Capture one and NAS
hi, I have finally got all my 18 hard drives onto a usable single accessible NAS (a synology DS1815+), its been a couple of months copying and 6K of cost.
But I realise now that C1 cant open my sessions (along with my much needed tags and adjustments) . It does, but its so slow and crashes regularly, its completely impractical.
What can I do? I can see files quickly and easily through the finder or with photomechanic, or make a catalog with media pro (which I have just been testing, but don't know it well), but I cant see how I can find my tags and ratings.
Is there a way I can make tis work for me? I read somewhere (after setting this up) that C1 doesn't work with NAS well, but its too late now, all the time and investment has been done.
What system does phase have for large volume shooters? The 128k of files is far too small for a catalogue IMO, (assuming I can get this to see my tags).
paul
But I realise now that C1 cant open my sessions (along with my much needed tags and adjustments) . It does, but its so slow and crashes regularly, its completely impractical.
What can I do? I can see files quickly and easily through the finder or with photomechanic, or make a catalog with media pro (which I have just been testing, but don't know it well), but I cant see how I can find my tags and ratings.
Is there a way I can make tis work for me? I read somewhere (after setting this up) that C1 doesn't work with NAS well, but its too late now, all the time and investment has been done.
What system does phase have for large volume shooters? The 128k of files is far too small for a catalogue IMO, (assuming I can get this to see my tags).
paul
0
-
One thing to troubleshoot is the method of mounting the NAS volume on your Mac.
You can choose AFP or SMB/CIFS.
If you choose SMB/CIFS there are three possible protocols, SMB1, SMB2 and SMB3, and there is a selectable option to disconnect resources on drop.
I think the first thing I would do is discover which mechanism is being used now, and try some of the others.
If you are currently using SMB3, for example, you may find that AFP or SMB1 works better.
Then, I wonder how your 18 drives are organised. I'm guessing you may be running something like RAID5 or RAID6. Do you have just one volume, or many volumes? How big are the volumes?
Do I understand ocrrectly that you have 128000 images? Are these in one shared folder or several?
It could be that the volume size is too large.
Another consideration may bee how your NAS is connected to your Mac. Is the connection wireless and which standard? Are there video or gaming users on the same wireless network?
My Mac and my QNAP NAS each have an ethernet connection to a layer 2 switch with a Gigabit switch fabric (GBE rates always possible between any two ports). Traffic between the iMac and the NAS goes directly through the switch and not throught the router. I get a pretty reliable connection with transfer rate peaking at over 100 MBps.
If you really have 128000 image files, there are users with catalogs that big. They do not store the images inside the catalog; the catalog just knows where to find the images and keeps track of the adjustments. Catalogs are designed to work with large numbers of images that may be offline.
I would NOT store the catalog on the NAS drive(s), but storing the images on the NAS drive ought not be too bad. What will take up a lot of space in the catalog will be the previews. I would keep the preview size small.0 -
[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
One thing to troubleshoot is the method of mounting the NAS volume on your Mac.
You can choose AFP or SMB/CIFS.
If you choose SMB/CIFS there are three possible protocols, SMB1, SMB2 and SMB3, and there is a selectable option to disconnect resources on drop.
I think the first thing I would do is discover which mechanism is being used now, and try some of the others.
If you are currently using SMB3, for example, you may find that AFP or SMB1 works better.
Then, I wonder how your 18 drives are organised. I'm guessing you may be running something like RAID5 or RAID6. Do you have just one volume, or many volumes? How big are the volumes?
Do I understand ocrrectly that you have 128000 images? Are these in one shared folder or several?
It could be that the volume size is too large.
Another consideration may bee how your NAS is connected to your Mac. Is the connection wireless and which standard? Are there video or gaming users on the same wireless network?
My Mac and my QNAP NAS each have an ethernet connection to a layer 2 switch with a Gigabit switch fabric (GBE rates always possible between any two ports). Traffic between the iMac and the NAS goes directly through the switch and not throught the router. I get a pretty reliable connection with transfer rate peaking at over 100 MBps.
If you really have 128000 image files, there are users with catalogs that big. They do not store the images inside the catalog; the catalog just knows where to find the images and keeps track of the adjustments. Catalogs are designed to work with large numbers of images that may be offline.
I would NOT store the catalog on the NAS drive(s), but storing the images on the NAS drive ought not be too bad. What will take up a lot of space in the catalog will be the previews. I would keep the preview size small.
Thanks Eric. I have been reading about catalogs. This might be the solution.
I dont know much about networking settings- i pay someone to do this, so I will forward this info to them.
I have way more than 128k images. I mentioned that this was a limit to a single cataloge and could be restrictive. I dont know how many shots I have, but I sometimes shoot 1000-4000 shots a day. I am guessing 128k images would be a year or two. I could make a new cataloge for every year maybe.
yes, I will have an ssd to put the catalogue on.
Do you think media pro is better than lightroom?
cheers paul0 -
Hi Paul,
Short answer, I ended up using neofinder (http://www.cdfinder.de) for cataloging. It is affordable,fast, and portable (meaning size of its resulting catalogs) with great search functionality. It is not 'perfect',has a learning curve depending on your needs, but for me does a great job.
Imho, the current available 'affordable' DAMs for 'consumer use' are not ready for use and abuse in a forgiving way.
Then again, I only use DAM to quickly find a particular session/image FAST (don't need 'pretty high resolution previews' etc.). I can then move that particular task to my workspace and do my 'thing'...
Over the years I 'played around' with a multitude of such software and could not settle on a particular one of the main stream offerings for one reason or another (Aperture, Lightroom, Imatch, Media Pro, Photo Supreme to name a few).
Cheers,
Franz
Disclaimer, I am not affiliated with any of the above mentioned programs in any way!0 -
[quote="NN261571UL" wrote:
......
I have way more than 128k images. I mentioned that this was a limit to a single cataloge and could be restrictive. I dont know how many shots I have, but I sometimes shoot 1000-4000 shots a day. I am guessing 128k images would be a year or two. I could make a new cataloge for every year maybe.
yes, I will have an ssd to put the catalogue on.
Do you think media pro is better than lightroom?
cheers paul
That's a lot of images.
I have no experience with medio pro or lightroom, and I have far fewer images than you, so it's hard to say which would be better for an image collection that big.
But if you have many of those images with tags and editing info from CaptureOne sessions, migrating that info to any new tool should be a major consideration. From that perspective Media Pro will likely be a simple shift and Lightroom difficult
The other thing you might think about is the level of support needed and consult the vendor (and check his forums) before making your choice.
I know that Photo Supreme is a mostly DAM tool that can support Capture One (and DXO) editting, and that Photo Mechanic is used by many professionals. I would look into those too.0 -
I have been trying to make a phase one catalogue the last day or so.
I have started with a single multi day shoot which has 10k of shots. the catalogue is still importing after a whole night (7 hours) and so far its about 1tb in size.
This doesn't seem at all practical. I know i can reduce the size of the previews - they are 2500 or so at the moment (the c1 default whatever this is). even if I can create a preview at half this size, the size of the catalogue is still 500gb for a single job...
How do I keep a catalogue on an ssd with this many for only one shoot?0 -
[quote="NN261571UL" wrote:
I have been trying to make a phase one catalogue the last day or so.
I have started with a single multi day shoot which has 10k of shots. the catalogue is still importing after a whole night (7 hours) and so far its about 1tb in size.
This doesn't seem at all practical. I know i can reduce the size of the previews - they are 2500 or so at the moment (the c1 default whatever this is). even if I can create a preview at half this size, the size of the catalogue is still 500gb for a single job...
How do I keep a catalogue on an ssd with this many for only one shoot?
You can use referenced catalogue. A standard catalogue for CO10 means it has previews and RAW files in it. A reference catalogue keeps the previews in the catalogue file but the RAW file somewhere else. I keep my catalogue with +20k images on my internal SSD, the RAW files are split between an external SSD and my NAS.0 -
hi, thanks for the reply. I have this as well. I have all my work sitting on 64tb of nas, and i just made an external catalogue on a fast raid i have attached by thunderbolt. My problem is that 10k images is a single shoot, the previews at the standard C1 preview jpeg size is still 1tb. I need a catalogue of many hundreds of thousands of images and they need to have small enough previews to have a catalogue that is able to sit on a single drive.
its just the nature of shooting lifestyle stuff and many shots a day. At the moment I cant see a practical way of doing this.
paul0 -
Fully agree - the catalog should not contain the image files.The size becomes unmanageable, and if there is ever a catalog problem, the image files are difficult to retrieve.
Also, with files outside the catalog, they are easy to access with any other tool I might want, and backup SW can easily keep track and backup.
7 hours sounds like an abnormally long import time but maybe its the images inside the catalog, or a slow drive.
I imported 16K referenced images from an Aperture Library to a catalog in a bit over an hour. Images stored on an SSD, the image files didn’t move.0 -
[quote="NN261571UL" wrote:
hi, thanks for the reply. I have this as well. I have all my work sitting on 64tb of nas, and i just made an external catalogue on a fast raid i have attached by thunderbolt. My problem is that 10k images is a single shoot, the previews at the standard C1 preview jpeg size is still 1tb. I need a catalogue of many hundreds of thousands of images and they need to have small enough previews to have a catalogue that is able to sit on a single drive.
Maybe my math is off but, for 10,000 images to generate a combined preview file size of 1TB, each preview would need to be 100MB in size (10,000 x 100MB = 1,000 GB = 1TB). Most RAW files aren't even 100MB in size. That would be really big preview files. In my test Capture One catalog, I have 134 files giving a catalog size of 434MB. This means that the previews should be smaller than 3MB each (434MB/134 = 3MB).
Are you sure that you are not creating a managed catalog (which would include the RAW files and could explain the huge size)?0 -
[quote="nbirkett" wrote:
[quote="NN261571UL" wrote:
hi, thanks for the reply. I have this as well. I have all my work sitting on 64tb of nas, and i just made an external catalogue on a fast raid i have attached by thunderbolt. My problem is that 10k images is a single shoot, the previews at the standard C1 preview jpeg size is still 1tb. I need a catalogue of many hundreds of thousands of images and they need to have small enough previews to have a catalogue that is able to sit on a single drive.
Maybe my math is off but, for 10,000 images to generate a combined preview file size of 1TB, each preview would need to be 100MB in size (10,000 x 100MB = 1,000 GB = 1TB). Most RAW files aren't even 100MB in size. That would be really big preview files. In my test Capture One catalog, I have 134 files giving a catalog size of 434MB. This means that the previews should be smaller than 3MB each (434MB/134 = 3MB).
Are you sure that you are not creating a managed catalog (which would include the RAW files and could explain the huge size)?
mmmm, I could be. I'm new to this. ill check my settings again! thanks!0 -
[quote="nbirkett" wrote:
[quote="NN261571UL" wrote:
hi, thanks for the reply. I have this as well. I have all my work sitting on 64tb of nas, and i just made an external catalogue on a fast raid i have attached by thunderbolt. My problem is that 10k images is a single shoot, the previews at the standard C1 preview jpeg size is still 1tb. I need a catalogue of many hundreds of thousands of images and they need to have small enough previews to have a catalogue that is able to sit on a single drive.
Maybe my math is off but, for 10,000 images to generate a combined preview file size of 1TB, each preview would need to be 100MB in size (10,000 x 100MB = 1,000 GB = 1TB). Most RAW files aren't even 100MB in size. That would be really big preview files. In my test Capture One catalog, I have 134 files giving a catalog size of 434MB. This means that the previews should be smaller than 3MB each (434MB/134 = 3MB).
Are you sure that you are not creating a managed catalog (which would include the RAW files and could explain the huge size)?
i appears that I am doing this....
ill try again.
also, do you just import the capture folders? the first try I imported the whole session including the sub folders, this seemed to work (as i will have my output tiffs etc). or shall i just import the capture folder only?
I hit a problem importing the whole session the second job I tried, it ended up be far more images than it was suppose to be, and I realised that it was importing the separate DNG's form my drone raw footage!0 -
Following
0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
12 comments