Capture One Pro 9 with Photo Supreme Workflow

[Stephen]

@NassauBoy
Welcome again to the community... I'm grateful as I don't know how many people are using PSu with C1 version 9. Ver. 8 still had problems in communicating with PSu.

No need for details here, but it's a configuration issue on my side which will entail the investment and can only be justified after the compatibility problems have been resolved. A migration would take 4-6 weeks and timing is still good for me before my next extended trip.

So, when you can, please take an image processed in C1 and "re-imported" into PSu ... change a small detail, maybe add a label, re-sync and see if all the camera exif data still exists. Going forward, this information will help you too, because you will frequently add a keyword, a label or whatever in PSu --- and need to re-sync. You can email a screenshot or an image to Hert for forwarding.

It can only be positive for PSu users to discover enhanced compatibility with C1 which I guess (even in vers. 9) is still lacking in cataloging functions.
C1 is a great editor and PSU is a great DAM! Everything has its strengths.

Compromises: You can get VERY fast DAMs / databases -- which the agencies use -- for 5 or 6 figure sums

BTW, I used Aperture before and 'logged-out' to C1 for processing. I migrated from Aperture ASAP after the news that it would not be developed further.

[NassauBoy]

@Stephen,

YEs Im a former Aperture user also. Exited quickly when I saw the writing on the wall and Aperture was sundowned. I knew Photos would not cut it and suspect never will. Also there is no need for Apple to make it a Pro type product as the Pro people have now moved on. I still love apple. I can understand its financial decision.

This last month I tested DX0 again. It has a couple things I like but in the end can do more with C1. The Catalog in C1 v9 is much much better, however its still no where near Aperture. I don't feel I can wait for it to get better either. I can also respect that an editor can be best of breed, and DAM best of breed and that trying to find a great editor and DAM in one package is going to involve sacrifices.

Im pulling the rest of my photos into PSu right now and feel for the money this the best option for me currently.

thanks very much for the input and perspective.

[Stephen]

@NassauBoy

I remember your mentioning Aperture. Aperture Exporter was a useful tool for me when moving images out.

A big advantage with PSu is that divorce is easy.

Pleased to have been of help and it's good to have another C1 user here.

Steps are now being taken to migrate to a new custom-built device. Would you be able to email Hert (for forwarding) any image which you have processed in C1 please? It would be great to do a double check on this end.

For example, there is lots of valuable meta data in images which C1 has been making unavailable. Need to search for photos taken in a hot environment? The ambient temperature tag will tell you!

*** Update: BTW, I have just heard that C1 vers. 9 might only run under El Capitan! Is that what you are running? ***

[NassauBoy]

@Stephen.

Yes Im running El Capitan.

[Stephen]

Yes Im running El Capitan.

Thanks. BTW, PhilBurton has posted a question to you in the "How many images are you cataloging?" thread. You might want to start a new thread to reply as I guess people only check that thread once, just to cast their vote

Incidentally, have you tried re-working any file to verify that your metadata remains intact?

[Larry56]

If I may jump in...

While C1 does have some nice advantages, two issues really bug me so I end up using LR or DXO. (C1 was given to me as a Christmas present.)

C1 ignores color labels as entered in PSu. In fact after conversion to jpg the come back with grey color because C1 marks as "No Label". I've has some dialog with C1 tech support and they say they don't fully support color labels and it doesn't sound like it's high on their priority.

My biggest issue right now is it doesn't play nice with PSu as far as lens information. After processing to a jpg the lens information is changed in PSu. In PSu the jpg doesn't show the camera, lens information, nor ISO, etc. and the lens information is just shown as the focal length of the lens. After converting to xmp only "-mm" is shown as lens and Mode is stripped out.

While most of this can be fixed in PSu it certainly makes for a more time consuming workflow.

[Stephen]

URGENT -

If I may jump in...

I am pleased that you did, because that has now changed my plan - until I hear back from you again. I was scheduling a time consuming test with my IT company which involves a complex set-up with an external drive running C1 however using my hardware (different OSs).

While C1 does have some nice advantages, two issues really bug me so I end up using LR or DXO. (C1 was given to me as a Christmas present.)

Firstly, are you using C1 version 9 under Mac? NassauBoy is and recently confirmed that this problem has been solved. However, the forum screen shots were not working at that time and I have not heard from him since. (Private messages would be useful).

My biggest issue right now is it doesn't play nice with PSu as far as lens information. After processing to a jpg the lens information is changed in PSu. In PSu the jpg doesn't show the camera, lens information, nor ISO, etc. and the lens information is just shown as the focal length of the lens. After converting to xmp only "-mm" is shown as lens and Mode is stripped out.

Exactly and this is my biggest issue too and C1 were never willing to see the light or change their practice of NOT writing to the "ExifVersion" field when a jpg is exported.

C1 ignores color labels as entered in PSu. In fact after conversion to jpg the come back with grey color because C1 marks as "No Label". I've has some dialog with C1 tech support and they say they don't fully support color labels and it doesn't sound like it's high on their priority.

My workaround sofar is to only open the likely candidates in C1. Then edit and color code what I want in C1. When the folder in PSu is verified, the new files can be 'imported' and then color coded again if it has disappeared. I could 'export' from C1 in batches if I have various colors, but I usually do the final color coding when back in PSu.

While most of this can be fixed in PSu it certainly makes for a more time consuming workflow.

I cannot agree more. Are you using C1 version 9 under Mac or Windows, because we think the problem has been solved with Mac? Your response will help with my further plans.

[Larry56]

I'm running C1 v9 on Windows 10.

As far as color labels, since I only process RAWs with once color my work around is easy. When I import back into PSu via Verify I can change the color label to the correct color at that time when shown in last import. Still, I don't think it C1's ignoring that bug is good. Neither LR nor DXO do that.

The more significant problem of messing up with EXIF/XMP (or whatever they're doing) information is my biggest gripe. I've worked extensively with Phase One tech support on this and the bottom line is they maintain they are following standards because the same information isn't supposed to be in more than one area (or something to that effect) and I should contact PSu developer to have him fix it. The never did give me a comment on my statement to them that neither LR nor Dxo processed jpg's mess up the lens information.

It would be nice it they did fix it in Mac so maybe Windows too in the near future even though they said they were following standards. Maybe they found out they weren't. Remembering to copy and paste lens information after importing to PSu can take some time.

I found out after my 2 attempts to get them to at least acknowledge the lens information bug that the processed jpgs also remove Mode. At least as far PSu displays it.

Since PSu is my baseline as a DAM whatever I use must play nice with it. LR and Dxo do.

[Stephen]

I'm running C1 v9 on Windows 10.

OK, that could be good news for Mac users, even if not yet for yourself.
So far I only have feedback from one user NassauBoy, but no file to confirm all data.

The more significant problem of messing up with EXIF/XMP (or whatever they're doing) information is my biggest gripe. I've worked extensively with Phase One tech support on this and the bottom line is they maintain they are following standards

I had the same conversation which lead nowhere.

Remembering to copy and paste lens information after importing to PSu can take some time.

Yes - and even finding the data to paste by navigating to the original files!!!

I found out after my 2 attempts to get them to at least acknowledge the lens information bug that the processed jpgs also remove Mode. At least as far PSu displays it.

Maybe other fields that you may need in the future too!
I have not found time to continue this test but you might like to try it with another Windows app. I opened a C1 processed file in iPhoto or Aperture and then re-imported it into PSu and it appeared to fix the error. Something similar might work for you. It is a pain that our best files don't display all the data we need!

Since PSu is my baseline as a DAM whatever I use must play nice with it. LR and Dxo do.

It should be that we can walk away from things we don't like.

[NassauBoy]

Hi Gents,

I was in, well ... Nassau for a bit shooting. Sorry but just back and able to catch up .. Trailing over the next couple weeks so won't have a ton of time, but will do my best when I can to test things out.

Right or wrong I was not using XMP files, I write changes to the RAW file. Its possible Im missing something big by not doing so and just unaware. At this time Im C1 9.1 (just upgraded) and running the latest PSu Server version.

Until recently I did not create any JPG in C1 that I then imported to PSu. So my testing was with the RAW files in PSu being round tripped.

Im still trying to get a good work flow going so sometimes I import FIRST to PSu and then other times I import First to C1. Importing first to C1 as a session is seeming to be my preferred route so far although both offer advantages.

I recently purchased the PSu so I guess Im going to be settling in and understanding it better.

[Stephen]

I'm running C1 v9 on Windows 10.
The more significant problem of messing up with EXIF/XMP (or whatever they're doing) information is my biggest gripe. I've worked extensively with Phase One tech support on this and the bottom line is they maintain they are following standards because the same information isn't supposed to be in more than one area (or something to that effect) and I should contact PSu developer to have him fix it. The never did give me a comment on my statement to them that neither LR nor Dxo processed jpg's mess up the lens information.

It would be nice it they did fix it in Mac so maybe Windows too in the near future even though they said they were following standards. Maybe they found out they weren't.

Since PSu is my baseline as a DAM whatever I use must play nice with it. LR and Dxo do.

Larry, I now have C1 v9 on the Mac and can confirm that nothing has been fixed. I will take a trip to Photokina to discuss this with them.

[fbungarz]

Hi all,
I just thought I'll draw to your attention that the following script from IDI's resource repository may be a solution for you all to help you recover the technical data being deleted by Phase One:
http://repository.idimager.com/openreso ... 0C56713A28
According to its instructions this script apparently cascades all metadata including technical metadata from the main to the subversions. Thus, if you add your PhaseOne derivatives in PSu as subversions of your main versions it is at least possible to recover the lost data cascading the data back from the main version using this script.

It is less than ideal of course and it seems pretty arrogant of Phase One to refuse to admit they are responsible for this severe bug of deleting Exif metadata. But given that they refuse to fix it, this is at least a workaround...
Glad I am not using Phase One

Cheers,
Frank

[Stephen]

... the following script from IDI's resource repository may be a solution for you all to help you recover the technical data being deleted by Phase One:
http://repository.idimager.com/openreso ... 0C56713A28
According to its instructions this script apparently cascades all metadata including technical metadata from the main to the subversions. Thus, if you add your PhaseOne derivatives in PSu as subversions of your main versions it is at least possible to recover the lost data cascading the data back from the main version using this script.

Thanks, Frank. I saw that but have not tried it. Just 3 points though:
1. One would need to stack the files, which I do not by choice
2. In order to stack (I believe that) they need to be located in the same folder, which they are not in my case
3. In a test a long time ago, without (knowing about) this script, I tested stacking and cascading from the RAW to the other files. Some data cascaded but not all. Either the Lens Information was seen and nothing else, or by stacking and cascading, everything else, except the Lens Information.

Far from ideal...

[fbungarz]

1. One would need to stack the files, which I do not by choice

Just curious: what are your reasons against using version stets?

2. In order to stack (I believe that) they need to be located in the same folder, which they are not in my case

Not true, you can manually version any files any way you like. Keeping files in one folder is necessary only if you want to use automatic version detection. And: Prior to PSu versions would easily be detracted by IDI even if they were located in different folders. Admittedly, the way versioning is currently implemented is not very elegant and automatic versioning does unfortunately not work very well. One of the very few gripes I still have with PSu after having migrated from IDI. Almost everything but versioning works much, much better in PSu.

3. In a test a long time ago, without (knowing about) this script, I tested stacking and cascading from the RAW to the other files. Some data cascaded but not all. Either the Lens Information was seen and nothing else, or by stacking and cascading, everything else, except the Lens Information.

This is correct. normal cascading does not touch technical metadata (which I believe is by design, a safeguard if you will: remember that you can version any images that you like and technical metadata of different files may be quite different, so cascading the data across different versions is definitely in that case not desirable).
However, the script specifically says that it does cascade ALL metadata...

BTW - I believe the correct term to be used would be "versioning", not "stacking" though that distinction has essentially become meaningless in PSu now. IDI v5 supported both: versioning AND stacking. The difference - versioning would refer to a set of related derivatives from a main version. Say, you have a NEF and various JPGs, one for the web, one for printing, etc. Stacking would refer to different images, for example a stack of images that can be joined into one big panoramic scene. I guess that stacking was never much used and thus abandoned when Hert released PSu. Personally, I still use versioning a lot and I do believe it has much potential. I typically keep quite a few different files that are all derivatives from one and the same one. Stacking I have never used much, though in micro-photography focus-stacking is actually quite popular and I have recently been thinking about how to perhaps stacks could again be implemented using labels or portfolios...

[sanphotgn]

the following script from IDI's resource repository may be a solution for you all to help you recover the technical data being deleted by Phase One:
http://repository.idimager.com/openreso ... 0C56713A28

I took an NEF (Nikon RAW) (with a XMP sidecar file) and JPG (from a Canon point and shoot), used Version Selected Files (the NEF is the main version), and applied the script.

The Canon .jpg now contains the technical Nikon data.

The only differences in the Technical section in PSU between the two:

Color Space: Uncalibrated (NEF) vs AdobeRGB (JPG)
The Nikon Maker Notes for the NEF, per ExifToolGUI, displays AdobeRGB (which is correct). Clearly PSU is picking it up somewhere in the metadata to paste into the JPG, even though it is showing Uncalibrated in Technical.

Flash Function Present: No (NEF) vs Yes (JPG)
To be honest, I have no clue what this field really represents. I don't see the field in the NEF using ExifToolGUI (is it called something else?). I see the field in the XMP (I think): <exif:Flash><exif:Function>False</exif:Function>. In the JPG, per ExifToolGUI, under the XMP section, FlashFunction is True. Again, not really sure about this field and what may be driving its values.