メインコンテンツへスキップ

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived. The information contained here may no longer be accurate or up-to-date. ⚠️

Why is cocatalogdb so slow on 150000 images?

コメント

6件のコメント

  • ernst.w

    Every user of the Windows version has same experience with C1 database. This is a knows issue for years but got very better with last update. You don't need to put 150.000 images in a catalog; 30.000 aree way enough. ;)

    Capture One knows about and suggests officially not to use more than 10.000 to 15.000 images per catalog.

    (Nice joke for a photographer, I know - but does Capture One?)

    0
  • SFA

    I could perhaps see the reason for having a very large catalog but not the need to use it all of the time for new editing.

    I could not imagine having a large number of images in a very active catalog without considering whether a full dedicated document management system for finished images might not be a better and more commercially viable option for such an archive.

    0
  • Permanently deleted user

    The point is, why should you limit yourself if even several million photos would technically not be a problem? In order to be able to use the full strength of the filters and the keywording, for example, it makes sense to have all images in one catalog. For example, you can search for all images with the keyword "tree" without constantly having to change the catalog.

    In my opinion, catalogs are nothing more than better folders. And that's not the reason why I like to use database-supported software like Capture One ;)

    The image processing functions in Capture One are excellent, but the file handling (which should actually be a core function) is from the Stone Age and should urgently be revised, we would all benefit from it.

    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    Top Commenter

    The point is, why should you limit yourself if even several million photos would technically not be a problem?

    It's rather a moot point - clearly there are "technical" reasons why Capture One struggles with overly large catalogues, which is why Capture One has long been very clear about keeping things smaller and more manageable.

    You're expecting something from Capture One which it is unable to deliver; which it is known not to be able to deliver; and which is clearly spelled out by the company as being something that you shouldn't expect it to deliver.

    we would all benefit from it.

    To those of us who take Capture One's caveat to heart, no. It's an irrelevance, because we work with Capture One the way we're advised to work with it.

    Choose to plough your own furrow by all means, but don't assume that we're all in this together, because we aren't.

     

    0
  • Permanently deleted user
     
    Perhaps it would be correct to say that Capture One does not want to deliver here. There are hardly any technically insurmountable hurdles.
    And even someone who keeps to the limit of 10,000 images per catalog should benefit from a database that is many times faster.
    0
  • Frank Eigenbrod

    In all honesty, I can't understand why members of the community defend this untimely behavior of the software and the limitations that come with it. Andreas Kern got to the point and the solution should be trivial according to the rules of application development: indices.
    It works everywhere, in 30 years of experience with really large databases, I've never seen it not work, so why should Capture One of all things fail?

    2

投稿コメントは受け付けていません。