Millions of your customers, including me, use many Google products - Android phone, Chrome, etc. I have 100K+ photos online with Google Photos. I prefer adobe photoshop elements to manage my photos.
Please add feature/management integration with Google Photos.
All pics from family member's phones are saved to Google Photos. We don't want to have to do regular uploads or sync with Google photos when using Adobe products. We want continuous, seamless integration into Google Photos with Adobe products including Elements, Lightroom, & Photoshop.
Google is a cloud storage. Not only is it risky but it's better to keep your photos at home. Is there a reason you won't use your own computer to store your photos, like say, Adobe Elements Organizer? In Adobe Elements 14 is the Organizer where you can store your own photos without Google. Frankly, we think Google is cumbersome. You may be using some other mode other than Expert Mode. In the Expert Mode all your tools will load and at the bottom is Organizer. Check it out. You may be utilizing Guided Mode or another one. Professionals use Expert Mode. Keep in that mode so you can really enjoy this robust program.
PS Google Photos has very limited organganization tools. I wish it did more like what LR does!
Am I the only guy who still uses a hard drive for storage?
As a tech, I know storing online in clouds is risky as they can be hacked. So I have 5 computers here. Each have external drives to store millions of photos we work with in our company, and then our server has 2 external drives for storing all of them altogether because two storage places is better than one, and actually I think we should use three. Just my rule of thumb: As a tech, we always did that at Microsoft and it worked out for us.
Thing is, someone thought of the cloud when external drives began to sell because a few companies wanted to make money on their software which would include a cloud. I don't need a cloud for anything. So I guess I am the exception here. Still, my advice is get out of the cloud and use a real hard drive. (real drive is mentioned below) This is my reason:
By storing stuff in a clouds, you'll never see it again. It becomes a junk heap. It's like storing your stuff in a storage company. You will never clean it out and you will forget what it has. When we cleaned out our storage company bin just recently. I found my old square end-pipes I always wanted to put on my classic GTO. Now I'm happy. But I won't use that storage anymore. I forgot what was in it. I hadn't seen it for years.
On a real external drive, preferably Seagate, with a real disc that turns at 7200 rpm, (or 8400) you can plug it into the wall to keep it warm, disconnect it from its USB, and it doesn't get viruses. And nobody can hack it. When you send photos to the cloud, if one photo has a virus it infects all that's in the cloud. Also, with a real drive I can clean it out with an auto-clean-up, and I can regularly see what's in it, by looking at my file manager.
I'd like to make mention about the so-called "portable" external drives, there is not a real drive. Like a thumb-drive, they are silicon. They need to be charged up every 3 to 6 weeks through its USB power connector, otherwise, your data goes away. It's (cheap) silicon, unlike a magnetic disc. Silicon is cheap material from a high intensity manufacturer in Japan, where quality is not there. So, use a real drive. In my book, a cloud just does not cut it, and it's just not safe.
I can buy Elements as a stand alone, and I don't need to buy Photoshop CC for the cloud.
I have my own cloud right here on many external drives. And I don't need to rent it.
Steve Lehman, MCSE responding
Photoshop Elements supports cloud sharing for third parties like Facebook and Smugmug but not for Google. Consequently I have to do my Google uploading outside of Elements. I would prefer to do it within Elements and have Elements update the shared version if I edit a photo.
In reply to Selondon, I agree that Adobe must have decided that it is not in the interest of their own sharing solutions to work with Google, but then why do this offer support for SmugMug, Flickr etc. Since they have this mechanism for customer feedback I am keen to tell them my views and to explain that they are getting less money from me as a result of their policy. If enough people speak up they may realize that they can make more money by selling upgrades to Elements.
I went ahead and made my own plugin to help me use the best of both worlds. The plugin uses Google Photos search to find the picture I want and then automatically finds the highest resolution image available.
Video showing it's working is here https://youtu.be/pWZJGH3OlsU
Hope this will help all the Photoshop fans who love Google Photos.
RE: Google photos
I reviewed Viga's add-on for Google integration with Adobe, and it look like what we need. Thanks Viga. It's only my opinion but, I think Google has a whole set of applications its getting people to use, and most of them appear to be a stripped down version of a Microsoft app or another brand. It could be that most companies don't know what to do with them. Hopefully a few might warm up to this new plugin Viga sent to us. It looks promising.
Steve Lehman, MCSE
In this reply to Dennis Dwyer, I have the greatest respect for his comment. To answer his question: no, I am not kidding about maintaining photos at home. I think clicking on two different systems is cumbersome (initially as said before). I use my own external drives. I do not use a mobile drive which only has silicon like a USB flash drive. It will lose data unexpectedly. But I do use a Seagate external drive with a real disc (not silicon) and it uses AC for power (not USB power), and I have a good reason for this. I use AC drives then disconnect the USB to guard from viruses on a clean backup, and I do not use the Windows backup utility which makes it impossible to copy files to a new computer. Instead, I use the old copy/paste onto a folder in the external drive so I can use that copy on any computer I happen to plug the external drive into.
BUT there is another reason I won't use a cloud for photo storage. It's because I am an old tech from the 1990's when we first used encryption and within the first month, hackers had the key to our encryption code. Sure it got better as time went on, but since then I won't trust cloud storage which has had complaints about susceptibility, hacking risks, and it's someone else's server which has their own rules (not mine) and I am at their mercy for storing my private photos, without my own control over it.
There may be billions of photos in cloud storage all over the place, but I will never make my private photos available on another's server. I won't run a risk with someone else's server. How good is it? How infallible? Sure it's a mainframe, but who's in charge of it? Is data being moved around so one mainframe can work freely then moved back? Is there a backup to my backup? Are my photos in two different places as a backup slo I will never lose them? How can I be in charge of my oen storage? How can I store them on a computer in one State and another computer in anotehr State? That what banks do with their transactions, as they keep their backup data in 3 different Sates in case of a nuc-attack. How can I make my life easy to live? THAT'S why I use MY external drives.
I am self-employed in business and my business has lesser risk than any cloud storage.
Okay, I will run his last letter sent to me today 5-29-18: Thanks for reading.
Dennis Dwyer commented on a reply to this idea:Feature Request: Elegant integration with Google Photos
I do not mean to offend, but in my opinion the argument you are making is ridiculous. You stated that you think that Google is `cumbersome` and that it's better to keep your photos at home. Are you serious? I have a four year old USB external drive that I use for backup, do you think this type of solution is more reliable than Google Cloud? It's not. You may feel that Google Photos is cumbersome, but for the rest of us 500 million+ users, it's how we store our photos (In May 2017, Google announced that Google Photos has over 500 million users, who upload over 1.2 billion photos every day. Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Photos). This type of response is not informed or adequate.
It's been my #2 rule since I received my technical certifications in engineering - at our University we had an our engineer-rule (#2) to never backup on just one drive. Always have a copy on two or more external drives. There has been events heard about one drive being corrupted as accidents happen. And since 1998 when Microsoft was working on the Japan piracy problem, where Microsoft software was being duplicated (exactly) down to the wrapper, Windows was programmed to reject discs whenever there is a print command or work being done on a stand-alone portable disc, alone in the D-drive. The disc always converts to 'read-only' so its content can only be copied to the hard drive. But at least it saves the content and allows the content to copy. For that reason, we have a sticker on our disc cases that tell our customers (who receive discs) to copy their photo content to the hard drive before printing, and to only print from the hard drive. It's much more stable than a portable disc in the D-drive. I have had my hard-fast engineer-rule #2 rule to backup on two or more external drives, or drive that are not related to the computer that is being backed-up. I always make it a copy/paste so I can buy a new computer and the copy will always copy back onto the new computer. That has been my #3 rule.
In case you're interested, my engineer-rule #1 is "never delete" - which is the rule taught to use in technology at the University and we were told to get that in our heads as a rule. It's especially a rule for the REGedit data area. Recovery can be a major problem there. Deleting cannot be reversed - sometimes even if you have recovery software. Deleting is a bad habit for some people. We don't need to keep everything, but use discretion. Think before you click your mouse too fast.
As for my backup methods, I know more than some, that encryption is like a locked door where a thief can find a way to unlock it. Hackers work for government with the same talent and they are there to teach the government. Likewise, I know that government servers, especially IRS, the military, the Federal Reserve to name a few, have several layers of encryption and security but there's still hacking. We hear it all the time about big stores being hacked yet they have more security than the government. My concerns are with merit. I stand my ground. I use my own.
That way, I don't need to rely on a stranger's server to maintain my photos. People have the same belief, that money in a bank is the responsibility of bank personnel to maintain it. Actually it's your money - you are responsible. That's why I maintain my own photos on my own backup devices. I won't pay monthly for a cloud storage to "maintain it". I have my own system, and it's paid for.
The problem is that 'elegant' integration needs to be explained. Wishing 'elegant' integration can mean anything, and for me I can't imagine which precise features are missing. And the purpose and rules of this forum are to deal with a single feature in a discussion, not several ones or ... none in the present case. This enables discussing the feature in detail and voting for it to prioritize it.
So I would be very interested to know which feature (or which features in several posts) would be 'elegant'and possibly not only a dream.
You may be late to this, everything has probably been answered by now. I've only been answering their questions as the topic was about cloud backup, to pay monthly, and how safe it really is, and then, whether a external drive backup is better. Happy to bring you up to speed butI think we've run it out now.
- 15769 Conversations
- 3421 Followers
- 13308 Conversations
- 2867 Followers
- 4660 Conversations
- 1231 Followers
- 711 Conversations
- 204 Followers
- 1048 Conversations
- 165 Followers
- 371 Conversations
- 51 Followers
- 1032 Conversations
- 667 Followers
- 32 Conversations
- 19 Followers