work to a heart (favorite) or non-heart, will vocally mourn the loss of the 5 point rating system. Now that albums being manually created is gone also, as commonly used terms are "updated" (as "albums" vs. "moments", etc. illustrates), rating scale. That and the "improvement" whereby there is no file data automatically displayed and allowing for further labelling - e.g.,, DSC_431 being pre-labelled easily changed to DSC_431_trixie-on-swings.jpg and then assigned 4 or 5 stars and put into the "family" album - have all headed into "simplified" land, pretty much defines "dysfunctional" disruption of existing or ongoing "workflow". So be it that computer using photo/graphics pros and serious others are not in the new equation. Hats off to Apple for the marketing hit, but sorry: Any long-term user of iPhoto who has seriously bought into the wonderful features like simple, automatic display of images - with filename - and the ability to add stars and place into albums, all within seconds, may be upset by the downgrade, for those working on a real Apple *computer* bought in large part for graphics/image managing and/or manipulation. I don't want an iPhone/ios on my screen. I want a real, dedicated tool for accomplishing basic tasks, as Steve Jobs envisioned and executed. It worked. Photos does not (for ma

The idea of manually going through 10's or 100's of thousands of files, already named and star-rated, or importing in/exporting out without a common filename (the one given by camera/exif) is like upgrading a Bentley to a go-cart. Great for those looking for a quick game of golf, not driving. Same with Photos "replacing" iPhotos, or specifically, being taunted as an "improvement" when it does not do the basic task of allowing for cohesive organization on a collection relying on iPhotos for years and years. A "workaround" involving 3rd party add-on programs, scripts, or days/weeks manually relabelling the most important files, is not equivalent to simply importing images, seeing the filename, being able to further label and place into an album, and assign a meaningful rating which can help pull out key photos in the future, from large collections on the computer or external. 5-STARS (excellent) vs. 3 stars (OK, decent) vs. 1 or 0 is just exponentially - do the math if you like, it's on a profound order of magnitude more useful - better than a heart or don't heart. That's a tool for adults or serious photographers whose work is based on an Apple *computer? And the explanation of "well, just call 5 stars "5 stars" instead of a simple in-the-moment click when viewing new images, that is like asking someone to hike 50 miles for water, as opposed to taking it from the tap. IMHO.

I'll finish now, and I (again) mean no disrespect for honestly held opinions to the contrary, but for me it's just 100% clear that Photos has been neutered and rendered a toy for cloud renters while iPhoto users are either getting with the program, or upset. Forums seem to indicate it's not just me and a handful of others. It seems a betrayal of Apple's core users, at least the photo/graphics crowd who once gave Apple its cache, its reputation for wonderful tools.read

Yes, this thread is specifically about whether iPhotos - such as it, still vastly superior for organization than huge mosaics and heart-ratings called "Photos" - will still work on El Capitan. Many of us fear its imminent demise, and many more are exasperated by Apple's apparent tone-deafness to computer users as of late, particularly photographers (for some time now). Yes, we can continue to use it - "for now". But will it work with El Capitan in its full capacity? This is the question posed here first, and Google search took me to this thread to answer this question. I guess the answer is "Yes". The "yes, but no guarantee it will keep working" is scary to some and causing reactions ranging from anger and frustration to ho-hum to "why can't Apple just listen to its many users and incorporate the key organizational features of iPhoto (5-point rating systems, file naming by default, GPS info, and album creation) ??

Jobs understood the power of simplicity and "it just works". For serious photographers with serious iPhoto catalogs built over years, it's not a simple conversion (as so much is lost in terms of ratings, naming, album organization, etc., etc.) and NOTHING (star rating and filename display) "just works" now. Except the cloud, of course. And what else matters? To me and some others, what matters is this Apple computer being able to continue using iPhoto for its library and organizing tools, and easy import/export to other "apps" when needed, while enjoying the basic editing tools which suffice for many images.,

I'm done. For me, the answer of "will it work on Capitan?" is answered, allowing me to consider the El Capitan upgrade. But I totally understand the angst which follows, given this atrocious move to dumb down photography tools to accommodate phone users but not computer users. (As it so seems) When will iPhoto stop being compatible? Will Apple ever consider all the voices (from iPhotos/Aperture days forward) of photographers who are happy with iPhoto but would like to see it a bit more robust (as in powerful, not 'simplified' and rendered useless as a serious image manager) ? Stay tuned, sure...that

But it is simply not factually correct that Photos does what iPhotos did. No filenames, no GPS, no album organizing, no 5-point ratings with the click of mouse or tap on a screen. Workarounds? Sure, complex and time-wasting, when iPhoto "just works", such as it is. Vastly superior to Photos, in my opinion, and the opinion of at least a few others. Granted, "Photos is not a replacement" for iPhotos. That's for sure! Nor is it in any way, shape, or form, an "upgrade" except as a conduit to cloud storage and device sharing. For anyone who just wants to use a computer for photography/image work? Sorry...

But will iPhoto be maintained or (gasp!) even updated? Seems unlikely. Might Apple take note of its abandoned photographer users or rectify the glaring weaknesses of Photo (as viewed in the sense of being a "new" app rather than a new/improved iPhoto)? We always have hope.

Q: Will iPhoto run on El Capitan?
A: Yes, today... but it still won't display filenames by default or allow for 5-star ratings by simple clicks. It's not iPhotos. Keep using iPhotos if you like. Today.

Sorry again to flesh out the issue beyond "will it work on El Capitan?", but users may legitimately want to know, "and will it work next week?" And for me, now nag-screened to update all my Apple things to El Capitan, the only question I have is what will be dumbed down along with iPhotos, and of course, will El Capitan allow continued use of iPhoto, which is just perfect for so many users, or certainly vastly superior - yes, in its functionality! - to Photos.How

Trick or treat! (How about listening to your customer base of Mac users who rely on iPhoto? Now that would be the ultimate treat!)
</treatise>

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Upgrades are nice, but cutting off one's head isn't a good way to lose weight. That's

Sorry for both length and typos - I tried to edit but it got lost... I meant to say (1st paragraph, last sentence) It - Photos - does not just work as iPhotos did.
Dangling sentence at end: that's not an effective diet.

Synopsis: People clearly want to know if our work of years in rating and organizing an iPhoto library is endangered, or replicable in a (future?) "Photos".

File-naming simply as part of the import process is gone in Photos, full stop. Also gone is simple, one-click rating on a 5-star scale (as opposed to heart-ing- favoriting).

Were iPhotos to disappear without an Apple equivalent in terms of maintaining/organizing filenames and ratings, that would signal the end of Apple's usefulness for serious library management and file naming/rating conventions using a Mac. At least for me, which I say with sadness. Photos may not be be a "replacement" but it's less "evolution" than a disintegration/"simplification" of a wonderful Jobs-inspired, *useful* program.

No wonder so many people want to be sure they'll retain iPhotos after an El Capitan installation. That's what draws users/searchers to this thread, IMHO.

Peace...

So, you used a tiny subset of the organisation tools (Events only) in iPhoto and these have changed. You can still do what you want using other, and arguably more appropriate, tools for the task with either iPhoto or the new app, but you don't want to - which is not the same as saying it's not possible.

Now that albums being manually created is gone also, as commonly used terms are "updated" (as "albums" vs. "moments", etc. illustrates

Perhaps a clue here is that you continually confuse Events and Albums. They're not the same thing in iPhoto and not the same thing in Photos either. Manually created Albums are perfectly possible in both apps. It's not albums v moments, but Events v Moments, If you actually used Albums for organisation you'd have no problem. But you don't want to. Not the same as saying it's not possible.

Ratings are non-standard metadata, and cannot be exported, for instance. Hence, the oft cited 'replace them with keywords' advice applies.

I'm unable to flow what you're saying about file naming as part of the import process. There is no way to name files in iPhoto, you could batch add or edit titles and you can in Photos too.

Or, if you don't want change stay with iPhoto. It runs on EC. But here's a tip: one day, an OS will come along where it won't run, or you'll need to upgrade your computer. That's the point where you'll have a problem, so you really should be preparing for that.

Thanks---I guess I need more practice with the format and a guide or tuturial would be helpful.

Example, how do I organize all my events and stray photos of say, 1977 into one album? I have some already existing photos from previous scans and now I'm adding more--as I find them.... I have say, 1977 Susie's Graduation, 1977 Kevin First Grade, 1977 Halloween, Sally and Bob's Wedding, 1977 Christmas, 1977Summer at the Lake, etc. How do I get all of these fragments into place, while discovering more all the time that will be scanned into their proper places?

I thought I was beginning to get that under control in iPhoto and now I'm not sure.

Is their other album organization software available? Apple has been so good at making things intuitive, now I don't feel that way. Is there a photo organization tutorial available?

So many of us are doing the same thing right now--scanning decades of photos and memories into our high resolution MACs, there must be an easy way to learn how to organize and categorize as we go along and add to the memory base. Thanks for your ideas...

how do I organize all my events and stray photos of say, 1977 into one album? I have some already existing photos from previous scans and now I'm adding more--as I find them.... I have say, 1977 Susie's Graduation, 1977 Kevin First Grade, 1977 Halloween, Sally and Bob's Wedding, 1977 Christmas, 1977Summer at the Lake, etc. How do I get all of these fragments into place

Easiest way? Make a Folder, call it 1997 and drag all these albums to it. Now they're all in one place.

If you want to then add them all quickly to a single album: In the folder, each album is represented by an Icon.

Command-a t select all. Click on the + button on the toolbar, select Album. Name it. Done.

There are lots of photo organising applications. These days Apple make one. Photos. But there are other excellent apps by other software makers. Adobe Lightroom, for instance. What's your need and what's your budget?

"Ratings are non-standard metadata, and cannot be exported, for instance. Hence, the oft cited 'replace them with keywords' advice applies."

iPhotos allows sort by keywords, Photos does not, it only allows search which is not a function supported by Apple TV so it's compatibility is seriously compromised as part of the Apple ecosystem. Even using keywords in iPhoto has limitations compared to ratings since sorting by keywords can result in undesirable results if there is more than keyword attached to the photos. (bizarre combinations of photos). Additionally keywords do not persist as a sort option if the iPhoto is closed and reopened requiring a re-sort for all folders. This makes the use of keyword sorts in iPhoto mostly unusable when accessing sorted photos on an Apple TV.

So, in a quite specific set of circumstances it has limitations. Yes. Perhaps you need to add a feature request for the Apple TV device...

I'm not sure what feature request of Apple TV would be appropriate to effect the desired solution. Apple TV mainly functions as a passive device. For the most part it doesn't allow creation, editing, or storage of the files it displays. It merely reflects the organization of the supplied inputs whether it be Apple Music, Netflix, YouTube, or the files on my home computer. If my home computer is running Photos and can't sort by keywords or ratings and has display conflicts due to multiple keywords, this circumstance is then reflected on the Apple TV. If I'm running iPhoto and keyword sorts aren't permanent, this too will be reflected by the device. Apple seems to be working hard to create uniform experience across all devices and different organizational displays of the same data on different devices seems antithetical to their overall mission. For these reasons I think the obvious necessary tweaks must occur in iPhoto or Photos.

Also, the last time I checked, iPhoto is no longer available at the App Store so it may not be strictly correct to say that iPhoto and Photos are supported as distinct products. It might be more reasonable to conclude that Photos is the intended replacement for iPhoto.

So, you have a problem and you're pessimistic about finding a solution. Thanks for sharing.

If Photos is a replacement for iPhoto how come both apps are on the machine after installing Photos? How come iPhoto runs and you can continue to use it and ignore Photos? How is that a replacement?

iPhoto was created to meet a perceived need - an app for the digital hub strategy. SJ announced this at some conference back about 15 years ago. The idea was that your Mac was the centre of your digital world, the central repository for you data and other devices - cameras, iPods video cameras etc all fed into to and from it.

Photos is an app created to meet a perceived need - and app for the Cloud strategy. This was announced a couple of years ago at one of the WWDC if I recall correctly. In this scenario the Cloud is the hub and all your drives feed into it and feed from it - including your Mac. Different strategy, different target, different aims. Different app.

Saying that Photos replaces iPhoto is a bit like saying that a truck replaces a family saloon. Different models for different usage scenarios.

Apple (like every other developer) see the Cloud as the future. That's where they're pointing their efforts. So they make different apps to meet the different strategy.

If, like me for instance, that's not what you want, then you do what I did, and that's use an app more appropriate for your needs.

"If Photos is a replacement for iPhoto how come both apps are on the machine after installing Photos?"

Photos requires access to the iPhoto library and it's reported that if you delete the old iPhoto library after converting to Photos then Photos will not work properly. I do not intend to try this to confirm. There there seems to be an ancestral relationship between the two products.

iPhoto did provide cloud services via photo stream so the cloud is not unique or new to Photos.

Why so argumentative. I simply pointed out that the solution isn't likely to come from changes to the Apple TV device as you suggested.

The usual reason I respond in these threads is to correct misinformation. I do this for the benefit of others who might read these threads.

For instance:

Photos requires access to the iPhoto library...

No it doesn't. Photos can run perfectly well with or without an iPhoto Library present. What's needed is an iPhoto Library if, and only if, you're migrating from iPhoto to Photos. Even at that, the library is required, not the application. And this is a one-time requirement.

...and it's reported that if you delete the old iPhoto library after converting to Photos then Photos will not work properly.

and that's just not true. Once migrated the two libraries are quite independent of each other. And I have tested this. Apart from the - once-off - business of migrating there is no connection whatever between the two apps or the two libraries. iPhoto "provided cloud services" is a wonderfully vague comment. It offered a means of sharing images, that's all. The devices could view them, no more. See? The Mac as the hub. Photos offers the iCloud Photo Library. Your images managed in the Cloud. Accessible from all your devices. Editable from all your devices. Shoot on an iPhone, edit on the iPad, complete the editing on your Mac, seamlessly. That's a rather different thing, because the Cloud is the hub you can do all of this that you could not do with iPhoto.

I admire your incredible patience..

Lex

This Apple description makes it sound like deleting the original library might leave you only a structure of links since the actual photo files reside in only one location. Similar to movie files that won't play without access to the original but distinct files.

Photos saves disk space by sharing images with your iPhoto or Aperture libraries - Apple Support

The problem with 'sounds like' is that it sounds different to different people. Suffice to say that's not what it says.