Terence, here are reasons why filenames are as important to iPhoto:
1) Search. They are the most basic, default search parameter. It is the ONLY static term of reference. If iPhoto is a database (or is it a visual organizer?), then the most basic search criteria is the filename. This is pretty obvious by the fact the the Title default is set to the filename. So, if a person does NOT re-word their titles (and iPhoto does not compel you to), and uses search, filename searching becomes progressively less functional as you have to apply another set of filters. Just because YOU and I do title renaming in iPhoto does not mean that everyone does or should. Also, how about a global search, like with Spotlight? Do you think it a good thing that the same filename can exist in iPhoto's structure and outside and both accessible by the OS search engine? This only encourages Finder intrusion, accidental or otherwise, in iPhoto. iPhoto as a database is not protecting itself from the OS.
2) Export. Funny how iPhoto can change a file name on export to the Title but not from within iPhoto. This is handy if compiling collections for prints and otehr projects. But it speaks volumes to the fact that this is something that iPhoto CAN do, it is just set up not to. It says that iPhoto cannot internally organize itself like every other iLife application, and therefore user expectations need to be curtailed here. Say you export via an iLife access panel, what name does that photo have? So the cross-reference applicability becomes compromised if multiplied file names are now used, and encouraged to do so by iLife integration. iPhoto is part of the iLife system. You're just getting what the camera gave you, not multiplies in iPhoto and (whoops!) now embedded in other apps.
3) File recovery. It seems odd that you are dually saying that "filenames are irrelevant in iPhoto", but yourself and Toad, the most experienced iPhoto users here, actually advocate work flows that rename files from the camera default prior to iPhoto import. This speaks at a base level that it is just good, standard file management and organization (with or without the "visual" component) to have individually named, discrete files. My camera's database is flat and dumb. I'd expect my Mac's to be better. Suppose the BIG ONE hits Palo Alto and there is no more Apple. Suddenly your photos are orphaned into a file structure that even the Finder won't tolerate. At some point systems fail and many users will have to retrieve their data, preferably using a sequential recovery method. Unfortunately, iPhoto has files of different media content with the same name! This is terrible for database recovery. In fact, it is the worst possible scenario. Using a freeware file renamer to pre-organize your photos before iPhoto organizes your photos pretty much tells me that you have not got the ultimate faith in iPhoto's database functionality. You are hedging your bets. In some ways iPhoto is NOT a database, and not an image viewer. You are right, it is a visual organizer. Let's not give it database functionality it does not deserve. It's using the camera's limited file structure.
4) Even advanced cameras are getting better renaming systems in their firmware than iPhoto currently has. After years of using iPhoto, many collections are become so large that multiple file names actually can be a major problem if a rebuild is necessary. I personally ran into that. iPhoto may be reaching the end of its consumer applicability if it still defaults to a file system that uses the camera naming convention as sole reference. That system was set up when the average digital camera could only store a dozen or so photos. It is now inadequate. Like it or not iPhoto is managing files to some extent.
So given the above points which are all pretty major usage scenarios some point (search, export, recovery and camera advvances) it will be necessary for users to have discrete file names for each photo. If a freeware file renamer of only a few hundred kb in size can batch rename files before entry, then there is no reason why iPhoto cannot have this functionality built in to each import cycle. After that who cares if the user want sot rename them or not, especially in a consumer app. It can delete files on a camera as it imports, but cannot rename them? That is just odd.
Just because YOU think that file names are irrelevant in iPhoto does not mean that they are objectively, for other people in different scenarios. Ironically, the simpler one keeps iPhoto the worse this becomes because NOT re-titling forces a default to the camera's minimal file name structure—a poor choice. If file names were truly irrelevant, they would not be visible. As it is they are visible in at least 3 different ways in iPhoto.
I have let Apple know that this is a flaw. That said, I don't think you should be stating as a fact and as advice that file names are irrelevant. That is your opinion in your circumstance, but definitely not a truism in any long-term database management scenario I have ever seen in 2 decades of managing databases. And not a truism for iPhoto.
Tom
My last words on the subject.
I note that a great deal of the discussions in
these forums are precisely centred on that
issue,
Not in my experience. This one crops up from time to
time, but there are far more common issues.
Consumer application or pro it is simply poor
design in any relational system to have the core
filename inaccessible to change from within that
system.
As I said, I, as a User, help other Users with the
app. I don't comment on whether this is a good or bad
decision on the part of the programmers. It's about
working with the app we have, not the one you or I
think we should have.
Filenames are NOT irrelevant in iPhoto.
Yes they are.
Import a pic - or a thousand. Edit it in iPhoto or an
external editor. Use it in a Slideshow or book. Use
in an app that integrates with iPhoto. At no point in
that process is the filename an issue. Nowhere.
Concerned about the filename issue, then give the pix
a title - Summer Holidays 07 - using the Batch
Change command and number them sequentially. Want to
export a pic, use the File -> Export command and
select 'Use Title as File Name' option. iPhoto
creates a copy of the pix on the desktop with the
title as a filename. Where in
that process
does the Filename affect the User?
Again, as I stated earlier in this thread, iPhoto is
about
visual organisation. It's a photo
organiser, not a file organiser.
I have been using iPhoto regularly since v2. I have
12k+ pics in iPhoto, organised by Roll, Keywords,
Titles et al, and I never use the Filename. Period.
I've never needed it.
If you want to use the Filename, then by all means
rename the files prior to import. But it's not
necessary.
It's quite possible that Apple decided on this format
about 10 years ago to spur sales on Aperture which
was released a couple of years ago. I've no idea what
the development cycle is within Apple.Imagine if Car
manufacturers kept ABS braking only for their higher
end models?
As to your other comments, they may well be entirely
true, and that's why I posted the Feedback link. Best
to let the people who can make a difference know your
comments.
Regards
TD
Do you Twango?