I was really impressed with the way Vista is handling photographs and the
tight integration with Photo Gallery. I thought I could do away with programs
like Picasa, but I found a big problem.

I put some images onto a test machine, made some fixes to them, reverted to
original, etc. I then checked the original directory and my original files
were not there - the modified versions were then in their place. I then went
searching the hard drive for the original image and I found it in the
following folder:

C:\Users\{user}\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows Photo Gallery\Original Images

I checked the filenames and although my original file was called
IMG_2635.JPG the file in the "original images" folder is called

{530FB1E9-0950-40F3-A4C5-715148FCEE37}-IMG_2635.JPG

I see two problems with this approach:

1. Let's say I regularly back up my Pictures folder, but not this hidden
obscure folder, then my system crashes or hardware fails and I reload the OS
and restore files from my backup source. I have restored a modified version,
not the original. Very bad design.

2. This potentially wastes a large amount of disk space.

Other applications either use sidecar files, XMP files, XML files to
describe the change and then apply those files over the original. I wish
Microsoft would do the same. If I missed something in the way my version of
Photo Gallery is configured, please let me know.

thanks,
mitch

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.

http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com...pictures_video

I believe this is typical Apple iPhoto stuff and one of the reasons why I
ended up hating iPhoto when I was trying and failing to switch to Mac last
summer. In apple you can avoid it and I don't think it renames your
originals (so Vista is worse), but it's the same kind of thing where a layer
of unnecessary bureaucracy is installed between the user and the user's
content.


"Mitch W" wrote in message
...
I was really impressed with the way Vista is handling photographs and the
tight integration with Photo Gallery. I thought I could do away with
programs
like Picasa, but I found a big problem.

I put some images onto a test machine, made some fixes to them, reverted
to
original, etc. I then checked the original directory and my original files
were not there - the modified versions were then in their place. I then
went
searching the hard drive for the original image and I found it in the
following folder:

C:\Users\{user}\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows Photo Gallery\Original
Images

I checked the filenames and although my original file was called
IMG_2635.JPG the file in the "original images" folder is called

{530FB1E9-0950-40F3-A4C5-715148FCEE37}-IMG_2635.JPG

I see two problems with this approach:

1. Let's say I regularly back up my Pictures folder, but not this hidden
obscure folder, then my system crashes or hardware fails and I reload the
OS
and restore files from my backup source. I have restored a modified
version,
not the original. Very bad design.

2. This potentially wastes a large amount of disk space.

Other applications either use sidecar files, XMP files, XML files to
describe the change and then apply those files over the original. I wish
Microsoft would do the same. If I missed something in the way my version
of
Photo Gallery is configured, please let me know.

thanks,
mitch

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.

http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com...pictures_video