I'll Wait This One Out.
I really don't care about the cosmetic changes. What I really had hoped for was this version to render and view the changes to a NEF file done in ACR. It's really nice that it does it for C1 and I can understand why they prioritized this, but I don't always do my work in C1. I'll stay with EM2 until then.
0
-
[quote="OneHorseStudio" wrote:
I really don't care about the cosmetic changes. What I really had hoped for was this version to render and view the changes to a NEF file done in ACR. It's really nice that it does it for C1 and I can understand why they prioritized this, but I don't always do my work in C1. I'll stay with EM2 until then.
Does Adobe Lightroom's catalogue show the changes you made in C1, or come to that DXO, Silkypix or Aperture?
I think you will have a long wait or pehaps I should be asking why I cannot see the changes made in my other three raw conveters in Media Pro. 😉0 -
If your RAW programs update the embedded RAW preview file... than I would expect ANY DAM product to show it... are you unable to update the NEF preview in ACR? This is why I use DNG files.... ANY of the DAM products I am working with will update the preview and show me EXACTLY what the image should look like. 0 -
I'd like to see the raw rendering give options for Manufacturer, Apple/WIC and Phase One.
-- Robert.0 -
[quote="OneHorseStudio" wrote:
I really don't care about the cosmetic changes. What I really had hoped for was this version to render and view the changes to a NEF file done in ACR. It's really nice that it does it for C1 and I can understand why they prioritized this, but I don't always do my work in C1. I'll stay with EM2 until then.
This is the reason I am interested in MPro, but I didn't see any updates, not even for C1 adjustments.
Seeing ACR raw adjustments is what I read on the features this app would have, and the primary reason my interest sparked. Until then Bridge and ACDSee Pro3 really do a fine job. No Cataloging BS, and very fast.
I would really like to see a folders option in viewing my files. I have organized them on the servers the way it needs to be done, I just need to access them with ease, speed, and seeing the adjustments in RAW files.
Reading that DNG files are seen with the adjustments does give me a reason to move to that file format.
Anyone else in this thought?0 -
I would really like to see a folders option in viewing my files. I have organized them on the servers the way it needs to be done, I just need to access them with ease, speed, and seeing the adjustments in RAW files.
Raffi3, what do you mean with folders option? MP1 and EM2 do have a folder option (catalog folders).
And is using DAM software not just 'the other way' to organise your images instead of the folder structure...?
Roelof0 -
[quote="rmoorlag" wrote:
Raffi3, what do you mean with folders option? MP1 and EM2 do have a folder option (catalog folders).
And is using DAM software not just 'the other way' to organise your images instead of the folder structure...?
Roelof
Why recreate "catalogues" over folders?
If you are using C1, and a active photographer, you have dedicated exclusively at least one drive or server with multi drives to images. You have likely organized them to an extent. DAM is really a way to manage, and by recreating catalogue over the existing folders is just redundant and somewhat backwards approach to managing files in my view.
The PC folder structure does a OK job of letting you make "catalogues" and organizing, what the DAM should do is help us visually see what the content is so we can manage the content within, not recreate a new structure etc over what is already there.
This of course is my view, and looks like is shared by a good number of users. MPro and other DAM's can help streamline tagging and viewing and organizing... but in my view, very redundant to be creating structures over exisiting structures which only slow down and complicate content.
I am open to learn new methods of course and be corrected, as constructive is the only reason I post and like to share communicate. I am trying to see the advantages of recreating cataolgues over exisiting catalogues, but yet to understand why, and if there are advantages. I do know they are slower, and create redundancy and crash potential.0 -
Raffi,
There are multiple reasons to use catalog sets (not catalogs) instead of folders. Folders are very limited as an organizational structure. One example is that a image can only reside in one folder but in multiple catalog sets without having to duplicate it.
I suggest to read "The DAM book" from Peter Krogh about this matter, it's very, very usefull.
You can get an impression about the book to take a look on . I think particularly this is helping you to understand:
Roelof0 -
thank you Roelof,
Not sure if you have seen the Expression Media Total Training video tutorial, but I just received a copy, and wondering if you've seen it, would you suggest that as well?
thanks!
Also, regarding on the example of what you said with a image being in only one folder....maybe a actual usage example of how multiple residence in a set is useful vs confusing (This is how I would find it from first thought) 😊 ?0 -
The big advantage of EM/MP is that you get away from the single-attribute indexing system imposed by a folder system. Instead EM/MP allows you to have a multi-attribute indexing system where you can manage your digital assets in a multitude of different ways. Folders no longer have any significance in an EM/MP based management system. All your images could be just sequentially numbered files in the one big folder for all EM/MP cares (except that's not a good idea from a computer operating system point of view).
Instead, with just one or two clicks, you can instantly locate all images with a given date or year or month or keyword or location or city or state or country or rating or person's name et-cetera. With a couple of clicks you can filter by intersections or unions of attributes e.g. all images of Bill AND Ben in city Sydney in 2009 OR 2010.
This aspect of forgetting folder based organisation is the biggest hurdle faced by new users coming to EM/MP.
See this thread .0 -
[quote="Raffi3" wrote:
thank you Roelof,
Also, regarding on the example of what you said with a image being in only one folder....maybe a actual usage example of how multiple residence in a set is useful vs confusing (This is how I would find it from first thought) 😊 ?
Raffi, there are many examples but here is one simple visual example just using hierarchical keywords and the place finder.
By using intersection of words I can find any images that contain a boy child with a animal at Hilltop Park, West Bromwich ,West Midlands, England it took seconds to find, and you can do much more complicated searches than this is just seconds .
http://www.pbase.com/paulsilkphotography/image/134858201.jpg0 -
[quote="Paul Silk" wrote:
By using intersection of words I can find any images that contain a boy child with a animal at Hilltop Park, West Bromwich ,West Midlands, England it took seconds to find, and you can do much more complicated searches than this in just seconds .
Good visual example of what I was trying to say in prose. Multi-attribute indexing of a single image is what makes true DAM software powerful.0 -
A "click interface" to do this is nice.. but it would also be helpful to just be able to type this in using logical AND/OR operators... and the ability to see what I've chosen using natural language would be a great way to check it.. 0 -
Thank you Dave and Paul,
This is a nice example for journalistic shoots, and MAYBE faster than doing....
X:People\*name of client or people\project name or date.
I rarely remember the date of the particular shoot, and I doubt many can ref that...heck I can't remember dinner from last night..sometimes and often with multiple shoots you don't rem dates, or link of a intersection with a date. Believe me I am FOR CHANGE, and this example may have been what you found such value in, and that is great.
So far doesn't do much for me than adding complexity and instability with redundancy and loss of speed.
Contrary to my work structure above, I structure my family pictures like this...
X1:Family\Year\month\occasion or place
You also have to invest ALOT of time to 10TB of existing data to keyword!.. AND as you shoot take the time to Keyword after upload....and honestly, being in a fast paced world and me being human and imperfect I am gonna have rush jobs with keywording the last thing on my mind. Yes you say it will be faster IF you keyword all and later see, BUT I see more loss error happening due to this than dropping in a folder then making a couple folders define the content. With MPro, you basically don't have information unless it is defined. With other "DAM"s your information is available both ways, and pardons when you don't define. Hope this makes sense, and more so , I hope there is a different approach I can look and take for this to actually work without issues I mention.
You are basically making MPro a search engine, with the catalogue being the "internet" of information.0 -
[quote="NNN634272722125339672" wrote:
A "click interface" to do this is nice.. but it would also be helpful to just be able to type this in using logical AND/OR operators... and the ability to see what I've chosen using natural language would be a great way to check it..
The 'Find" command will let you build up a complex search using logical AND/OR operators (and even save searches for later use). Not quite as fast as a natural language query, but the same end result.
I'm a "keyboarder" rather than a "clicker", but I've found the "click interface" much faster than the 'Find" interface. I very rarely use the "Find" command and then only for a very complex search, or where I need to save and repeat a complex search.0 -
[quote="Raffi3" wrote:
Thank you Dave and Paul,
Contrary to my work structure above, I structure my family pictures like this...
X1:Family\Year\month\occasion or place
There is nothing to stop you still using your folder system, but the same can be done using MP1 and searched faster.
Using your definations it took 3 seconds to find all images of family member Chelsea on holiday at the harbour in Brixham, Devon England took in 1993 with just 4 clicks .http://www.pbase.com/paulsilkphotography/image/134879791.jpg
As to time key wording none was used here and dragging a complete batch of images on to the relevent element takes no time at all, and the date info is automaticly added from the image exif any way. 😊
You are basically making MPro a search engine, with the catalogue being the "internet" of information.[/quote]0 -
[quote="Raffi3" wrote:
Thank you Dave and Paul,
So far doesn't do much for me than adding complexity and instability with redundancy and loss of speed.
Contrary to my work structure above, I structure my family pictures like this...
X1:Family\Year\month\occasion or place
You also have to invest ALOT of time to 10TB of existing data to keyword!.. AND as you shoot take the time to Keyword after upload....and honestly, being in a fast paced world and me being human and imperfect I am gonna have rush jobs with keywording the last thing on my mind. Yes you say it will be faster IF you keyword all and later see, BUT I see more loss error happening due to this than dropping in a folder then making a couple folders define the content. With MPro, you basically don't have information unless it is defined. With other "DAM"s your information is available both ways, and pardons when you don't define. Hope this makes sense, and more so , I hope there is a different approach I can look and take for this to actually work without issues I mention.
You are basically making MPro a search engine, with the catalogue being the "internet" of information.
Raffi3,
Six years ago I was exactly where you are now. I'm sure you are open to change, but from what you say above, "10TB of existing data to keyword"..."take the time to Keyword after upload"...etc, you are much like me in that its going to take a disaster for you to make the change. In my case, all my photos fit on one 120GB hard drive (remember, 6 years ago). Suddenly one Saturday morning that drive started making horrible grinding noises and it was gone forever. Yes, I had backups on CDs, but there wasn't any structure to my backups. I would upload photos, put them in folders, and back up the new ones to a CD or two, file the CDs away and call it a day. It took me a full 24 hours over that weekend to rebuild my photo archive on a new drive. Did I get everything back? Maybe. I certainly got most of it, but I had no way to be sure I had everything. Because I couldn't recall the exact structure of my folder arrangement in enough detail to be sure it was complete. I knew there had to be a better way, but I didn't know what that would be.
A year or two later, Peter Krough published the first edition of his DAM book (Digital Asset Management) that someone referenced earlier in this thread. That was the better way that I was looking for. Over the summer I read that book completely through 4 times, and some chapters more than that, in an attempt to "get it" with respect to DAM.
Here, in a nutshell, is my take-away from all that reading. 1) In a DAM environment, the folder structure is meant to serve one purpose and one purpose only, disaster recovery. 2) The ability to find exactly the photo you are looking for, at the time you are needing it, is provided by using a good piece of cataloging software combined with consistent image keywording and catalog or collection sets. 3) Just as you said above, implementing a DAM strategy on a large catalog of previous work can be VERY time consuming, but it is work that will pay itself back many times over once completed. There are also strategies for doing this in a way that isn't so onerous if you read Peter's book.
So what do I mean by folder structures are just for disaster recovery? The biggest problem I had when recreating my folder structure following that hard drive crash was remembering EXACTLY what it was. Remembering in enough detail to insure that I had recovered every photo. Today, if you asked me to write down my EXACT folder structure for my archives, I could do it as quickly as I could write A1, A2, A2...A230 for my originals, and D1, D2, D3...D88 for my derivative files. With the originals there are subfolders that I created when I downloaded the photos, but I don't need to know what they are in order to be certain that every photo is restored in case of a disaster. I just need to be sure I have DVDs A1 through A230 and D1 through D88 and everything will be in place. Peter refers to this as the bucket system. I've created buckets, or folders, each of which will fit on a single DVD and I've numbered them in consecutive order as my collection has grown.
Obviously, if you commit to this type of folder structure, you MUST use a good piece of cataloging software in order to find ANYTHING. At the time I started, the software of choice from most people was iVeiw Media Pro. That is where I started and I haven't looked back. Of course Adobe had to go and muddy the water a bit by creating Lightroom, and while I love Lightroom and cant imagine doing without it, when I'm looking for a particular photo, or group of photos, I almost always turn to Expression Media. (I too, am holding off, waiting for version 1.X or 2.0 of Media Pro, but for reasons of stability more than interface or feature set, but that's for a different thread. Actually, that's exactly what this thread was about initially 8-{ )
So why is cataloging software worth the extra effort, because as you correctly note, doing the keywording and creating the catalog sets requires additional work? Others have weighed in on this, but it basically comes down to a couple of things. First, being able to quickly find a photo or photos that have a particular set of attributes. Finding one photo in your structure, particularly if you remember enough details, may not be very hard, but pulling together a group of photos that share a particular set of attributes and that are scattered across many folders can be quite time consuming. In fact, it might involve so much manual searching that you would decide not to try. Good cataloging software and practices can make this a dead simple job as others have pointed out.
The second, and VERY important reason has also been mentioned by others, and that is the ability to store a particular image in MANY folders without storing multiple copies of the photo. This is something that makes zero sense with the folder structure you are using, and that I was using 6 years ago. But why would you want to do this in the first place? Because it makes finding photos, and particularly sets of photos, much easier.
Here's a simple example of what I'm talking about. I have a passion for photographing Native American Pow Wows. Every time I come back from a pow wow, I assign all the new photos to the top level pow wow collection. But I also create a sub-collection for that particular event. A year ago I was asked to put together an exhibition of some of my images. It took two clicks in Expression Media to show all of my top rated pow wow photos. Once selected, those images went into another sub-collection for the exhibition. I've also created Folios of images after the style of Brooks Jensen, and each of these goes into a sub-collection. When I need to print another copy of a folio, there is no searching or worrying about which ones or where they are.
You may have noticed I haven't said much about keywording. I do keyword my images, but not extensively, and I don't use hierarchical keywords.There are still too many complications with those and the current level of software for my liking, and a good set of collections and sub-collections works well for me at this time. Keywording for me is another level of granularity, but I don't have to rely on it very often. Using Lightroom, it is very quick and simple to add set of keywords. Nothing complicated. If I was into stock photography, that would be a different matter entirely, but again, a different topic for a different time.
So I guess the bottom line is, the many benefits of using folders to aid in disaster recovery, and cataloging software like iView, or Expression Media, or Media Pro in order to manage your collection, will probably not become completely obvious until disaster strikes. That was certainly the case for me.
This has gotten very long. I hope you found it at least a bit useful.
Charlie Dunton0 -
That is an interesting take... and I guess it all depends on what you do with your images afterward that matters. I know folks that don't use a DAM and instead take your approach and create complex folder structures where they drill down to find images... I personally rely 100% on my DAM application and dont' have any concerns about a disaster recovery.. that's the reason why you should ALWAYS write your catalog info back into your image XMP... When I needed to rebuild my computer a few years back, it took 3 keypresses in Idimager for me to rebuild my catalog using just the images. The full hierarchy of labels was rebuild thx to the program writing its schema into the XMP. In addition, it didn't matter where these images were stored on my system so that is a huge bonus as well.
Everyone is different of course... I keyword with between 1 and 6 keywords per image depending on the situation. I always use a hierarchical approach - its just as easy for me to create keywords in a layered approach (ie: People->Family->Jessie) vs individual keywords (ie: People, Family, Jessie). Keywords are written out individually to the IPTC/XMP keyword field while the hierarchy is exported to custom XMP schemas and supplemental keywords fields...
Good Discussion.!0 -
[quote="NNN634272722125339672" wrote:
I personally rely 100% on my DAM application and dont' have any concerns about a disaster recovery.. that's the reason why you should ALWAYS write your catalog info back into your image XMP... When I needed to rebuild my computer a few years back, it took 3 keypresses in Idimager for me to rebuild my catalog using just the images. The full hierarchy of labels was rebuild thx to the program writing its schema into the XMP.
Writing XMP back to your images has almost nothing to do with disaster recovery (as Charlie put it, that's the originals plus the catalog) and everything to do with transferring your metadata to another app - as you yourself found!0 -
My English is not good enough, else i would have given the same arguments as Paul and Charlie did. However, they did a very good job, thanks for that!
Raffi3, I hope you are confinced now why to use a DAM instead of trusting on folder hierachy alone. Believe me, we have all been there..
Roelof0 -
[quote="NNN634272722125339672" wrote:
When I needed to rebuild my computer a few years back, it took 3 keypresses in Idimager for me to rebuild my catalog using just the images.
Good Discussion.!
I probably wasn't very clear above, but I wasn't talking about rebuilding a catalog, I wasn't using cataloging software at the time. What I lost were all my original and derivative photo files. I also didn't have a back-up hard drive (or 2 as I currently do) that I could plug in and be back in business. All I had was stacks of CDs (I'm afraid I wasn't even very organized with the CDs). What made everything so difficult was that the CDs had various folders of photos but there was no rhyme or reason to the organization of the folders that were on the CDs. Because of that, I wasn't sure if I had found all the CDs because I couldn't remember the name of every folder that had been on the original drive.
That's the beauty of Peter's bucket system. It's immediately obvious if a folder is missing because the folders are numbered in sequential order. But for anyone using cataloging software or Parametric Imaging Editing software like Lightroom or Aperture, you absolutely need to save backup copies of you catalog file in addition to your original images.
Fortunately I learned my lesson without losing anything important (that I could tell).
Cheers,
Charlie0 -
[quote="johnbeardy" wrote:
[quote="NNN634272722125339672" wrote:
I personally rely 100% on my DAM application and dont' have any concerns about a disaster recovery.. that's the reason why you should ALWAYS write your catalog info back into your image XMP... When I needed to rebuild my computer a few years back, it took 3 keypresses in Idimager for me to rebuild my catalog using just the images. The full hierarchy of labels was rebuild thx to the program writing its schema into the XMP.
Writing XMP back to your images has almost nothing to do with disaster recovery (as Charlie put it, that's the originals plus the catalog) and everything to do with transferring your metadata to another app - as you yourself found!
Why do you say that? If your XMP data is fully stored in your images and your application makes use of the ability to rebuild its own database from this XMP data.. then, you can always rebuild your database from these files. I've done it multiple times - it has a lot to do with disaster recovery. Let's say your backup database is corrupt.. now what do you do?0 -
Hi Charlie and others,
I apprecaite the replies greatly, in particular Charlie's experiences and methodology and approach.
I guess the big factor out of the equation for me is the backup issue that many people have. I run 4 Parity RAID Intel servers that are hotswap drives. If any go hard drive goes down. just pop in a new drive...and likely wait a day for the rebuild..but that's one reason I split them up to 4 physical units so its not just one huge databank.
I already have ExpMedia and the upgrade is no problem. I just have not seen it merge into my workflow...as Lightroom...There is little Bridge and ACR can't do, yet I have LR1,2,3 and had it on my system to transition to my workflow, but the database thing AGAIN. It maybe that I'm just a bit a control freak, and I like to work with knowing where things are 😊
So the second reason you love the MPro method is where I have to weigh in my usage and see if it makes sense. I have yet to have any issue finding my images, and in fact, I shoot so much that I can only see MPro limit my view, my window that I use to see my content, and I can easily forget about images I have unloaded on my system. regularly working with what physically exists on my system allows me to know that "this is residing here, and what do I want to do with it".
I will take up what Dave or Paul and you mention re Peters bucket method...It sounds a bit like(I know it's different) what I wrote to ACDSee(another "DAM" I use and highly rec to check out, unless the base of your DAM reason is Backup) nopi.... to allow DEFINING folders with image attributes that you can drag into, and those images get converted to the settings you create, i.e. jpeg, max 1200x 1200, 8-compression, rgb, etc. And what ever you drag into it, converts to it. Anyway.
I will check out the books mentioned and see how they apply to my situation.
MY MAIN ATTRACTION TO MPRo....Is that I read in ads that I interpreted it would "emulate" or read the adjustments made from other RAW converter used. So if I made adjustments in ACR/LR, I would see them adjusted as I do in Bridge, which is a MAJOR help. If ACDSee did this, I would simply not use Bridge. I have yet to successfully make this setting happen, and just read another post that it doesn't support Nikon files, and being a Canon user, I would think its the same?
Thank you!... greatly and appreciate any additions0 -
Oddly enough today, one of the drives in a sever bit the dust. I was alerted by email which server. Although my content was accessible, I didn't want to risk anything. I grabbed a new Hitachi 2TB drive from the local computer store, and simply replaced it, and within a few hours it rebuilt the content, and back up and running securely. For the record I use the 7200rpm Hitachi drives in a couple servers and WD Caviar black in the other pair. So far I have had 2 failures, score is 1 to 1. The WD was over a couple years old, the Hitachi was 3 months NEW. 0 -
I can't follow your post at all... bridge is just a viewer/folder locator.. you can't find images using bridge without pointing it to a folder. Try to locate a: RED FLOWER taken in AMSTERDAM on JULY 2010 that has a rating of 4 stars using bridge.. that is where a catalog comes in - takes me 10 seconds to find the above on ALL 50,000 images in my database whether they are on local drives, external media, NAS drives or DVD's (since the database contains previews and keywords for these images - it doesn't need to search the files themselves). That's the benefit of a catalog DAM. 0 -
Interesting discussion. A couple of thoughts occur to me after reading Raffi3's recent posts.
First, with regard to finding images. It's great if you can find any image when you need it from a folder arrangement, but I still say that once you've built a collection database, it gets a lot easier. Is it worth the trouble? That's a personal thing; it certainly was for me.
Here's a very recent example. My wife and I are currently at Disney World in Florida. We came down this past Monday, and we knew we would be going to the Ragland Road Pub (Irish) while we were here. We first went there last September and discovered to our delight that the three Irish dancers that performed there were people we had seen performing for many years at Busch Gardens Williamsburg. Even stranger, when the one fellow started dancing at Busch Gardens back in 2001, his Mum came over for a visit. As luck would have it, my wife sat next to her prior to one of his performances and struck up a conversation. I happened to take here picture once we realized she was the mother of the lead dancer we admired.
So it's late at night before our 6:55am flight to Florida (3:45am wake-up call) and my wife has put together a photo album of shots I made of Ivor and his now bride when we were at the Pub last September. What she would like me to print for her is the photo I made of Ivor's mum back in 2001 (or so). It took much longer to print a 4x6 of the photo than it did to find it in the archives under Places/Virginia/Busch Gardens/Misc. It scored me a BUNCH of points and my wife made points with Ivor. Could I have found it if I was still using the folder method of organization? Maybe, but I would have had to look in a lot of yymmdd.busch gardens folders (we have season passes and go a LOT). I'm not sure I would even have tried.
Second point. It's great that you (Raffi3) were able to pop in a new drive and get your server back up, but what if, God forbid, you server(s) were in the path of one of the recent tornadoes? Or a lightening strike hit close to your home and took out ALL your attached servers. Could you recover? We all know hard drives dive of natural causes, some late, some early as Raffi3 related. But RAIDs are just the beginning of a proper backup strategy. I use RAID as well. I have a pair of drives set up as RAID1 for my working files (before they go to archive). And when I get ready to download a card of images I attach another drive an make a second copy of the original raw files. Once the originals are copied to this drive, I disconnect it from the machine and the power source - it's onsite, but offline, completely. It's main purpose is to serve as another safety net until the photos get off my working RAID1 drives and onto my online archive drive. Once I've finished rating, keywording and adjusting the latest images, they go into the DVD size buckets which are then transferred to the always online archive drive. I attach a second duplicate archive drive and copy them there as well, before taking that drive completely offline (meaning no electrical path to anywhere). I then burn the bucket to a DVD. Then, the next day I go to work I carry the offline archive and the DVD to the office. I store the DVD there and swap the archive drive for a third archive drive which goes home with me to get a backup of the latest bucket(s). Peter Krogh calls this the 3-2-1 philosophy; 3 copies of every file, on at least 2 types of media, with at least one copy stored offsite. So far it has worked perfectly for me.
That said, nothing is ever totally safe. John Kennedy's personal photographer during his Presidency stored all 30,000 now priceless negatives in the Bank of America vault in the basement of one of the World Trade Center towers. They were all destroyed.
Charlie0 -
Dude should have had copies of those priceless images made.... I know if I was the president's personal photographer with access and funds from Kennedy - I would have! I agree (as I mentioned in the post above yours) 100% with the catalog importance.. 0 -
[quote="NNN634423513210645475" wrote:
can someone guide me what is MP1?
MP1 = Media Pro 1, the successor off EM2 (Expression Media 2) which was purchased by Phase One (P1) from Microsoft (MS) last year 😉
Roelof0 -
Hi NNN634272722125339672,
I can see what you're saying if your approach to retreiving images is based purely on your memory.
I on the other hand forget ALL the time... I unload a CF or 2 of images almost everyday (8 to 32+gb worth).
How am I going to first, define these images besides the date? Two, Without physically SEEING what is there, to me is non-existant, because I'm going to only remember the general heading, like "Paris" as the heading, and having a dedicated image drive, it only contains photos. All my images are forked 2 ways. 1 bank is for family and family trips. The other bank is for People_studio, Product_studio, Stock_all. Stock is branched also to macro, people, street, landdscape, sky, plants and animals, etc. So YES, I do have to have a general aim, BUT IF I don't, I can simply go back to them, see what I missed, and after time you have a new perspective of how you like seeing things, or you passed a pic thinking it was bad, but now see something very important and good in it. It's THERE. The value of being able to see ALL images in a search tree is that they exist.
I do see how the criteria can be overlapping in my folder setup... and how a database that would sift through different "keywords/folder names" would be powerful.
NNN634272722125339672, perhaps Bridge is too basic, ACDSee does the searches you mention and a lot more. It does tag and build a database in the background, but your not limited to it.
True, a physical disaster cannot protect them. Although I am too skeptic of the online services that offer backup...and would likely never use a online databank, but having a a couple drives of the images backed up in off site location is ideal... something I should do.
Well...I like that now we are getting closer to the real issue..."How we recall images in our minds?" I think this is the big question that is not very clear, or at the obvious least, not done in one way.
Charlie, yes a good example. If I hit a road block, those books will be by my bed side 😊0 -
I understand and perhaps for certain types of photographers (ie: newspaper/sports) - the content within each image isn't as important and the whole of the shoot - for that purpose, a folder structure might work just great. For folks that don't take 500 images of the Eiffel Tower for example though - having a catalog is very useful and simple to do. Upon image download and import to my database, I cull the images and quickly tag them with labels.. people I know, objects, places, colors, descriptions, etc. It only takes about 20 minutes for me to get through 400 images this way. When I through - I have a wonderful database full of details that I can use later to locate a very specific image (ie: a photo of me and my wife at the Les Enfants cafe eating escargots).. you get the idea.. 0 -
I was initially excited about the potential for Media Pro on my Windows 7 machine. However, given others experiences, my enthusiasm is tempered. Can anyone recommend an alternative until some of the issues are resolved in future releases? 0
投稿コメントは受け付けていません。
コメント
35件のコメント