Catalogue Feature Hopes

[pmagi]

Now that it seems that the cataloguing module is really on its way i'd like to rimind of the importance of versioning that we discussed here quite a long time ago. A lot of people probably have many versions or copies of the same image spread around on their drives, so its a very good feature to be able to collect them all into one image with versions (hidden "behind"). Have a look ad ID Imager for reference. Finding the versions shold be easy to do manually like "find *3267", but it would also be nice with some kind of auto find, and not based on image name only. Perhaps like "if the same 4 digit number apears and the colors are 90% simillar then assume its the same image" then present the results in a list for the whole folder/drive for me to OK.

I see that collaboration is coming and that is also very important, so we can for example all work on collecting images to one virtual gallery, with record locking locking working etc.

I assume some kind of virtual galleries will be implemented. But also think of smart thinks like keeping track and warning if you try to delete an image that is part of a virtual gallery.

Also, it should be easy to relocate images and folders that have been moved outside the cataloguing SW. Look at ThumbsPlus where you see what folders are "missing" and can drag and drop them to their new locations.



 

[Hydester]

A lot of people probably have many versions or copies of the same image spread around on their drives, so its a very good feature to be able to collect them all into one image with versions (hidden "behind").

I would give a massive thumbs up for this feature !!!

We are the first generation of digital photographers and accordingly have pretty much had to make up our DAM strategies as we went along.

Accordingly, we have often made errors along the way. Mostly, for me anyway, this has involved hurriedly working on an image for a pitch/website/ad/whatever, then forgetting which version is the best & quite often, even forgetting the filename and even which images exist where. Consequently, I have often worked afresh on an image & now have many duplicates lurking in dark corners of my computer.

The thought that I could have a catalog which has one image in the front which references all existing versions of the same image (at different resolutions/in different file formats etc) is a VERY alluring one.

As pmagi says, an automated search for similar files (with same capture time??) would be best (with a compare-before-confirm feature, a bit like iTunes 'Display Duplicates' feature, but better) It would also make it easier to delete the old/bad versions.

This would truly be a fabulous feature as far as I am concerned !!

Would appreciate other supporters giving it a +1 below

Stephen

[NeilR]

I hate to waste bandwidth arguing for a feature that may well already be in place but... since you ask... 

I've been using a catalog app (iMatch) for many years.  That app has a lot of great features but it does not natively support versioning.  It does support custom scripting, which is something I'd miss.  A lot of iMatch users have come up with different work-arounds via scripting, but none of them make any sense to me, in terms of ease of use.

The way I see it, we Nikon shooters have the following two basic options for cataloging:

1.  Use Lightroom, and ditch any other raw processor including CaptureNX2, which I happen to like.  With Lightroom you get versioning via the virtual copies.  You get LIghtroom rendering - whether yo like it or not :-).  That's part of the package.  But LR does not inter-operate well with other raw rendering apps- it is fundamentally built to do it itself and that makes sense in the context of its "all in one solution".

2.  Use some other cataloger that inter-operates with NEFs such that they read the embedded previews created by Capture.  And this is most other catalog apps, as far as I know, and PM does this very well.  The downside of this is that if the catalog app does not FULLY support versioning, chaos reigns.

What I'm trying to say here is that the market of people that, for whatever reason, choose not to use LR, in many or most cases severely need versioning to tie everything together.  If they haven't worked with an image cataloger they may not understand that yet, but they will learn quick after assembling a substantial image catalog 

I doubt I would go through the pain of converting to a new cataloger unless that cataloger fully supported versioning.  Versioning is a deal-breaker for me.  The only other reason I would go through the effort of switching is to get faster browsing in the catalog app.  I'm spoiled by PM's look ahead cache.

Short story... +1 for versioning 

Edit:  I need to add that the main (most critical) reason versioning is so important for me is that I believe it is critical to get all the versions of the same image with consistent ratings and keywords/categories.  That's the chaos part.  If I have to do that manually I might as well maintain my catalog on a stone tablet.

[Woodie]

I hate to waste bandwidth arguing for a feature that may well already be in place but... since you ask... 

I've been using a catalog app (iMatch) for many years.  That app has a lot of great features but it does not natively support versioning.  It does support custom scripting, which is something I'd miss.  A lot of iMatch users have come up with different work-arounds via scripting, but none of them make any sense to me, in terms of ease of use.

The way I see it, we Nikon shooters have the following two basic options for cataloging:

1.  Use Lightroom, and ditch any other raw processor including CaptureNX2, which I happen to like.  With Lightroom you get versioning via the virtual copies.  You get LIghtroom rendering - whether yo like it or not :-).  That's part of the package.  But LR does not inter-operate well with other raw rendering apps- it is fundamentally built to do it itself and that makes sense in the context of its "all in one solution".

2.  Use some other cataloger that inter-operates with NEFs such that they read the embedded previews created by Capture.  And this is most other catalog apps, as far as I know, and PM does this very well.  The downside of this is that if the catalog app does not FULLY support versioning, chaos reigns.

What I'm trying to say here is that the market of people that, for whatever reason, choose not to use LR, in many or most cases severely need versioning to tie everything together.  If they haven't worked with an image cataloger they may not understand that yet, but they will learn quick after assembling a substantial image catalog 

I doubt I would go through the pain of converting to a new cataloger unless that cataloger fully supported versioning.  Versioning is a deal-breaker for me.  The only other reason I would go through the effort of switching is to get faster browsing in the catalog app.  I'm spoiled by PM's look ahead cache.

Short story... +1 for versioning 

Edit:  I need to add that the main (most critical) reason versioning is so important for me is that I believe it is critical to get all the versions of the same image with consistent ratings and keywords/categories.  That's the chaos part.  If I have to do that manually I might as well maintain my catalog on a stone tablet.

I am a Nikon shooter and use Windows.  I started with iMatch but switched to IDimager for cataloging several years ago with PM as a "front end" for the catalog.  IDimager has versioning and reads/writes embeded metadata to NEF files.  Like everyone else, I've been waiting and waiting for a catalog integrated with PM but for the last few years, the PM-IDimager combo have worked well for me.

[pmagi]

Great to hear others think versioning is important too! Then is the question of how to implement it so you can actually find and maintain the different versions spread around your drives. Since PM has the best user interface I have ever seen, and I am not talking GUI here but ability to know what users want to do and when, and cut out the crap  (and I have worked with software, and have seen A LOT - actually, if I were a manager at Microsoft I would buy out the people working on PM and put them in charge of Windows, then Apple could get some competition....lets hope this never happens!!!!) - anyway, so I think we could see some fantastic implementation of it!

I would have a look at ID-Imager, that versioning is close to what is needed (but the user interface really sucks, and it super-buggy, but I still use it...;-)

The innovation bit would be to be able to search 300.000 images on all drives, find version candidates and present a suggestion list to the user at the end of the process in a smart way, and, the ability to save the search result somehow, as going through that list of suggested versions could take days and has to be done manually, and the computer could also o crash sometime during the process too, since it so massive amount of data and drives we are talking about.

Perhaps a user settable mix of image name part (*number*) OR/AND capture time (*exact same second*) OR/AND image looks (*thumbs match >90%*)

Talking about crashing.....ID Imager tend to crash on very large imports of the type you do when catalogouing the first time, I can understand that it happens, and that PM will most probably be less buggy, but there should be some kind of auto-resume thing kicking in if it should ever happen, since typically you would have to leave the computer unattended for days to do a really big first scan....only to come back and find out that it stopped after 5 hours, and you dont know what file caused it, so you have to guess and restart the scan.....then you need anger management...;-) Again I am not sure this will be needed for PM, but perhaps worth considering, since a smooth first scan of all images is absolutely vital to gain new users.

Also the ability to cope with changes to drives outside the database, new jobs have to be scanned, and old jobs have moved etc etc. Look at Thumbsplus for a nice handling of all this. The databse is kind of integrated into the standard tree view, just indication what is in the catalogue and not. Much nices tham the Lightroom approach with explicit "imports" if you ask me.


/Petter

[NeilR]

I came to the conclusion that the only sane way to version 300,000 images (which happens to be my own requirement) would require custom scripting, and that scripting facility would have to include the assembly of version sets.  I hope this cataloger includes scripting...