I recently had a problem with a file processed by DxO PhotoLab. In response to a question from DxO Support, I indicated that I launch a file in DPL from Photo Mechanic Plus.
I then received a reply that included:
"...Because all of the modules used in both DxO PhotoLab and PureRAW are created using extremely precise measurements of actual output files from specific camera and lens configurations, we do not recommend using any other programs with your original camera files prior to using PhotoLab or PureRAW. In the past, we have received reports from other customer telling us that Photo Mechanic caused unexpected and unsupported changes to occur to their photo files that cannot be accommodated in PhotoLab. In these prior cases, the customers avoided use of Photo Mechanic prior to using their photo files in PhotoLab. Since PureRAW is based on the same set of modules, the same applies to PureRAW..."
Makes no sense to me.
Bob
Kirk and Bob
A thing that can happen is that an image you know you have updated in Photolab is not updated automatically in PMPlus.
In that case it will not reflect the changes you have made in for example Photolab, before you make a "Scan to Catalog".
Kirk, I know there is a feature request posted about this and I have lifted it myself in a conversation with one of your staff.
Since i know how the system works now I can handle this in my workflow but it would be much better to at least give us an option to handle this automatically.
Once I worked with the Norwegian enterprise DAM-system FotoWare (not misspelled just norwegian spelling :-).
I guess like many other enterprise DAM FotoWare - like PhotoMechanic - index everything below the topfolder you point at where all the images lays you will incorporate in your the catalog you just are about to create.
The difference though is that FotoWare then activates a folder watch on every folder beneth the topfolder. (through the file systems logs)
After that every change of a file will result in an automatic update of the index.
In PMPlus you have a "folder watch"-function in the ingest-system but that's it.
Would it be possible to get an automatic update in Photomechanic too?
With that said, the DxO-representative have to get updated on the fact that PM or PM Plus does not affect the very images and the image quality at all from my experience.
It is important though that you establish a work flow that works.
Personally i develop the RAW-images first in Photolab.
Then I apply all the metadata I want to apply in PM Plus and I mean all!
After that I export all the JPEGS from all the RAW I'm working with in Photolab.
Finally I run a Scan to Catalog of the main folder I have been working with and the subfolders too.
That's it!
When I do like this I can't see any problems at all with the integration between Photolab 4 and PM Plus 6.
If I do like this, the few IPTC-fields Photolab's rudimentary IPTC-implementation displays correctly in Photolab 4, even without an import.
I NEVER update any keywords in Photolab 4 at all.
All the metadata jobs will be handled more effectively and extensively in PM Plus that supports the entire IPTC-schema instead of just a couple of elements open in Photolab 4. When I export and reexport JPEG-files I can't see Photolab 4 corrupts the metadata in any way so far.
I can't see that is an issue at all.
The only thing I don't think is to my liking is that we have to remember to run a "Scan to Catalog" manually.
I'm sure quite a few users might forget to do that from time to time.
