Tom
Thanks for your detailed and thoughtful responses.
I will experiment along the lines you suggest.
Much appreciated.
Search found 11 matches
- 31 Dec 14 9:02
- Forum: Photo Supreme
- Topic: View Unedited Raw
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3108
- 30 Dec 14 13:27
- Forum: Photo Supreme
- Topic: View Unedited Raw
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3108
View Unedited Raw
Thumbnails of raws are displayed with the edits applied. I would like to view the raw in its original form, rather than in its edited form. Is there a way to do this? Versioning has not been applied.
Edits to the raw have been made in Photo Ninja.
Any advice gratefully received.
Edits to the raw have been made in Photo Ninja.
Any advice gratefully received.
- 08 Nov 14 15:57
- Forum: Photo Supreme
- Topic: Geotagging place name inconsistency
- Replies: 11
- Views: 7026
Re: Geotagging place name inconsistency
It is a very useful setting.
I will continue to experiment and if any further issues arise I will report back.
Thanks, all, for the help.
I will continue to experiment and if any further issues arise I will report back.
Thanks, all, for the help.
- 08 Nov 14 6:57
- Forum: Photo Supreme
- Topic: Geotagging place name inconsistency
- Replies: 11
- Views: 7026
Re: Geotagging place name inconsistency
When I imported the images, I found that a number were categorised as not geotagged, although all were.
Following advice to my post on this issue, I selected the images categorised by PS as ungeotagged, right clicked and selected Metadata>Read Metadata from file. I also clicked Save Metadata to ...
Following advice to my post on this issue, I selected the images categorised by PS as ungeotagged, right clicked and selected Metadata>Read Metadata from file. I also clicked Save Metadata to ...
- 07 Nov 14 23:17
- Forum: Photo Supreme
- Topic: Geotagging place name inconsistency
- Replies: 11
- Views: 7026
Re: Geotagging place name inconsistency
The image data was not inconsistent.
The geotagging identified all the images as being in Alpes-Maritimes.
Photo Supreme identified some of the images as being in Alpes-Maritimes.
It identified other images as being in Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur, of which Alpes-Maritimes is part.
Example - image ...
The geotagging identified all the images as being in Alpes-Maritimes.
Photo Supreme identified some of the images as being in Alpes-Maritimes.
It identified other images as being in Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur, of which Alpes-Maritimes is part.
Example - image ...
- 06 Nov 14 21:25
- Forum: Photo Supreme
- Topic: Geotagging place name inconsistency
- Replies: 11
- Views: 7026
Re: Geotagging place name inconsistency
Thanks for the response, and my apologies for not getting back to you sooner.
I should have specified my issue more precisely.
Why is it that PS identified some images as being in Alpes Maritimes, and some as being in Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur when the GPS data was the same and each location ...
I should have specified my issue more precisely.
Why is it that PS identified some images as being in Alpes Maritimes, and some as being in Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur when the GPS data was the same and each location ...
- 03 Nov 14 16:28
- Forum: Photo Supreme
- Topic: Geotagging place name inconsistency
- Replies: 11
- Views: 7026
Geotagging place name inconsistency
I imported a folder of photographs taken in the Alpes-Maritimes Department of France. All were geotagged.
Alpes-Maritimes is part of the Region of Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur.
Photo Supreme inserted location data into the IPTC, placing some photos in Alpes-Maritimes and some in Provence-Alpes-Cote ...
Alpes-Maritimes is part of the Region of Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur.
Photo Supreme inserted location data into the IPTC, placing some photos in Alpes-Maritimes and some in Provence-Alpes-Cote ...
- 02 Nov 14 14:06
- Forum: Photo Supreme
- Topic: photographs dated as 30 December 1899
- Replies: 8
- Views: 6961
Re: photographs dated as 30 December 1899
Thanks, right clicking on Read Metadata seems to have worked.
I appreciate the speedy response.
I appreciate the speedy response.
- 02 Nov 14 14:04
- Forum: Photo Supreme
- Topic: Geotagging
- Replies: 2
- Views: 2204
Re: Geotagging
Thanks, this seems to have worked, except that I could only make it work by right clicking and selecting Save Metadata to File.
I am not sure why the problem arose, because I did not cancel the import process.
I will continue to review.
Thanks again for the speedy response.
I am not sure why the problem arose, because I did not cancel the import process.
I will continue to review.
Thanks again for the speedy response.
- 02 Nov 14 10:16
- Forum: Photo Supreme
- Topic: photographs dated as 30 December 1899
- Replies: 8
- Views: 6961
photographs dated as 30 December 1899
I am running a trial version on OSX Mavericks.
I have imported a test folder.
Dynamic Search by date shows a number of photographs dated as 30 December 1899. However, the Info button shows the correct date of the photographs, and other photos from the same shoot are shown with the correct date in ...
I have imported a test folder.
Dynamic Search by date shows a number of photographs dated as 30 December 1899. However, the Info button shows the correct date of the photographs, and other photos from the same shoot are shown with the correct date in ...
- 02 Nov 14 10:11
- Forum: Photo Supreme
- Topic: Geotagging
- Replies: 2
- Views: 2204
Geotagging
I am running a trial version on OSX Mavericks.
I have imported a recent folder for testing. All images have already been geotagged with Photomechanic.
In Dynamic Search some of the images show up as not geotagged; however, if I click the Geo Tag button at the bottom right of the window, map ...
I have imported a recent folder for testing. All images have already been geotagged with Photomechanic.
In Dynamic Search some of the images show up as not geotagged; however, if I click the Geo Tag button at the bottom right of the window, map ...