Feature Request -- Find moved folder

[Marv]

Please add the ability to a catalog with a folder of images that has been moved to a new disk. 

If you move a folder to a new disk, there is no way to update the catalog with the folder's new location.   Currently, you would manually have to find and delete the old imagines then re-catalog the folder on the new disk.   This is time consuming.  The ability to tell PM+ the new location of the folder would be much faster.

Thanks,
Marv
Mac Pro Quad Core 2.93 (2009/Nehalem)
20GB RAM
OS X 10.10.5

[Hayo Baan]

This a again looks like what we need is something like the “synchronize folders” that Lightroom offers. I use that feature frequently there.

[carlseibert]

I think running Scan to Catalog for both the old and new locations should do that. Basically, just what Lightroom's Synchronize folders command does.

There's another thread here about the potential for (semi) auto-update, which could help here, too.

But I just tested and rescanning doesn't detect deleted or moved images.  [....shuffles off to report probable bug...]

[carlseibert]

Turns out - not a bug it's a (missing) feature.

Here's what Kirk says from the Support forum:

Carl,

Scan to Catalog does not know what it has scanned and found before.  So basically a missing feature, though I don't think we'd be adding that capability there.

More likely it will be a new feature that would check for new or missing items.

-Kirk

So it's on the map....

[krubin]

I think there are probably two approaches to solving this, and it would be great to have both (of course users want everything).

The simpler option, which is what I believe the original request was, is more of a "reset path" feature for an existing branch within the catalog.  When  a folder move happens outside of the environment (for whatever reason) it would be ideal to "re-point" the catalog path to the new directory.  For example, in my workflow I locate files in one place as they are being "worked on" actively, and then they are re-located to large-volume storage once they have been backed up on optical media.  Nothing within the catalog has changed, except the volume and part of the folder path. 

The more complex option is a folder synchronize, as has been described above. 

I would submit there is a case to be made for both.    Thanks much!

[Hayo Baan]

If you performed the move within PM, the location is already updated
If not, the planned rescan (perhaps in combination with a manual scan of the destination if not already in the catalog) would probably do what you want.

[carlseibert]

What Hayo said.

And for many (most?) workflows, the "worked on" part is files and folders (what we've always done in Photo Mechanic), then assets are committed to the DAM (cataloged) later. In which case, you just do what you're going to do, subset out the selects from the outtakes, drag the folders to where they are going to live and hit whatever button gets them indexed. (Scan from folder right now.) In PM+, you could even catalog your outtakes by making a separate catalog for them.

That's a very different environment than many folks are used to in Lightroom, et al. But easier, safer.

It sort of works already. The issue now is that PM+ doesn't understand when an asset has moved away from where it was living. We're left with a whole bunch of broken links in the return if we move something that has already been cataloged. That's coming, though, says Kirk.

[krubin]

I could probably make this work with some jumps.  For my workflow, I do a two-phase move, where the images go to a staging area until I've burned them onto optical media, and then they migrate to where the "live" for the long term. 

Admittedly I"m a new user of PM as an orphaned user of MediaPro/C1.  I bought my license when I heard about PM+, so I'm still a newbie.

If I do the interim and subsequent move via PM+, will all the pointers be adjusted and I'll be good?

[krubin]

As I think through this, I still think the feature to provide a new folder mapping would be useful, but perhaps it is more of an "expert" function.  The proposed approaches will work but seem like work-arounds more than directly addressing the functional gap. 

That said, I appreciate the help!

[carlseibert]

Krubin - it sounds like your workflow is pretty much like mine. My pictures are in folders on my desktop until they are captioned and ready to store. Whereupon, the entire take, including outtakes, selects, and exported JPEGs is copied to my outtakes external drive. Then, I delete all the "no-stars" and generally tidy up a little, and move the selects and their exported JPEGs to their permanent home.

Up to that point, there's no need of DAM functionality at all. Everything can be done in Photo Mechanic (or my RAW converter/editor) or the operating system. There's really only a brief period in between captioning (when DAM becomes possible) and when the files are moved to their DAM home. In the rare instance when I might need to find something that hasn't yet been committed, and just glancing at the contact sheet won't do, I can use Find in Photo Mechanic. Of course, ranking, sorting, filtering, ordering, and that sort of thing are all ordinary Photo Mechanic functions. Nothing DAM-y there.

All that said, if you have images in that "pre-DAM" limbo state for a long time, I could envision setting up the directory tree where they rest as one PM+ catalog and the permanent DAM area as another. Just drag them from one place to the other when the time comes and a re-scan should take of everything seamlessly.

The re-scanning seems to be the sticking point. Kirk hasn't decided on which approach to take. But worst case (in my worldview) would be we have to press a button to make it happen. Or it could be automatically triggered. It's not going to be much effort either way.

The theme here is that it's something of a paradigm change from most of the all-in-one programs like Lightroom and Capture One that make you commit your whole take to a DAM before you even work on the images.  That seems way unnecessarily cumbersome to me, since 90% of the files will never be captioned or keyworded or developed and will just end up in outtakes cold storage, if not the bit bucket. 

In a files and folders workflow, like those that have traditionally used Photo Mechanic, pictures are prepared up to the point of DAM-ing in an unstructured world where you just don't have to care about things like maintaining folder-to-folder or folder-to-catalog relationships. In a PM/PM+ workflow, those things won't matter until very near the end of the workflow.

Now, in today's world, many of us do use non-destructive RAW converters instead of Photoshop (so Photo Mechanic > RAW converter > Photo Mechanic Plus) and in some cases (Lightroom and Capture One, but not ON1 RAW) we do have to worry about maintaining those relationships in those programs. That means a Capture One or Lightroom user doesn't want to break the relationship between an image and its session or catalog, lest all the edits be lost. Thus, the move from staging area to final home might need to be done in the RAW converter itself.

PM+ is agnostic to all that. It doesn't need to know or care. Once the images arrive where they will live, it can scan them and be good to go.