Sync IPTC with your secondary located files

[whistlerdan]

I'm new to PM but really liking it so far.  One thing that I was thinking though is that it's all very well to be able to ingest to a secondary location , but on a very big multi-camera event shoot taking the photos is only half the work.  If something should go wrong with the primary disk then I would lose the sorting, captioning work.

It would be great to have a couple of options where you could simultaneously write to the IPTC of the primary and secondary file as you go along.  Or an option to sync the info from primary to secondary after you have done some captioning or sorting.

osx 10.7.1
pm 4.6.8

[Kirk Baker]

I'm new to PM but really liking it so far.  One thing that I was thinking though is that it's all very well to be able to ingest to a secondary location , but on a very big multi-camera event shoot taking the photos is only half the work.  If something should go wrong with the primary disk then I would lose the sorting, captioning work.

It would be great to have a couple of options where you could simultaneously write to the IPTC of the primary and secondary file as you go along.  Or an option to sync the info from primary to secondary after you have done some captioning or sorting.

People request this from time to time but I don't think we'll ever implement such a feature.  It makes sense to have a backup in case something catastrophic happens during your workflow, but once you're done, you might as well just copy the finished files to a new backup location and delete the secondary ingest files.  That way both locations are guaranteed to have the exact same set of files.

Most workflows include work outside of PM which would never be reflected in the "synchronized" secondary location.  It wouldn't be possible for PM to do that.  A secondary backup after your workflow is complete will guarantee that the files are exactly the same, no matter what applications/modifications your workflow entailed.

-Kirk

[FVlcek]

I agree. A secondary ingest location is usually the *backup* location. Backup files should never be touched except when the primary files fail. That's the basic rule of any computer backup strategy.

Other than that, I would somewhat like a to be able to synchronise IPTC/XMP data *manually* from a set of files to another set of (same named) files. But that has been wished for already I think in another forum thread.

[whistlerdan]

I would somewhat like a to be able to synchronise IPTC/XMP data *manually* from a set of files to another set of (same named) files. But that has been wished for already I think in another forum thread.

Yes that's basically what I was suggesting.  Just thought i'd throw it out there.  Having to copy a set of the original files just means one more hard drive to take with me that's the only reason I was asking. 

What about generating some sort of master file that contains a list of file names and IPTC alterations that can be saved after an editing session.  Then if something ever went south on the original files someone can import the changes to their secondary files.

[Kirk Baker]

I would somewhat like a to be able to synchronise IPTC/XMP data *manually* from a set of files to another set of (same named) files. But that has been wished for already I think in another forum thread.

Yes that's basically what I was suggesting.  Just thought i'd throw it out there.  Having to copy a set of the original files just means one more hard drive to take with me that's the only reason I was asking.

You wouldn't need any additional drives beyond the drive that is currently acting as your backup.  You would just backup to the same drive and delete the unwanted originals.

What about generating some sort of master file that contains a list of file names and IPTC alterations that can be saved after an editing session.  Then if something ever went south on the original files someone can import the changes to their secondary files.

This would be fragile at best.  If you renamed your files at all (which people do frequently as part of their workflow) then the list would not be maintainable.  Also, any image manipulation you may have performed would not be synchronized either.  Just making a simple backup when your work is done solves this issue completely and does not require an additional drive beyond what would have been used for the Secondary Ingest.

-Kirk

[Luiz Muzzi]

Hi,
I myself have been using two backup HD drives. One for the "Time Machine" backup (i.e. everything is periodically backep up by Time Machine) and one as a "Second Backup" that only backs up the Pictures folder every time I do anything with the files (tagging, applying IPTC, renaming, editing, etc). This second backup is triggered by a command in the Terminal window.
It is working pretty fine.
HTH

-Luiz Muzzi

[theim]

What about generating some sort of master file that contains a list of file names and IPTC alterations that can be saved after an editing session.  Then if something ever went south on the original files someone can import the changes to their secondary files.

Also, any image manipulation you may have performed would not be synchronized either.  Just making a simple backup when your work is done solves this issue completely and does not require an additional drive beyond what would have been used for the Secondary Ingest.

________________________

Exactly! Which would make this feature even more valuable.  Example: You ingest original RAW files to a folder on your hard drive, then generate DNGs of those originals.  You now go through the DNGs making all kinds of image adjustments.  When finished, you must now apply keywording to both sets of files (original RAW and DNG).  Of course, had you done all the keywording on the originals before creating the DNGs, then you wouldn't have this problem.  Or would you?  How many of us have gone back to a set of images at a later date and applied more keywords and/or modified the keywords?  I know I have.  And it's a royal pain to have to do it in two places.

Often I'll create DNGs before keywording intentionally, as PM will not display full size versions of the orginal RAW files (the embedded jpg in Sony ARW files is not large enough to judge focus accuracy, for instance).
So rather than going thru the effort of keywording all the originals, I'll create DNGs, toss out all but the keepers, then begin the keywording process (again, to two sets of images).

Being able to copy the keywords from one set of images to another (with identical file names) would be extremely useful!!

[Kirk Baker]

What about generating some sort of master file that contains a list of file names and IPTC alterations that can be saved after an editing session.  Then if something ever went south on the original files someone can import the changes to their secondary files.

Also, any image manipulation you may have performed would not be synchronized either.  Just making a simple backup when your work is done solves this issue completely and does not require an additional drive beyond what would have been used for the Secondary Ingest.

________________________

Exactly! Which would make this feature even more valuable.  Example: You ingest original RAW files to a folder on your hard drive, then generate DNGs of those originals.  You now go through the DNGs making all kinds of image adjustments.  When finished, you must now apply keywording to both sets of files (original RAW and DNG).  Of course, had you done all the keywording on the originals before creating the DNGs, then you wouldn't have this problem.  Or would you?  How many of us have gone back to a set of images at a later date and applied more keywords and/or modified the keywords?  I know I have.  And it's a royal pain to have to do it in two places.

Often I'll create DNGs before keywording intentionally, as PM will not display full size versions of the orginal RAW files (the embedded jpg in Sony ARW files is not large enough to judge focus accuracy, for instance).
So rather than going thru the effort of keywording all the originals, I'll create DNGs, toss out all but the keepers, then begin the keywording process (again, to two sets of images).

Being able to copy the keywords from one set of images to another (with identical file names) would be extremely useful!!

But in your example you're already changing the filename from .ARW to .DNG...  What constitutes matching filenames?  Just the base name?  What if other file types are in the folders?  Like JPEGs that might have been produced?

Given files in two different folders how would you specify which file to act as the source and which file(s) would act as the destination?

-Kirk

[theim]

Exactly! Which would make this feature even more valuable.  Example: You ingest original RAW files to a folder on your hard drive, then generate DNGs of those originals.  You now go through the DNGs making all kinds of image adjustments.  When finished, you must now apply keywording to both sets of files (original RAW and DNG).  Of course, had you done all the keywording on the originals before creating the DNGs, then you wouldn't have this problem.  Or would you?  How many of us have gone back to a set of images at a later date and applied more keywords and/or modified the keywords?  I know I have.  And it's a royal pain to have to do it in two places.

Often I'll create DNGs before keywording intentionally, as PM will not display full size versions of the orginal RAW files (the embedded jpg in Sony ARW files is not large enough to judge focus accuracy, for instance).
So rather than going thru the effort of keywording all the originals, I'll create DNGs, toss out all but the keepers, then begin the keywording process (again, to two sets of images).

Being able to copy the keywords from one set of images to another (with identical file names) would be extremely useful!!

___________________________

But in your example you're already changing the filename from .ARW to .DNG...  What constitutes matching filenames?  Just the base name?  What if other file types are in the folders?  Like JPEGs that might have been produced?

Given files in two different folders how would you specify which file to act as the source and which file(s) would act as the destination?

-Kirk
___________________________

Yes, file base name (sorry, should have been more specific).  I would have no problems conforming to that restriction.
Regarding folder, it would be great if PM could prompt the user for one source and one destination folder.  Barring that I certainly wouldn't mind putting both sets of files in the same folder where PM would have to prompt me for source and destination file type (extension).

[theim]

Example: You ingest original RAW files to a folder on your hard drive, then generate DNGs of those originals.  You now go through the DNGs making all kinds of image adjustments.  When finished, you must now apply keywording to both sets of files (original RAW and DNG).  Of course, had you done all the keywording on the originals before creating the DNGs, then you wouldn't have this problem.  Or would you?  How many of us have gone back to a set of images at a later date and applied more keywords and/or modified the keywords?  I know I have.  And it's a royal pain to have to do it in two places!

Being able to copy the keywords from one set of images to another (with identical file names) would be extremely useful!!

But in your example you're already changing the filename from .ARW to .DNG...  What constitutes matching filenames?  Just the base name?  What if other file types are in the folders?  Like JPEGs that might have been produced?

Given files in two different folders how would you specify which file to act as the source and which file(s) would act as the destination?

-Kirk

Yes, just the base name.  Other file types are not an issue.
If necessary, I would create a temporary folder with just the images I wanted updated (the target folder, if you will).
Still very interested in this feature !!

[theim]

Kirk, is this the sort of thing I could accomplish with a script?  If so, I'd be happy to go that route (although I'm afraid I know the answer).

Thanks,
-Tom

[Kirk Baker]

Tom,

Kirk, is this the sort of thing I could accomplish with a script?  If so, I'd be happy to go that route (although I'm afraid I know the answer).

I'm sure you could do it with a script using ExifTool.

-Kirk