My DSLR-to-Google-Photos workflow, in its entirety

  1. Insert memory card into Mac.
  2. Grab beer, wish that Google Fiber were already available in San Jose.
  3. There is no step 3.

Visit to grab the uploader for Mac or Windows. Once you turn it on, it’ll take things from there.

9 thoughts on “My DSLR-to-Google-Photos workflow, in its entirety

  1. Are you content to store your DSLR photos only as High Quality versions? Or do you maintain local files and backups of the original versions as well?

    1. Personally I’d prefer to pay ($10/mo. for 1TB, though if I had a smaller collection, $2/mo. for 100GB would work) in order to preserve raw data as-is. From my iPhone, however, I see zero reason whatsoever to upload originals. The resolution fits well under (by 2x) the 16 megapixel cap, and the visual impact of compression is immaterial:

      1. My originals are over 1TB, so I’ve been relying on local backup rather than Google Photos rather than pay $240 a year. A great compromise would be to let the Google Photos uploader upload only those images that have more than x stars in Lightroom. I’d encourage you to consider whether there’s a way, via a LR add-in or otherwise, for the Google Photos uploader to query the LR database and make that kind of selection, based on the user’s choice of x.

  2. I’m loving the auto collections that Google Photos creates. I toss out a bunch, and swap some images in the stories it creates, but it does a pretty darn good job for being algorithmic, and I appreciate the easy reminders to even think about some of the images. For example, I’m not going to take the time to create a “story” manually for an afternoon at the park with the kids, but if it will do 90% of the work and then prompt me to maybe fix a couple things, I’m all over that.

    One weird thing I’ve noticed on the collages lately is that sometimes it will make a collage of 3 or 4 pictures, all with the same image. Or 2 of the 4 will be the same, and the others will be very very similar. Do you think it’s just finding different resolutions (like a web-sized version I might have saved out) and/or psd files and assuming they’re all different? I don’t remember seeing that kind of issue the first week or so, but have been noticing it more this last week.

    The movies are my kids’ favorite type of collection. I love having the music in there and the ability to swap out a different track so easily. Some great work.

  3. Up till now I have been an ‘all aboard’ type atitude with all the innovations and new ‘workflows’ and all that, but now I think a major deviation from progress is occurring and google is involved. New compression and tweeking of existing formats is not a good way to go, and may be doomed for failure in the long run. What we need here is a new totally new format. Film thinking is over. Until now we still have used iso, f stop, speed, and all the jargon of film. We have imitated film all the way, and now you are imitating jpg and tiff with the same thinking. We now have the capability of the jump that lasers brought with their advent. It is time to bring forth a new format and thinking on images- based on neuron technology, yes based on how the brain stores it’s images. The brain which converts all thought to neuron images to store into short or long term memory. Throw away the past and let’s forge into a new world.

  4. I just noticed that my DSLR pictures which are at 4 to 7 mb (16 mp sony alpha a57) is now only less than 2mb in google photos. the downgraded quality is not that noticeable until you zoom at 2x or 4x. but in 100% crop, it’s almost the same.

    1. Hey James, would you mind sharing examples where you notice visual degradation? Seeing those would be very helpful in fine-tuning the compression algorithm. Email-wise I’m nack at google. Thanks!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *