if you want a catalog feature - speak up here!

[Kirk Baker]

Don,

Yes!
I've been using M$ Expression Media, after going through the entire string of changes since it was iView. It WAS a great program until M$ bought it & it began developing glitches, crashes, and now it's common knowledge they've abandoned the product entirely. On their forum for the software, there's an extended discussion about alternatives for cataloging solutions. PM is on the list, but as it stands now, I've quit using it since I got CS3 with Bridge. It does everything PM does and it's all integrated. EXCEPT for a cataloging & archiving system.
Big void here, and PM is poised to jump in & save the day.

Cataloging is our highest priority at this time.

However, I don't agree that Bridge does everything that PM does, and it certainly isn't as fast as PM.  PM integrates quite nicely with Photoshop though it can't show adjustments made to RAW files (with the exception of DNG which it can display) since Adobe doesn't update the embedded JPEG previews in the RAW files it adjusts, and they don't share their rendering technology with anyone else.

-Kirk

[vAfotoriporter]

I got CS3 with Bridge. It does everything PM does and it's all integrated.

You seem to have pretty strange ideas on what PM does. Of course it may happen you need no more than Bridge has to offer.

[KKReimer]

Kirk,

I'm sure you are well aware of the imminent end for many of us that have been using "another" DAM software. With this end now approaching rapidly, we are looking to be able to shift gears rather quickly.

Several options exist, but for us, we are looking for longevity and reliability and the ability to work over a server with multiple users. Personally I think Photo Mechanic is the best transition for us, but the catalogue function will be KEY.

This is the perfect time to gain new customers, I sincerely hope that Camera Bits will be moving quickly on the upcoming changes. If PM can answer the call as "the other guy" goes down, everyone will win in the end.

We look forward to seeing the changes coming down the road.

Best,
Kristin Reimer
Ed Kashi Studio

[Hayo Baan]

Kristin,

Hear, Hear 

[tomoc]

Kirk-

Good lord, everything's been working so well for the last year or so, I hardly knew what to think when I saw that all the weeks of work getting all my iMatch cataloging over to iView, now EM was about to be threatened.

SO glad to hear you are working on a replacement for us; no question I will trust anything you guys produce.

My catalog is pretty simple... keywords x 120k images... all I require is stability and speed. I already use PM for all keyword and IPTC info as a standalone and would be just as happy to continue that way... or not.

Thanks for the new effort...Hope it is a huge success.

Tom O'Connell

[judophotos]

Kirk,

I am looking for a replacement for EM2 because it appears that it is going nowhere and I want to move from XP to Win7.  One of the features that I use most in EM2 which appears in no other cataloging software is the PEOPLE database feature.

Hopefully your program, when it is released, will be able to link up in the same way and match all the fields including SCENE etc..

Best rgds
David

[Photo_op]

Cataloging is our highest priority at this time.

-Kirk

Any thought to a Beta process ala Adobe Lightroom?

--Dave

[Kirk Baker]

Dave,

Cataloging is our highest priority at this time.

-Kirk

Any thought to a Beta process ala Adobe Lightroom?

I'm certain we'll have a beta phase.  We have done it that way so far...

-Kirk

[louster1950]

Naturally, I would like to be among the throngs volunteering to be Beta testers.

[mbbphoto]

One of the things that would be great to include in the cataloging software would be a verification or data integrity checker.....

Many of us have large archives and it really sucks to find that one of your pick files has corrupted over time and that you cloned this corruption onto your backup....
Perhaps an add checksum hash option could be included in the PM ingest box and then the cataloging software could have an option to check volumes any time they are attached (or on demand).
Perhaps there's a simpler solution but we need to add this to our workflow and would love it to be as passive as possible.

[Kirk Baker]

One of the things that would be great to include in the cataloging software would be a verification or data integrity checker.....

Many of us have large archives and it really sucks to find that one of your pick files has corrupted over time and that you cloned this corruption onto your backup....
Perhaps an add checksum hash option could be included in the PM ingest box and then the cataloging software could have an option to check volumes any time they are attached (or on demand).
Perhaps there's a simpler solution but we need to add this to our workflow and would love it to be as passive as possible.

Just because a check sum changes doesn't mean that the image has been damaged.  The caption data may have changed in another application.  Or the image data may have been re-saved from an application like Photoshop.

The only real way to know if the image data were corrupted instead of simply changed would be to render the files and you would have to judge them yourself.

-Kirk

[vAfotoriporter]

A checksum feature still could help a lot even if it would result lots of false warnings. For archived images (especially those on read only media) it is rare to change or rewrite them. And it is still faster to check manually (or rather visually) only some of the files - those checksum seems corrupt - than check all the archive.
Maybe the checksum warning could say: there may be a corruption of the image data with the specified files render them to check if they are really corrupt.
Maybe there could be some tool to do this check render images and check them visually or an option to skip this and warn later. Maybe one to log these warnings for later reference.

[mbbphoto]

A checksum feature still could help a lot even if it would result lots of false warnings. For archived images (especially those on read only media) it is rare to change or rewrite them. And it is still faster to check manually (or rather visually) only some of the files - those checksum seems corrupt - than check all the archive.
Maybe the checksum warning could say: there may be a corruption of the image data with the specified files render them to check if they are really corrupt.
Maybe there could be some tool to do this check render images and check them visually or an option to skip this and warn later. Maybe one to log these warnings for later reference.

It is my understanding that the reason for a checksum failure can also be interpreted to some degree. Also if you see it in a proprietary raw file you would immediately suspect a problem.

[PhotoServices]

What is the current status on this project?  I am still waiting for a cataloging program.  Have Extensis portfolio, but it doesn't handle RAW images or keep JPG/RAW files together plus it is a bear once the images are collected to evaluate.  I now export the files in order to evaluate.. a time consuming process.

Alan
Photo services manager.

Dave,

Cataloging is our highest priority at this time.

-Kirk

Any thought to a Beta process ala Adobe Lightroom?

I'm certain we'll have a beta phase.  We have done it that way so far...

-Kirk

[Kirk Baker]

Alan,

What is the current status on this project?  I am still waiting for a cataloging program.  Have Extensis portfolio, but it doesn't handle RAW images or keep JPG/RAW files together plus it is a bear once the images are collected to evaluate.  I now export the files in order to evaluate.. a time consuming process.

We're working on it.  I don't have a projected release date for you.

-Kirk