Write Portfolio info to images

[stevehughes]

Hi,

I have a large set of historical family images which are arranged using Portfolio Collections. I want to ensure that this information is saved in the image files in case I one day need to rebuild my catalog database. I can't make PSU work the way I expect it should and I'm wondering if someone can help me out.

I have set PSU to read and write ICS and to write to all images (rather than just out-of-sync images). I then selected all images and chose "Write MetaData to File" I expected that this would write the portfolio info out to the files, but it seems it doesn't because an import into an empty database doesn't place them into the collections.

Should this work ? Am I doing something wrong ?

Thanks,
Steve

[Hert]

Steve, did you configure the new and empty database to read ICS? Preferences are per database.

[stevehughes]

I did check that before doing the import Hert. In fact it appears that a new database has those options enabled by default.

[Hert]

The default for ICS is OFF, both for reading and writing.

You could verify if the ICS is written with a tool like ExifTool

[Larry56]

Sorry for the question, but what is ICS?

[vlad]

I think it stands for IDimager Custom Schema (or something like that) and it contains proprietary metadata, which basically stores Photo Supreme catalog data (such as labels, versions, portfolios) pertaining to the image. If you enable the writing of ICS in the preferences (which is recommended if you worry about ever losing your catalog+backup data), you could browse the ICS content in Details panel -> XMP Advanced.

[george]

Sorry for the question, but what is ICS?

ICS stands for IDimager Core Schema and represents your metadata as written to your images by PSU. It contains image-specific information about your catalog and can be used to reconstruct the catalog if it ever becomes corrupt. As such, it can be considered another backup of your catalog information. For example, if all your catalog backups are corrupt for some reason, the catalog information can be reconstructed from the images themselves if you choose to write ICS data to your images.

[Larry56]

Thank you george. I can see a great value in that if I do a lot of portfolios I will start doing that. I pretty much use catalog labels only at this time with only a couple portfolios.

[Mike Buckley]

Larry,

Writing to the ICS schema is more than about ensuring Portfolios are restored. Anything in your catalog that is proprietary to IDimager will be restored including private catalog labels, relationship catalog labels, versioning, bookmarks and anything I didn't immediately think of that is not an XMP protocol. Personally, I can't think of any reason not to write to the ICS schema.

I'm very surprised (actually, shocked!) to see Hert's post explaining that enabling that setting is no longer a default setting. I actually wonder if he is correct about that. Indeed, the hover tip states "We strongly recommend to leave this option enabled." The fact that it says to "leave" it enabled implies that the enabled setting is the default setting. Moreover, it makes absolutely no sense to me that IDimager would recommend so strongly to enable the setting while at the same time making the disabled setting the default setting.

[tstoddard]

Anything in your catalog that is proprietary to IDimager will be restored including private catalog labels

Mike,
I seem to recall a conversation a long time ago about whether or not private labels should be written to ICS and it seems to me that the decision was made NOT to write them to ICS. I'll have to see if I can find that thread.

[Mike Buckley]

I seem to recall a conversation a long time ago about whether or not private labels should be written to ICS

If it was a long time ago, looking up the information doesn't confirm anything about now. We would need confirmation from Hert about how the program is intended to operate today.

[tstoddard]

Actually, it was a little over a year ago and I just found the thread and scanned it. It discusses a lot of other topics as well so the private label issue wasn't the main issue in the thread and I'm not sure if the question was ever answered precisely. You can have a look at it if you want but you are correct that it may well have changed since then. If I get a chance, I'll test it. Here's the previous thread: http://forum.idimager.com/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=22886

[Mike Buckley]

I'm not sure if the question was ever answered precisely.

Now that you have reminded me of that thread, I remember that it made my head spin. I was not using Supreme at the time. Now that I am, I see that the hover tip pertaining to the configuration of a private label (option #3) explains that no information about the label will ever be written to the image file's metadata. That being the case, reconstructing a catalog by reading the ICS will not reconstruct the catalog labels that are configured to be private. However, there is also option #2 to create a label that is not written as a keyword to the file (presumably meaning that it is not written to xmp:dc:subject) but is written to the ICS. That type of label, which in Photo Supreme-speak is not considered a private label, will be included in the catalog that is constructed by reading ICS.

[Hert]

I'm very surprised (actually, shocked!) to see Hert's post explaining that enabling that setting is no longer a default setting. I actually wonder if he is correct about that. Indeed, the hover tip states "We strongly recommend to leave this option enabled." The fact that it says to "leave" it enabled implies that the enabled setting is the default setting.

I am correct about that. The default ICS settings are OFF for reading as well as writing, I've rephrased the wording for the Tip

[Mike Buckley]

Hert,

What are the reasons not to write to the ICS?