Author Topic: Ingest Function Request, COPY Primary First then Secondary, Instead of together.  (Read 1272 times)

Offline zhpenn

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
Because We Currently Using SSD For Primary Destination, HDD for 2nd Destination.
I have noticed when insisting photo, will copy them one by one together. so that will slow down the SSD Ingest speed just to fit the slower HDD speed.

Can we have an option that can Ingest to the first destination first((in my case SSD) for us to start working earlier, when first destination finish, the 2nd Destination will keep Ingesting in the background but will still show in progress bar maybe two colors to indicate two destination status? or the thicker bar contains two color bar indicate the two destination status.

this will help to save a lot of time when we have an SSD for one of the destinations, which is getting popular right now.

Thanks a lot

Offline Kirk Baker

  • Senior Software Engineer
  • Camera Bits Staff
  • Superhero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20513
    • View Profile
    • Camera Bits, Inc.
Doing so would make Ingest more complicated.  Things like the IPTC Stationery Pad application especially with the use of the {sequence} variable would become more complex or when unaddressed would produce inconsistencies.

-Kirk

Offline zhpenn

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
Doing so would make Ingest more complicated.  Things like the IPTC Stationery Pad application especially with the use of the {sequence} variable would become more complex or when unaddressed would produce inconsistencies.

-Kirk

Because some people really do not need to use IPTC or care about inconsistencies, all they need is they all backed up in 2 destinations eventually and this way can speed up the process, can start the editing process earlier, the speed really matters for some event photographers like me, can you give us an option, but just do a popup said this will produce inconsistencies. this will saves a lot of time for people like us.
because copy 60GB images to SSD is  just a few mins, but HDD can take up to 30-40 mins, saves 20mins every time, every day 2 event saves 40 mins it is a big deal.Thank you very much
« Last Edit: January 09, 2019, 05:55:23 PM by zhpenn »

Offline Kirk Baker

  • Senior Software Engineer
  • Camera Bits Staff
  • Superhero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20513
    • View Profile
    • Camera Bits, Inc.
If you're not really using any of the features of Ingest then you may as well use the Finder/Windows Explorer to copy to your secondary location.  Then the two copies will run in parallel and PM won't be waiting on anything but the SSD.

-Kirk

Offline zhpenn

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
If you're not really using any of the features of Ingest then you may as well use the Finder/Windows Explorer to copy to your secondary location.  Then the two copies will run in parallel and PM won't be waiting on anything but the SSD.

-Kirk


I'm using PM ingest which the auto add a date in front of the name folder when ingest, this is easier than copy twice and rename two folders.

but anyway, seems you are not listening to your user anyway, why do you need this forum for? only listen to those features that easy for your programer to make it happen? good luck then...

Offline Hayo Baan

  • Uber Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2474
  • Professional Photographer & Software Developer
    • View Profile
    • Hayo Baan - Photography
Kirk is listening to suggestions, but here he has listed why he can't fulfil your wishes without breaking/complicating things. Seems fair to me.

In this case, it really looks like you simply want two ingests. Why don't you do that instead? I.e. ingest everything to the SSD, when that's done, start another ingest but now with the slower device as destination. In the meantime you can work with your images on the SSD.

All this takes is setting up two settings for the ingest dialog, easily done using the thunderbolt button.

Hope this helps.
Hayo Baan - Photography
Web: www.hayobaan.nl

Offline Kirk Baker

  • Senior Software Engineer
  • Camera Bits Staff
  • Superhero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20513
    • View Profile
    • Camera Bits, Inc.
If you're not really using any of the features of Ingest then you may as well use the Finder/Windows Explorer to copy to your secondary location.  Then the two copies will run in parallel and PM won't be waiting on anything but the SSD.

I'm using PM ingest which the auto add a date in front of the name folder when ingest, this is easier than copy twice and rename two folders.

but anyway, seems you are not listening to your user anyway, why do you need this forum for? only listen to those features that easy for your programer to make it happen? good luck then...

I am listening to you and I am one of the programmers (a senior software engineer) on Photo Mechanic.  I understand completely how Ingest works, what options it offers and I know how much more complex it would be to defer copying to the secondary ingest destination and redo all of the options chosen without causing unwanted side-effects.

Hayo's suggestion sounds like it would work for you.

Offline Bob350

  • Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Kirk,
Sometimes a programmer can take a feature request too literally. I wonder if that has happened here. Running a full ingest process as a separate deferred repeat process that is fully reliable could be daunting or even nearly impossible. Yes, that is technically what the original request appeared to suggest as a possible method. But customer-centered listening might require parsing the expressed need as something entirely separate from the expressed possible methodology. Easier said than done, especially when mired in a giant version development process. But perhaps a worthwhile starting point when looking at feature suggestions more generally.

Looks to me like the need expressed is to have PM ingest to the primary drive in a way that operates at full SSD speed without being slowed by the limitations of the speed of a slower secondary destination drive. Looks like you just came up with a way to do this. Solution: don't do a deferred identical ingest process. Instead, have PM ingest first to the primary destination (SSD drive in this case) and then copy everything over to the secondary drive. Much less complex than what the initial request appeared to suggest as a method. Problem nearly solved.

Since there may be a less complex way to meet the requested need for SSD speed, the next step could be to explore possibly ways to automate that without being bound to only what was seen as an implied method in the initial request. I'm not a programmer, but it seems natural to consider the feasibility of making a preference or a button available to instruct PM execute the ingest to the primary location followed by copy from primary to secondary location. The customer would not have the full flexibility available by designing and running separate ingest processes. But if the flexibility matters less to the customer than speed, perhaps the customer might find such a new automated feature valuable as an alternative to needing to remember to carry out a second process every time.

I write all this without any personal stake in the prioritization of the requested feature. Just suggesting a  potentially useful way to look at things. Not seeking a specific response. Best wishes for timely completion of version 6.

Offline zhpenn

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
Kirk,
Sometimes a programmer can take a feature request too literally. I wonder if that has happened here. Running a full ingest process as a separate deferred repeat process that is fully reliable could be daunting or even nearly impossible. Yes, that is technically what the original request appeared to suggest as a possible method. But customer-centered listening might require parsing the expressed need as something entirely separate from the expressed possible methodology. Easier said than done, especially when mired in a giant version development process. But perhaps a worthwhile starting point when looking at feature suggestions more generally.

Looks to me like the need expressed is to have PM ingest to the primary drive in a way that operates at full SSD speed without being slowed by the limitations of the speed of a slower secondary destination drive. Looks like you just came up with a way to do this. Solution: don't do a deferred identical ingest process. Instead, have PM ingest first to the primary destination (SSD drive in this case) and then copy everything over to the secondary drive. Much less complex than what the initial request appeared to suggest as a method. Problem nearly solved.

Since there may be a less complex way to meet the requested need for SSD speed, the next step could be to explore possibly ways to automate that without being bound to only what was seen as an implied method in the initial request. I'm not a programmer, but it seems natural to consider the feasibility of making a preference or a button available to instruct PM execute the ingest to the primary location followed by copy from primary to secondary location. The customer would not have the full flexibility available by designing and running separate ingest processes. But if the flexibility matters less to the customer than speed, perhaps the customer might find such a new automated feature valuable as an alternative to needing to remember to carry out a second process every time.

I write all this without any personal stake in the prioritization of the requested feature. Just suggesting a  potentially useful way to look at things. Not seeking a specific response. Best wishes for timely completion of version 6.



Thanks Bob for explaining more in detail for me, the automated feature is useful because no need to remember to carry out a second process every time, sometimes will forget but most importantly it is time efficient.

For example, after starting the 1st ingest(let's say it may take 20mins), I went for lunch(take 1 hour), but when I come back (if I did not forget to start the 2nd Ingest) I still need to start the 2nd ingest and wait 20 more minutes again. The 20 mins that used to ingest to the 2nd destination could be saved if it can start automatically(when I still having lunch) when I come back from lunch 2 destination are all copied finish.

I really thank PM Team make such a great app, it would be great it can be improved more or add some new features in the new version. Thanks.

Offline threiner

  • Newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
the easy solution is just to use only SSD's then there is no delay, job done!