DAM software with C1 4.1
Hello,
Now that C1 supports my Pentax K20D, I like it a lot more 😊 and have included it in my work flow. Which brings the following questions:
1)Is there a DAM software that would support/read the raw files processed by C1?
I explain myself. When you process a file in Camera Raw, Bridge is able to read the changes in the setup file (xmp file or in the DNG) and update accordingly the preview. This makes reviewing raw files for organizing purpose a lot easier.
It would be great if a third party DAM software could provide preview/view of raw files processed by C1 (before output as a TIFF or JPEG of course). Before somebody point it to me, I do not consider the C1 "browser" as a DAM.
2)When is C1 going to pass along ITPC/metadata?
I input various data including keywords in my raw files in Bridge. Once these files are processed by C1 into TIFF, the keywording is lost
😭
Otherwise non counting the issue with delocalised previews already discussed and hated, I really like what I get from C1. Not as good as Camera Raw or Lightroom for highlight recovery but great colors with minimal processing 😄
Cheers,
Now that C1 supports my Pentax K20D, I like it a lot more 😊 and have included it in my work flow. Which brings the following questions:
1)Is there a DAM software that would support/read the raw files processed by C1?
I explain myself. When you process a file in Camera Raw, Bridge is able to read the changes in the setup file (xmp file or in the DNG) and update accordingly the preview. This makes reviewing raw files for organizing purpose a lot easier.
It would be great if a third party DAM software could provide preview/view of raw files processed by C1 (before output as a TIFF or JPEG of course). Before somebody point it to me, I do not consider the C1 "browser" as a DAM.
2)When is C1 going to pass along ITPC/metadata?
I input various data including keywords in my raw files in Bridge. Once these files are processed by C1 into TIFF, the keywording is lost
😭
Otherwise non counting the issue with delocalised previews already discussed and hated, I really like what I get from C1. Not as good as Camera Raw or Lightroom for highlight recovery but great colors with minimal processing 😄
Cheers,
0
-
[quote="lbenac" wrote:
1)Is there a DAM software that would support/read the raw files processed by C1?
I explain myself. When you process a file in Camera Raw, Bridge is able to read the changes in the setup file (xmp file or in the DNG) and update accordingly the preview. This makes reviewing raw files for organizing purpose a lot easier.
It would be great if a third party DAM software could provide preview/view of raw files processed by C1 (before output as a TIFF or JPEG of course). Before somebody point it to me, I do not consider the C1 "browser" as a DAM.
Although I believe CO4 uses an XML based structure for its settings files to store your adjustments, no DAM software to date does read this AFAIK. Would be a nice task for the cooperation between Phase One and Microsoft and its Expression Media.[quote="lbenac" wrote:
2)When is C1 going to pass along ITPC/metadata?
I input various data including keywords in my raw files in Bridge. Once these files are processed by C1 into TIFF, the keywording is lost.
The Camera Raw to Bridge metadata support is stored in XMP sidecar file or DNG. In contrast to software that store IPTC data in the RAW file CO4 does not read the Bridge XMP file.
I know there are some users here that are more knowledge about this topic and might join. Or do a search because it has been discussed before in this Win or CO4/Mac forum.0 -
I might have missed it, but I haven't seen this topic posted in relation to C1 v4. And it asks, in effect, what I think is a rather useful question; how and where do you fit C1 v4 into an image creation and management workflow?
I strongly agree that C1, in its present incarnation is neither a DAM nor an even half complete workflow application, whatever Phase One may claim. Essentially, it's a RAW converter with add-ons; its counterpart in the Adobe line up is not Photoshop, LightRoom or even Elements, but Camera RAW. So what is needed is a DAM which, as you say, can act as a review application for your RAW files and fix the mess that C1 makes of the metadata when it produces a conversion.
For this purpose, I use BreezeBrowser Pro (BB Pro), having first downloaded the files in its companion program Downloader Pro (they can be purchased separately or as a bundle from www.breezesys.com, and trial downloads are available). BB Pro has basic but often quite effective RAW conversion capabilities, and the latest version supports the K20D. It is fast and unfussy; using its slideshow and tagging capabilities, I can review and do a first cull on a shoot of several hundred images in 10 minutes. It also has metadata copying capabilities (single file and batch), which enable you to copy metadata (EXIF, IPTC and XMP) from your RAW files to JPEG and (with limitations) TIFF conversions. It can have C1 set as its main or alternate external editor, so it is easy to shell out from BB Pro to C1.
BB Pro's main shortcoming as a DAM for some people is that, for reasons of speed simplicity and data management, it does not use a database, and so, currently at least, lacks a keyword search facility. It is however metadata compatible (in so far as this is possible for any application) with the Adobe family; metadata added or edited with BB Pro and DL Pro will normally show up in Bridge or vice-versa.
An alternative to BB Pro, which has a database and more fully featured DAM capabilities is IMatch. You may like it; it happens that I have never got on with it, but that's probably just me. A great strength of both BB Pro and IMatch is that their authors put a great deal of knowledge and effort into standards (especially metadata standards) compliance, and both are typically very responsive both to the emergence of new data formats (with new camera models) and to the problems created by, in particular, Adobe and the camera manufacturers, who seem to think that standards compliance is something that fits where it touches.
For just viewing capabilities, the freeware IrfanView claims to support Pentax files, but its browsing and tagging capabilities are rather limited and, while it can view EXIF and IPTC data, it can only edit the EXIF comment field. Another freeware product (prettier but slower, better browser, search capabilities, but the same limited metadata handling) is XnView, but I don't know whether it supports your Pentax files.
I hope this information helps.0 -
Hello Paul,
Thank you for your answer even if they confirm my fears
It pretty much look like the only solutions that keep everything wrap-up together (setting/metadata) across files type is in the hand of Adobe with:
1)Camera Raw/Bridge for a browser oriented solution
2)Lightroom for a cataloging solution.
The way I see it the only alternative for non Adobe converters to integrate effectively in a DAM workflow is by supporting DNG output or working format (read/write). It would means for C1 that you can input a native raw file like PEF take advantage of the camera profiles in C1, make your global adjustments and then convert/output to DNG with all these changes included into the DNG file. These DNG can then be reviewed in a DAM with the adjustments with a potential return to C1 for more adjustments and stored effectively.
Well all this is already possible with Bridge/ACR or Lightroom which is really its bigger strength.
I guess that it means that I some point I will have too many images to stay with C1 and Silkypix as converters 😭 without loosing the setting files when moving thinks around. Darn I really like processing with C1.
Hello David,
Thank you for the information provided. I looked them up. But frankly if I were to drop C1 as my main converter I would go back to Camera Raw/Bridge or Lightroom for the reasons stated above. To me it look like these two provide the most coherent and consistent A to Z work flow. I still prefer C1 for the conversion/global adjustment portion of the work flow. And I agree with you C1 cannot be compared to Lightroom in functionality and I don't think that PO is positioning it that way.
Cheers,
Luc.0 -
What are you using as your DAM application?
Personally I am using Iview Media Pro, though it has now become Microsoft Expression Media both of which are available at a discount to registered C1 users from the Phase One Eshop,
I very much doubt that C1 will ever output a DNG file complete with raw settings imbedded, nor do I think its desirable for the simple reason that how would you ensure consistent or even predictable results if a DNG created in C1 was opened in Camera Raw for example?
In my view one of the best features of the workflow described in Peter Krogh's book 'The Dam Book' is the embedded preview in the DNG which can be opened directly in ACR from within the DAM app.
However with a bit of imagination you can use C1 to produce Jpeg proofs which don't take up any more hard disc space than DNG's and still provide the 'pretty good print' as outlined in Krogh's book, and providing you are consistant with your metadata between the raw files and the corrisponding jpeg (I use the same filename) its a breeze to organise the raw files and jpegs within a catalogue so you can easily find a raw file which can then can be opened in C1 if further work or a 16 bit tiff is required.
Additionally because C1 now stores its settings files and previews within the main image folder, its a breeze to keep the settings and raw files together in an archive and backed up.
HTH
Stu 😊0 -
[quote="stuwhitt" wrote:
I very much doubt that C1 will ever output a DNG file complete with raw settings imbedded, nor do I think its desirable for the simple reason that how would you ensure consistent or even predictable results if a DNG created in C1 was opened in Camera Raw for example?
If the settings are stored in XMP (the way Adobe, among others, does it), then each application can have its own metadata schema, independent of the other(s). So settings from more than one RAW converter can be included within the XMP embedded in a DNG file or stored as a 'sidecar' with the RAW file.
C1's idiosyncratic approach to the storage of settings information is, as many contributors to this forum have testified, a real data management headache for them, even if it is a 'breeze' for others. XMP is far from perfect, but it is at least an established standard that is supported by a wide range of applications, including all those produced by the industry leader.0 -
stored as a 'sidecar' with the RAW file
Surely it can be argued that C1 already uses 'sidecar' files in the form of the cos and the cop files that live in the Capture One folder living in the main image folder, which providing they are all kept together can be archived, backed up and opened on any C1 V4 installation, an advantage over V3.x
I agree that its regrettable that P1 decided on a custom format for its sidecars, I particulary find it annoying that no other application can see any ratings applied in C1, which IMHO makes them a waste of time, I have registered XMP support as a feature request which I believe is in the intray of the program manager
Stu 😊0 -
I agree with David here.
As of now I use Bridge as I like the browser approach better than the catalog one (Photo Mechanic would probably be the same)as I have a hierarchical approach to filing.. This is the reason I had stop using Lightroom for DAM.
I have readjusted my filing system/work flow to accommodate C1. Not perfect and will not handle high volume but it will have to do for now.
So I have folders and sub-folders by location
i.e. France/France 2008/Roussillon/Collioure
all files keyworded,....
within the location folder I now have
*RAW files with XMP sidecar from Bridge metadata/ACR preview. I also of course have the C1 folders with cos and cop.
*TIFF files used as master for printing and local adjustments in CS3
*JPG files for web use
I cannot review the RAW file in Bridge as it will not reflect the changes made in C1. I cannot move selectively the raw files without going through C1 so that the cos files are also moved. Of course I am then loosing the xmp sidecar 🙄 .
(To add to this mix, I have found out that from time to time after a visit to C1 to process/output some TIFF, the xmp data on the RAW files has been lost unless the Bridge cache for the folder is rebuild 😭 ).
Of course the metadata entered for the RAW files needs to be copied over to the TIFF created by C1.
Note that this would be the same for Silkypix which I use from time to time.
To me having C1 use the xmp file either as a sidecar or in a DNG to store its setup and preview like ACR does would be a huge bonus and would help tremendously.
If you compare the above with an all inclusive Adobe approach where everything is handled within the DNG or the sidecar file, it does not feel very breezy to me 😉0 -
[quote="lbenac" wrote:
[...]
I cannot review the RAW file in Bridge as it will not reflect the changes made in C1. I cannot move selectively the raw files without going through C1 so that the cos files are also moved. Of course I am then loosing the xmp sidecar 🙄 .
(To add to this mix, I have found out that from time to time after a visit to C1 to process/output some TIFF, the xmp data on the RAW files has been lost unless the Bridge cache for the folder is rebuild 😭 ).
Of course the metadata entered for the RAW files needs to be copied over to the TIFF created by C1.
Maybe it helps if you switch to the Camera Raw database from sidecar files within Bridge/ACR. This way you can't loose the XMP files if you move the raw files with Capture One.0 -
[quote="lbenac" wrote:
As of now I use Bridge as I like the browser approach better than the catalog one (Photo Mechanic would probably be the same)as I have a hierarchical approach to filing.. This is the reason I had stop using Lightroom for DAM.
How is your 'hierarchical' approach setup? In what way could LR not be used?
I have a very strict hierarchical approach which begins with DLP automatically downloading to a date based folder structure, e.g. any photos from today would go to e:\\2008\\2008_06\\2008_06_05.
Then I import them to Lightroom as 'at their current location' so that the same structure is in my catalog as on my hard drive. In that way, you get the bost of both worlds, i.e. all the benefits of a catalog approach with a hierarchical structure too.
Iain0 -
Hello paul,
You are perfectly right. I tried it and still had xmp without realizing that they were left over. Following you suggestion I tried it more thoroughly and it works perfectly. Thanks for the tip. 😄 😄
Cheers,[quote="Paul Steunebrink" wrote:
[quote="lbenac" wrote:
[...]
I cannot review the RAW file in Bridge as it will not reflect the changes made in C1. I cannot move selectively the raw files without going through C1 so that the cos files are also moved. Of course I am then loosing the xmp sidecar 🙄 .
(To add to this mix, I have found out that from time to time after a visit to C1 to process/output some TIFF, the xmp data on the RAW files has been lost unless the Bridge cache for the folder is rebuild 😭 ).
Of course the metadata entered for the RAW files needs to be copied over to the TIFF created by C1.
Maybe it helps if you switch to the Camera Raw database from sidecar files within Bridge/ACR. This way you can't loose the XMP files if you move the raw files with Capture One.0 -
Sorry I should restate: because I use a hierarchical approach I could get away from Lightroom (or other cataloging DAM) to use Bridge. Of course Lightroom can handle this and then some. Because I have all my non rejected images going through CS3 for deconvolution (Focus Fixer) lens corrections (PT Lens) Noise reduction (Noiseware) Dodge & Burn, framing resizing for web or print - I use a lot of actions launched directly from Bridge on batches of files. As far as I know I cannot do that from LR.
I print from Qimage or CS3.
I upload my web images directly by drag and drop from Bridge to Zenfolio.
So for me the "light weight" Bridge makes a lot of sense.
Now if I could see C1 changes in Bridge preview and if C1 could accept the XMP files, I will happy as a pig.......
Cheers,
Luc.
How is your 'hierarchical' approach setup? In what way could LR not be used?
I have a very strict hierarchical approach which begins with DLP automatically downloading to a date based folder structure, e.g. any photos from today would go to e:\\2008\\2008_06\\2008_06_05.
Then I import them to Lightroom as 'at their current location' so that the same structure is in my catalog as on my hard drive. In that way, you get the bost of both worlds, i.e. all the benefits of a catalog approach with a hierarchical structure too.
Iain[/quote]0 -
"The Camera Raw to Bridge metadata support is stored in XMP sidecar file or DNG. In contrast to software that store IPTC data in the RAW file CO4 does not read the Bridge XMP file."
I need this exact feature (to carry keywords through CO4 to the processed images). Any way to do this? Without it, CO4 remains useless for me!0
投稿コメントは受け付けていません。
コメント
12件のコメント