Ease in Moving Away from Media Pro?
Hello everyone!
I'm looking to purchase Media Pro for my Public Relations team at Asbury University here in Kentucky, and I wanted to see how easy it is to migrate out of Media Pro if we were to switch software programs down the road. From the looks of it, there's no easy way to extract all the work that has been done tagging photos if we were to find a new software program 4 or 5 years down the road (just hypothetical).
For instance…
You tag photos in Adobe Bridge.
That embeds them into the metadata of the photo itself.
Media Pro can then import the metadata from the photo into their catalogs.
Is there a similar system for Media Pro like this…
You tag photos in Media Pro.
That embeds them into metadata *somewhere*.
*Software X* can then import all metadata from Media Pro if need-be.
The last thing I want is this scenario:
You tag photos in Media Pro.
Media Pro (heaven forbid) goes bankrupt or your team decided to go a different route 5 years from now.
All the hard work you've done is now useless.
Does that make sense?
I'm looking to purchase Media Pro for my Public Relations team at Asbury University here in Kentucky, and I wanted to see how easy it is to migrate out of Media Pro if we were to switch software programs down the road. From the looks of it, there's no easy way to extract all the work that has been done tagging photos if we were to find a new software program 4 or 5 years down the road (just hypothetical).
For instance…
You tag photos in Adobe Bridge.
That embeds them into the metadata of the photo itself.
Media Pro can then import the metadata from the photo into their catalogs.
Is there a similar system for Media Pro like this…
You tag photos in Media Pro.
That embeds them into metadata *somewhere*.
*Software X* can then import all metadata from Media Pro if need-be.
The last thing I want is this scenario:
You tag photos in Media Pro.
Media Pro (heaven forbid) goes bankrupt or your team decided to go a different route 5 years from now.
All the hard work you've done is now useless.
Does that make sense?
0
-
This is typically called an exit strategy and it's very wise to think about it before purchase IMHO.
Media Pro is scriptable, so you can write a script to extract all that data (the work you and your colleagues did) into a file of you your choice and migrate it to another tool of your choice. If you can't write it, there will be others who can.0 -
I think it's very smart to think about a exit strategy before purchasing software!
Bridge is a browser and it does 'touch' the photo imidiately. When you ad keywords, they become visible right away.
In Media Pro this is a two-step action because it's a catalog.
When you ad metadata to an image in MediaPro this first is saved into the database of the catalog.
You have to 'push' back this data into the image with a command (Ctrl/Alt/B) and then the metadata can be read by other applications (like bridge) too.
B.t.w. I think this two-step thing is good. I want to keep images untouched as long as possible because every touch can (potentialy) lead to corruption or quality-loss.
One very important thing to remember is to only use the meta-data fields that are compatible with other applications. Not all MediaPro fields are! It's save to use 'Keywords', 'Caption', 'Title', 'Copyright', star ratings and i think you can find others too.
Some fields to avoid are 'People', Custom fields, Coloured labels and the catalog fields.
You could do some organizing with Hierachical Keywords perhaps but normaly the catalog fields are used for this. Now the question is, is MP usable enough for you with these limitations?
Roelof0 -
Much appreciated! Thanks, all! 0 -
"...B.t.w. I think this two-step thing is good. I want to keep images untouched as long as possible because every touch can (potentialy) lead to corruption or quality-loss…"
this is contrary to what I am given to understand
the image remains in RAW/JPG as imported. Therefore it is never "corrupted".
use of .xmp files and proper set up in "Preferences" will assure that all instructions and metadata are translated to a new catalog system.
The real incompatibilities come from adjustments which are non-standard across programs (LR is different from C1). It's easy enough to export a "clean" RAW to any new program and avoid the issues if need be. And keep your metadata... 😄0 -
Maybe i was not clear enough. English is not my first language, sorry.
Media Pro does keep images 'untouched' when you ad or alter metadata.
Then, you can push back this information back into the image (in the XMP placeholder). At this point, the image is 'touched'.
However, this is not the complete story because proprietary RAW files like NEF of CR2 can not be altered by third party applications. Media Pro will make sidecarr files (.XMP) All other format's will be altered (DNG, JPG, TIF, whathever).
So, it's a litle bit more nuanced.
One question @PhaseoneUser30154:It's easy enough to export a "clean" RAW to any new program and avoid the issues if need be. And keep your metadata..
How do you bring over (all) the metadata from Media Pro to the other application?0 -
I was able to export from media pro to an XML file, then import that into Photo Supreme, which mostly worked.
This did not require touching any media files or creating any sidecar files.0 -
[quote="bnes" wrote:
I was able to export from media pro to an XML file, then import that into Photo Supreme, which mostly worked.
This did not require touching any media files or creating any sidecar files.
I'd be interested to know how you did this. I tried, but didn't succeed (with the export menu option).0 -
The 'People' field, Custom fields, Coloured labels and the catalog fields can not be exported by XML at my knowledge...
So that information will be lost0 -
I'd be interested to know how you did this. I tried, but didn't succeed (with the export menu option).
I used Media Pro 1->File->Export To XML...
You probably have to select the POSIX option.
Name the file.
Start Photo Supreme
Tools->Import from MediaPro
I wrote up my results at http://obviously.com/1465/Digital-Asset ... tware#grid
My keywords were all heirarchical keywords. Nothing was stored under people. I did not check if ratings came through.0 -
Thanks bnes.
I did try that (even before your post), but it fails for me with the error: "The action could not be completed because the catalog contains files not found in mounted volumes". I have no clue what that means, but there is nothing obvious wrong in my catalog. I check, double checked and triple checked.
If you've got any pointers, i'd appreciate it.0 -
I reported an similar issue to Photo Supreme's developer, and they sent me an updated version of the software the next day. Great service.
Unfortunately PS is about twice as sluggish as Media Pro (at least on my older machine), and thus I stuck with MP for now. Since MP is abandoned I'll eventually have to bit the bullet and switch.0 -
Turns out something was amiss with my MP catalog. I don't know what, but i could export my RAW metadata, so something somewhere else in my catalog is hampering.
I've successfully imported the data into photo supreme. Now i'm working on a roundtrip with C1, getting exported jpegs back into psu as .preview files. To do that, i need to rename the .jpg files from C1. I can do that (e.g. with automator or a rename app), but the next time i want to rename to the same file name, all of them fail to overwrite.
In case you might have any pointers, i'd appreciate that. However, it may be better to continue that conversation in the psu forum.0 -
@bnes
You say Media Pro has been abandoned. Has there been official confirmation of this? I am an Aperture user who used iView which I liked in the past. MS Expression caused many problems on the Mac. Just bought the upgrade to Media Pro 1.4.2 version and also downloaded archived 1.4.1 at a very reasonable price. Is Media Pro actually on it's way out? The comments here seem to indicate many think so. Was hoping to use it in at least a minimal way on possibly a shoot by shoot catalog basis, but it seems for a 500GB Aperture move it might not be wise. I am on a new 2013 Mac Pro and several other systems 10.6.8, 10.8.5, 10.9.2 on the Mac Pro 2013 and all on a 2012 Mac Pro tower with multiple boot drives. Planning on moving to later systems as they prove themselves, 10.9.4, Yosemite, etc. Any thoughts from anyone about the future of Media Pro?0 -
You say Media Pro has been abandoned. Has there been official confirmation of this?
It's apparent it's been abandoned by PhaseOne's actions. The question is will PhaseOne have the profesional courtesy to discontinue the product? It's still for sale, despite it the abandonment.0 -
[quote="bnes" wrote:
You say Media Pro has been abandoned. Has there been official confirmation of this?
It's apparent it's been abandoned by PhaseOne's actions. The question is will PhaseOne discontinue it?
It is hard to argue otherwise when "dot" releases take about a year.0 -
If an exit strategy is required don't adopt Media Pro.
It is a defunct Microsoft program that was sitting abandoned for quite a while before Phase One bought it.
It appears to be at least sidelined by Phase One at this time.
You are much better off adopting an industry standard application with a very wide install base such as Lightroom.
Lightroom is also more of a swiss army knife type of application so you will have far more flexibility in the long term.0 -
[quote="FredBGG" wrote:
....
It appears to be at least sidelined by Phase One at this time.
You are much better off adopting an industry standard application with a very wide install base such as Lightroom.
Lightroom is also more of a swiss army knife type of application so you will have far more flexibility in the long term.
I have developed what I call a "use what works" strategy and workflow.
I import, rename, cull, rate, and keyword using lightroom.
I then import the remaining into a small MP catalog (generally a current year). These small MP catalogs are very stable and fast.
With MP, I then open those files I want to process with Capture One in a session, which places them in a CO session album of "not in catalog set". I can rename this if I want.
One disadvantage is that the color labels don't translate between LR and MP.
The advantage is I don't have to have CO take the time to generate previews of the files I won't process.
Since I generally process these photos for work in PS, LR then can keep track of the CO conversions when I resync LR.0 -
It's apparent it's been abandoned by PhaseOne's actions.
bnes - could you elaborate on what you mean with that?
I am considering moving TO Media Pro - from Extensis Portfolio, that HAS been both abandoned and discontinued. Would rather not move to a DAM that will be in the same situation a year down the road...0 -
Take 10 minutes to browse some topics on this forum and you will know enough.
MediaPro is abandoned and so you better look for something else.
I think only Lightroom is a serious alternative.
Roelof0 -
[quote="rmoorlag" wrote:
I think only Lightroom is a serious alternative.
We're talking DAM here and of all the serious DAM products you name the least serious contender. Lightroom is a great "all in one" solution and I use it frequently as my editor of choice. But its DAM capabilities underperform when compared to the dedicated DAM solutions. I recommend LR only for novice DAM users or those who have very low DAM needs.
Another critical note for Lightroom is that its generally believed that they will move to a subscription model soon. And that is something that I personally don't want at all and so I've been investigating my options to drop LR as my editor and move to either DXO or CaptureOne to replace Lightroom.
The most serious dedicated DAM tools today are:
- Photo Supreme (Windows and Mac)
- Daminion (Windows only)
- iMatch (Windows only)
- ACDSee (Windows only; the Mac version is a weak extract of the Windows version; also ACDsee is moving more and more towards becoming a Lightroom clone)0 -
[quote="HansDeZomers" wrote:
[quote="rmoorlag" wrote:
I think only Lightroom is a serious alternative.
We're talking DAM here and of all the serious DAM products you name the least serious contender. Lightroom is a great "all in one" solution and I use it frequently as my editor of choice. But its DAM capabilities underperform when compared to the dedicated DAM solutions. I recommend LR only for novice DAM users or those who have very low DAM needs.
Another critical note for Lightroom is that its generally believed that they will move to a subscription model soon. And that is something that I personally don't want at all and so I've been investigating my options to drop LR as my editor and move to either DXO or CaptureOne to replace Lightroom.
The most serious dedicated DAM tools today are:
- Photo Supreme (Windows and Mac)
- Daminion (Windows only)
- iMatch (Windows only)
- ACDSee (Windows only; the Mac version is a weak extract of the Windows version; also ACDsee is moving more and more towards becoming a Lightroom clone)
I intend to take a hard look at the new imatch5 .
The key for me will be how well it integrates with CO sessions.
BTW, I do use LR for most of my photo DAM work - good, but not great.0 -
[quote="HansDeZomers" wrote:
its generally believed that they will move to a subscription model soon.
No, it is not "generally believed" that Lr is going to a subscription pricing model - soon, or at any other time.
The only actual information that anyone has on this is that Adobe has explicitly stated that Lr will stay on a perpetual licence model "indefinitely".
"Indefinitely" can mean a lot of things, but it never, ever means "soon".
Anyone who says they know better is a liar.0 -
[quote="Jim MSP" wrote:
I intend to take a hard look at the new imatch5 .
The key for me will be how well it integrates with CO sessions.
BTW, I do use LR for most of my photo DAM work - good, but not great.
I tried iMatch5 when it first came out but gave up on it shortly after due to its (for me) impossible interface. Of course that's just a personal opinion.No, it is not "generally believed" that Lr is going to a subscription pricing model - soon, or at any other time.
I didn't say that it is going to be subscription only; I said that it's "generally believed". I read on many forums and many with me believe that the next major LR update will be subscription only. The general opinion could be wrong of course.
I know the statement from the Lightroom product manager that you're referring to, but don't forget that that statement is now over a year old. And that's a long enough period for Adobe to have chosen a different direction. Look at what happened to PS.
But whichever Adobe decides, at least I'll be prepared. I already picked a successor for when they do and now I just wait patiently to see what the future brings.0 -
[quote="Jim MSP" wrote:
.....
I intend to take a hard look at the new imatch5 .
The key for me will be how well it integrates with CO sessions.
BTW, I do use LR for most of my photo DAM work - good, but not great.
Well, I'm two days into my testing of iMatch5.
It appears to be a very good DAM - but I'm struggling with how to properly integrate it with CO (and Lightroom).
One of the primary uses of a DAM for me is to find a single photo (or a few photos) I have previously processed, and reprint or reprocess in some way. I can find the photo in iMatch quite well. But I'm almost stymied as to how to easily get the single photo into CO or a CO session.
I can get the whole folder reloaded into a session, but that for me defeats the purpose. Or I can get a copy of the raw into a new session folder, but then I have to start all over, and I now have a duplicate that I don't really want.
I can do this properly with MP.0 -
[quote="HansDeZomers" wrote:
The most serious dedicated DAM tools today are:
- Photo Supreme (Windows and Mac)
[...]
Yesterday I spent some time testing Photo Supreme on a Mac. I tried it out with small number of images (I did not try to import an iView/EM/MP catalog). It has a lot going for it: it's feature rich and somewhat user friendly, and the developer is very responsive. And I was surprised to see that it displays edited NEF previews. On the other hand, it uses a very different organizational paradigm from iView/EM/MP, and the interface is a bit "clunky." I don't know if it's just my unfamiliarity with PS and greater comfort with iView/EM, but after an hour of testing PS, I realized just how well-designed iView is (was).
Even if I could adjust to Photo Supreme, it unfortunately lacks a Web gallery generator, which is a deal breaker for me. So I'm still staying with Expression Media for the foreseeable future.0 -
When you switch software you shouldn't expect to find a clone in the other tool. Every tool works in its own ways, each with pros and cons. Of course your years of experience with iView makes you familiar with its operating and even it's quirks will have become part of your routines. You probably also realize that an hour is enough to just scratch the surface of a product. I came here to these forums because I was looking for an alternative for Lightroom editing, and if I'd spend an hour only on each alternative then I don't think I would've taken my quest seriously. Instead I used all the trial days I got to be able to get a honest impression of each product.
Unfortunately I can't suggest alternatives for web page generation as I stopped my own web hosting many years ago; too cumbersome. Maybe scripting in Photo Supreme can do it? These days I mostly use SmugMug and Flickr. SmugMug is a very professional photo service and while it does cost, you'll also save on your hosting package and the hassles of maintaining it. Smugmug offers public as well as private galleries and can be personalized so that you won't even know that it's a Smugmug site. You can also use your own domain name with your Smugmug pages.0 -
[quote="HansDeZomers" wrote:
When you switch software you shouldn't expect to find a clone in the other tool.
And I didn't expect to find a clone of iView in Photo Supreme. But when comparing DAM software it is reasonable to expect to find similar or analogous functionality, even if implemented differently.Every tool works in its own ways, each with pros and cons. Of course your years of experience with iView makes you familiar with its operating and even it's quirks will have become part of your routines. You probably also realize that an hour is enough to just scratch the surface of a product.
I agree. I acknowledged the bias of prior experience in my original statement ("I don't know if it's just my unfamiliarity with PS and greater comfort with iView/EM . . .").I came here to these forums because I was looking for an alternative for Lightroom editing, and if I'd spend an hour only on each alternative then I don't think I would've taken my quest seriously. Instead I used all the trial days I got to be able to get a honest impression of each product.
That's fantastic! Your approach is very thorough and will undoubtedly yield objective/scientific results. I made an instinctive judgment that Photo Supreme's "CATALOG | FOLDERS" tabs (requiring a third column for info) were not as usable as iView's "Info | Organize" tabs (with no need for a third column). In my assessment iView's implementation of key functions/features (e.g., view options, keywording) is more versatile and sophisticated. It's possible my judgment is wrong. It would be interesting to compare the two programs using professional usability testing methods.Unfortunately I can't suggest alternatives for web page generation as I stopped my own web hosting many years ago; too cumbersome. Maybe scripting in Photo Supreme can do it? These days I mostly use SmugMug and Flickr. SmugMug is a very professional photo service and while it does cost, you'll also save on your hosting package and the hassles of maintaining it. Smugmug offers public as well as private galleries and can be personalized so that you won't even know that it's a Smugmug site. You can also use your own domain name with your Smugmug pages.
I understand how self-hosting can be cumbersome, but with iView's HTML templates I have a reasonably streamlined workflow. I've considered Smugmug, Zenfolio, etc., but the cost would actually double my expenses (I use my current self-hosting for several business ventures/domains, so I would still be paying for self hosting). Perhaps some day I will eliminate those other business ventures and eliminate my self-hosting, but not yet.0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
27 comments