Where's cataloging?

[jswain]

Thanks Mick.

[Odd Skjaeveland]

Soon.

Take your time.

I'm with Kevin M. Cox in his posting of Dec 03 2013 http://forums.camerabits.com/index.php?topic=8821.msg42812#msg42812  Camera Bits does not owe me a cataloging version of PM.

[Kevin M. Cox]

Ha, blast from the past!

I'm really looking forward to hearing details about PM6 when they are ready.

[Odd Skjaeveland]

I'm really looking forward to hearing details about PM6 when they are ready.

Indeed, I guess quite a few of us are. I queued up long time ago and I'll stay put.

If I have picked up the right signals here in the forums, PM6 has entered the feature freeze phase. That is normally an important milestone for developers, and I believe they are praying to avoid a thaw-refreeze cycle.

Member posts I have seen indicate that few understand the tremendous task they are facing. Not on building an image catalog, but on deciding the fine details on functionality and integrating that with other third party software, all moving targets. Plus, this is Photo Mechanic and user's expectations are probably sky high.

[312elements]

You mentioned 3rd party integration? Do you know of any additional 3rd parties being integrated, or if there will be an available API?

[Odd Skjaeveland]

Do you know of any additional 3rd parties being integrated, or if there will be an available API?

I do not know anything except that I noted feature freeze was stated in the forum.

However; I seriously doubt CB is targeting PM to become a replacement for Lightroom, Capture One, On1 etc. If I'm right, I believe integration is the word.

What do we users need, and what do we expect to find once the catalog is here? PM-catalog must be fully compatible with every other cataloging system on the planet and have twice their summed functionality, right?

The Swedish photographer Per Karlsson pretty much sums up my own hopes with "...I do not want the DAM system to do image editing for me".

PM and Camera Bits have a winner feature: A real Support Forum. Sure, it also functions as a user to user forum like most forums out there, but a very significant number of the answers given here are not from ordinary users. I hope CB will be able to continue that part of their product.

My plan is simply to sit still and wait. If the urgent need for a DAM pops up tomorrow, I'll buy one tomorrow. It did not pop up yesterday because I do not yet have a DAM.

Oh, and here is a link to one of Per Karlsson's blog posts:
http://www.bkwinephotography.com/technology/features-functions-digital-asset-management-system-dam/

[312elements]

That kind of integration would awesome. Thanks for the update.

[f0t0man]

Mick,

Bare with me......why do we want a database in PM if we are using other apps for DAMs and only want PM to ingest?   The last thing I need is another slow Lr database.   

Agree completly
Don't try to be everything to all, just do what you do the best and fastest.
Remember when MS word fit on two floppy disk....ahh the good ole days.
The K.I.S.S. system is best! IMHO

[ChuckC]

Keep up the good work. We have patience.

[Pavel]

I too am fine with waiting, though I hate doing it.

I'm not sure if it's the  right time to ask but I now pretty much only use Macs even though my two windows boxes are the more new and powerful machines compared to my Macs. 

I have an HP server, which I used while taking some NetApp virtualization  courses and now it has just been sitting on a shelf for a long time.  I actually only keep it around in hopes that the cataloguing version of Photomechanic can re-purpose the machine as a storage repository that can be hit from mine and my wife's Mac.

I wonder if any guidelines can yet be discussed on the expected best practices with the upcoming product.  In particular I'd like to know ahead of time if a Xeon server running Windows server 2008 or 2012 would be a viable OS to run PM Catalogue, or will I have to install Windows 8?  Please oh golly, don't make it windows 10 only as the auto update has now twice ruined my whole install.  I don't trust it and only use it now for games. 

I'd also like to know if hardware raid is likely to be supported, or is software raid the better choice, or perhaps neither?  Currently my choice is raid 1+0, and it's running off a built in card, but I'd prefer software raid. but I don't mind changing to whatever is needed, but would love to start to get underway when I have free time even if the release is a good year or so away.  That way I'd know I have a solid setup, waiting and ready.

I wonder too if there is any sort of licensing model in mind or in place.  I'd need it running on this PC and accessible with at least two seats as two people will be using it concurrently. Of course I understand that changes are always likely to some degree, sometimes last minute before release, but if there are an small bones of information to keep us salivating that the developers can throw us - that sure would keep the spirits up! 

[Kirk Baker]

Pavel,

I too am fine with waiting, though I hate doing it.

I'm not sure if it's the  right time to ask but I now pretty much only use Macs even though my two windows boxes are the more new and powerful machines compared to my Macs. 

I have an HP server, which I used while taking some NetApp virtualization  courses and now it has just been sitting on a shelf for a long time.  I actually only keep it around in hopes that the cataloguing version of Photomechanic can re-purpose the machine as a storage repository that can be hit from mine and my wife's Mac.

I wonder if any guidelines can yet be discussed on the expected best practices with the upcoming product.  In particular I'd like to know ahead of time if a Xeon server running Windows server 2008 or 2012 would be a viable OS to run PM Catalogue, or will I have to install Windows 8?  Please oh golly, don't make it windows 10 only as the auto update has now twice ruined my whole install.  I don't trust it and only use it now for games.

The requirement for Catalog on Windows will be Windows 7x64 and higher.  I don't know if either of those OSes will identify as Windows 7 or not.  When we get closer to release we'll have a beta that you can try.  If it doesn't work, I'll work with you to see if we can make it work.  The main OS we wanted to cut out was Windows Vista since it added to testing costs and Vista isn't widely used.
 

I'd also like to know if hardware raid is likely to be supported, or is software raid the better choice, or perhaps neither?  Currently my choice is raid 1+0, and it's running off a built in card, but I'd prefer software raid. but I don't mind changing to whatever is needed, but would love to start to get underway when I have free time even if the release is a good year or so away.  That way I'd know I have a solid setup, waiting and ready.

PM and Catalog don't really care about the format of your drives or if they're in a RAID array of any kind.  Neither operates at a block level with files.  So you should be fine with any RAID you like, but I suggest NTFS as your file system.

I wonder too if there is any sort of licensing model in mind or in place.  I'd need it running on this PC and accessible with at least two seats as two people will be using it concurrently. Of course I understand that changes are always likely to some degree, sometimes last minute before release, but if there are an small bones of information to keep us salivating that the developers can throw us - that sure would keep the spirits up! 

There is no limit to how many clients (instances of PM6) that connect to an instance of Catalog.  Each instance of PM6 has to be licensed.  So in your case if you want to run Catalog on your server and access it from two other machines, you'd need three licenses (seats).

HTH,

-Kirk

[SamoMalo]

@Kirk

To make it simple I would suggest, you make a thumbnail sheet each folder, and one database with all exit iptc xmp data, first to get a fast search of the subject then fast small preview.

[Pavel]

Pavel,

PM and Catalog don't really care about the format of your drives or if they're in a RAID array of any kind.  Neither operates at a block level with files.  So you should be fine with any RAID you like, but I suggest NTFS as your file system.

There is no limit to how many clients (instances of PM6) that connect to an instance of Catalog.  Each instance of PM6 has to be licensed.  So in your case if you want to run Catalog on your server and access it from two other machines, you'd need three licenses (seats).

HTH,

-Kirk

Thanks for clarifying the licensing - that seems perfectly logical. 

Besides NTFS, if I decide instead of my old, lonely, dusty and noisy Proliant keep Thunderbolt drives attached to a Mac, will another mac on the network be able see those drives with the new PM-Catalogue software?  And if I were to keep the PC's out of it what are your thoughts and current experience on the new Apple file system (APFS)?

I presume that the new release will run on Mac and PC (only - no linux clients or server) and from you comment is it a safe assumption that NTFS can be reached by both Mac and PC clients but not perhaps the other way around, that if one was to use HFS+ or APFS, then it would not be possible for PC clients to reach the server?

No miracle announcement about full ZFS pools support or BTRFS, It take it - since we want to have our cake and eat it too, as modern times dictate? 

[Kirk Baker]

Pavel,

PM and Catalog don't really care about the format of your drives or if they're in a RAID array of any kind.  Neither operates at a block level with files.  So you should be fine with any RAID you like, but I suggest NTFS as your file system.

There is no limit to how many clients (instances of PM6) that connect to an instance of Catalog.  Each instance of PM6 has to be licensed.  So in your case if you want to run Catalog on your server and access it from two other machines, you'd need three licenses (seats).

Thanks for clarifying the licensing - that seems perfectly logical. 

Besides NTFS, if I decide instead of my old, lonely, dusty and noisy Proliant keep Thunderbolt drives attached to a Mac, will another mac on the network be able see those drives with the new PM-Catalogue software?

As long as the PM instance that is publishing the Catalog has access to the drives (or the proxies in the Catalog) then other computers (Mac or Windows) will be able to have read-only access.  If you want all clients to be able to modify the images then you'll have to share the drives with the other computers.

And if I were to keep the PC's out of it what are your thoughts and current experience on the new Apple file system (APFS)?

It's too early to say.  I'm hopeful that it will turn out to be an excellent fault-tolerant file system.

I presume that the new release will run on Mac and PC (only - no linux clients or server) and from you comment is it a safe assumption that NTFS can be reached by both Mac and PC clients but not perhaps the other way around, that if one was to use HFS+ or APFS, then it would not be possible for PC clients to reach the server?

If you use SMB file sharing, then all clients you listed should be able to work with the images directly.

No miracle announcement about full ZFS pools support or BTRFS, It take it - since we want to have our cake and eat it too, as modern times dictate? 

I'm sorry, I'm not up on either of those technologies.

-Kirk

[Linwood]

However; I seriously doubt CB is targeting PM to become a replacement for Lightroom, Capture One, On1 etc. If I'm right, I believe integration is the word.

Too bad.  I have lots of replacements for LR's editor, but none for the overall DAM aspects, integration with plugins, etc.  Adobe needs competition in that space, whether you want to stay with Adobe or switch.