Import from Lightroom - strategies?
I've successfully imported a Lightroom catalogue into Capture 1. Seems to work well, does what I need. But it was a small catalogue with ~ 17,000 images. Next I tried a bigger catalogue with has ~ 132,000 images. Last I looked I had imported around 25,000 pictures with another 102 hours remaining. I tried quitting and restarting the import (cos I have other things to do!) but that restarted the import from the beginning.
I can't really leave my MacBook running for a week to do this as I need to take it out and about. I wonder if anyone has any ideas - or has already managed to import large Lightroom catalogues into C1.
Thanks!
I can't really leave my MacBook running for a week to do this as I need to take it out and about. I wonder if anyone has any ideas - or has already managed to import large Lightroom catalogues into C1.
Thanks!
0
-
I haven't imported such large Lr catalogs. Maybe Phase One, hasn't either! 😊
Perhaps you'll have to export parts of the giant catalog as smaller pieces and import each of them individually, rather then asking C1 to swallow the thing whole.0 -
I didn't realise mine were so big ;)
Good idea, now I'm going to have to learn if I can split a Lightroom catalouge up into bite sized pieces.
Thanks!
DG0 -
[quote="David Gordon" wrote:
I can't really leave my MacBook running for a week to do this as I need to take it out and about. I wonder if anyone has any ideas - or has already managed to import large Lightroom catalogues into C1.
I imported in total more than 100K images from Aperture libraries (split into C1 catalogs of 20 - 40K) only to learn that C1 is not able to handle catalogs like that. Best strategy would be to stay with LR as so far there is no sign that Phase One is able to improve the situation.0 -
C1 can simultaneously manage multiple catalogues and you can drag and drop files from one catalogue to another. I had not realised this was possible until very recently and this opens up all sorts of possibilities that would have never cross my mind when I was working with Lr.
My Lr catalogue which I have not bothered to import into C1 is a monolith covering 7 years, with a folder for original and another folder for derivatives, both of them with an internal folder structure consisting of a folder per year, a folder per month, and folder per day (all dates based on exposure dates) and spanning 2 digital cameras. Because C1 can work with multiple catalogues, there are various alternatives on how I could split this catalogue: a catalogue per year, a catalogue per camera, a catalogue for originals and another for derivative, and so on. The possibilities are endless.[quote="David Gordon" wrote:
Now I'm going to have to learn if I can split a Lightroom catalouge up into bite sized pieces.
"Splitting" Lr catalogues should be straightforward if you your catalogue is organised into folders. Just take a folder, right click on it and select Export As Catalogue. The export dialog will pop up, enter a name and location for the catalogue, select the 3 options at the bottom of the dialog as desired (Export negative files, Build/Include Smart Previews, and Include Available Previews). Once the process has completed you will end up with a smaller catalogue containing just the exported folder, and the catalogue you exported from as it was before the export.0 -
[quote="harald_walker"] wrote:
I imported in total more than 100K images from Aperture libraries (split into C1 catalogs of 20 - 40K) only to learn that C1 is not able to handle catalogs like that. Best strategy would be to stay with LR as so far there is no sign that Phase One is able to improve the situation.[/quote]
Not quite sure what you mean. C1 can't import split catalogues from Aperture?0 -
Thanks NN I think that could work for me! 0 -
[quote="David Gordon" wrote:
Not quite sure what you mean. C1 can't import split catalogues from Aperture?
No, I split my Aperture library of +100K images up into smaller libraries of 10 - 40K images and imported those into C1 as separate catalogs. But catalogs of that size are not really usable in C1. Performance and memory consumption are just unacceptable. Aperture and LR might not be super fast either but at least they are able use libraries like that. Phase One is selling features that are just not working as they should. Not only did I pay a lot of money for it (and am still paying as I have a subscription that I can't cancel before the end of the term), ever worse is the time I've spend dealing with bugs and other problems, and first migrating to C1 and now migrating away from C1.0 -
[quote="harald_walker" wrote:
[quote="David Gordon" wrote:
Not quite sure what you mean. C1 can't import split catalogues from Aperture?
No, I split my Aperture library of +100K images up into smaller libraries of 10 - 40K images and imported those into C1 as separate catalogs. But catalogs of that size are not really usable in C1. Performance and memory consumption are just unacceptable. Aperture and LR might not be super fast either but at least they are able use libraries like that. Phase One is selling features that are just not working as they should. Not only did I pay a lot of money for it (and am still paying as I have a subscription that I can't cancel before the end of the term), ever worse is the time I've spend dealing with bugs and other problems, and first migrating to C1 and now migrating away from C1.
Harald, may I ask you a question? Why did you get C1? To do things exactly the same way you were doing them with Aperture?
I fully appreciate that moving out of Aperture was imposed by Apple discontinuing it. I fully appreciate getting outside your comfort zone is painful; it has been painful for me and have not fully adapted yet after almost a year. But the transition out of Aperture would have been painful even if you had moved to Lightroom, agreed it can handle +100K, catalogues but it renders colours very differently.
The main thing I have learnt about the transition is to keep my workflow as independent from software as I can.
My apologies, if you think this negative or a criticism. It is not my intention.0 -
[quote="NN259560UL" wrote:
Harald, may I ask you a question? Why did you get C1? To do things exactly the same way you were doing them with Aperture?
Yes and no. Like many of us I had to replace Aperture with something different. C1 at the time seemed like the better alternative. But of course I adjusted my workflow, did things differently and had to accept that some valuable Aperture features were not available.
Nevertheless, Phase One is selling C1 with features that just don't work as one can expect from a professional software. Without the catalog and keywording features I would not have chosen Capture One. What we are asking for is not rocket science and it should not take years to implement improvements.[quote="NN259560UL" wrote:
But the transition out of Aperture would have been painful even if you had moved to Lightroom
That would have been one transition and not two. Also moving from C1 to LR is is pain by itself since there is no C1 importer in LR.[quote="NN259560UL" wrote:
but it renders colours very differently.
Difficult to compare them as both in LR as well as in C1 you have to do some manual work to get the best results. Personally I prefer the LR result at the moment, which I did not expect.0 -
[quote="harald_walker" wrote:
Nevertheless, Phase One is selling C1 with features that just don't work as one can expect from a professional software.
Not sure I would agree with this. C1 catalogues can handle keywords and can do most things I used to do with Lr except for 1, which is a bug and will be fixed, this covers creating the C1 equivalent of Lr collections and smart collections. Of course I do not have a catalogue with 100K images and would probably never create a catalogue with a 100K images, not even in Lr. I am sure you have your very valid reasons to do this.[quote="harald_walker" wrote:
What we are asking for is not rocket science and it should not take years to implement improvements.
Human beings capable of handling the technical complexities of computer programmes, starting with myself, have an amazing tendency towards trying to make things look like rocket science when they could look simpler. I have to constantly remind myself that I could always do things in a simpler way.[quote="harald_walker" wrote:
Difficult to compare them as both in LR as well as in C1 you have to do some manual work to get the best results. Personally I prefer the LR result at the moment, which I did not expect.
It is a personal preference. My personal preference is that C1 does a better job rendering colours than Lr after the RAW file is adjusted. This was indeed one of the reasons why I moved from Lr to C1. The other 2 being, I don't like how the makers of Lr are trying to muscle everybody into a) a subscription and b) getting Photoshop by diluting Lr.
Personally, I will advice anybody to give C1 a chance. The colour editor and the fact that you can use layers to adjust a raw file (including healing and cloning) is worth the try.0 -
[quote="NN259560UL" wrote:
Of course I do not have a catalogue with 100K images and would probably never create a catalogue with a 100K images, not even in Lr.
Why would'nt you?
That's the whole point of a catalog. To put your whole collection in one place, so I can search across my whole library of pictures. Having an - imaginary or real - upper limit of pictures inside a catalog defeats the whole purpose of the word "catalog".
I once read of an Aperture user some years ago who had about 250.000 images in his Aperture library and had no performance issues with it. So that was years ago and we are writing now the year of 2016 AD. Everybody is talking about "big data" and modern software, that can parse through several disconnected databases and make sense of millions and millions of lines of data and we photographers are told to be worried about software cracking under the pressure of the mind blowing amount of 100.000 picture files? Give me a freakin break. Any Stanford or MIT undergraduate in his first semester will laugh his ass off if he sees this.0 -
+1 0 -
[quote="EnderWiggins" wrote:
I once read of an Aperture user some years ago who had about 250.000 images in his Aperture library and had no performance issues with it. So that was years ago and we are writing now the year of 2016 AD. Everybody is talking about "big data" and modern software, that can parse through several disconnected databases and make sense of millions and millions of lines of data and we photographers are told to be worried about software cracking under the pressure of the mind blowing amount of 100.000 picture files? Give me a freakin break. Any Stanford or MIT undergraduate in his first semester will laugh his ass off if he sees this.
😂
+1
You didn't pick that nickname at random, did you? 😉0 -
[quote="NN259560UL" wrote:
Of course I do not have a catalogue with 100K images and would probably never create a catalogue with a 100K images, not even in Lr. I am sure you have your very valid reasons to do this.
Why not? My single LR catalogue references well over 200,000 images, opens in, literally, a few seconds, and selects keyworded images almost instantly. Admittedly the catalogue sits on an SSD Drive within a latest model (late 2013, 16GB, six-core) Mac Pro, but this is hardly bleeding edge, or at the frontiers of science.
Phase One can deliver this in Capture One Pro when and if they choose to. The fact they don't is the biggest single impediment to me making the move across - which I'd dearly love to do. I don't think I'm alone.0 -
[quote="W.W. Webster" wrote:
Phase One can deliver this in Capture One Pro when and if they choose to. The fact they don't is the biggest single impediment to me making the move across - which I'd dearly love to do. I don't think I'm alone.
I'm not so sure about this. So far, all we have is hearsay on this issue. I have yet to see a user try to build a 100k+ catalog inside C1 and prove that performance is taking a hit vs. a smaller catalog with say 10k images. Some people BELIEVE that a bigger catalog makes things slower, but I want to see prove of this in terms of benchmarks, videos on youtube etc.
This whole issue reminds me a lot of all the discussions we had in the Aperture communities, where people were pretty convinced, that a bigger library is bad for performance and were wrongfully told to split it up per year etc. It got repeated so many times by people in the forums, that everybody took it as a fact until some other guys came around the corner, shrug their shoulders and said they have 100k images in their library and no issues at all.
Don't get me wrong: C1 is slow as a dog compared to Aperture (and probably LR as well) and needs some serious database engineering, no question about that. But I think its slowness comes from the core of the software and has probably nothing to do with the sheer number of images inside a catalog. If somebody thinks otherwise, show me.0
投稿コメントは受け付けていません。
コメント
15件のコメント