Different labels to paired photos?

Post Reply
HvTFoto
Posts: 20
Joined: 01 Apr 12 12:23

Different labels to paired photos?

Post by HvTFoto » 07 Apr 12 12:24

I've spent the better part of the last two days trying to figure out if it is possible to have partly different labels assigned to paired photos, but have had no luck. The lack of a manual is annoying for someone without any previous experience with DAM software. I've paired photos with different quality (raw, tiff and jpg) and would like to assign "Quality raw", "Quality tiff" and "Quality jpg" respectively. Can't seem to do that as long as they are paired, if I break the link I can assign different labels but when I re-link it merges the labels together.

Anyone knows if what I'm trying to achieve is possible, and if so, how to go about to active this.

Regards

Hans

weidmic
moderator
Posts: 834
Joined: 04 Dec 06 22:21

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by weidmic » 07 Apr 12 12:32

Hello Hans,

Unfortunately this is not possible.
It has been discussed a few times, but never made it on the to-do list of the developer.

This is something I would also like to see, cause it would make some stuff so much easier...

Cheers,
Michael
PSUServer 5.x, PostgreSQL 10.x
My homepage http://www.michaelweidner.com
PSU Tips and Tricks http://www.michaelweidner.com/WP/psu/

HvTFoto
Posts: 20
Joined: 01 Apr 12 12:23

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by HvTFoto » 07 Apr 12 13:12

Thanks for the quick reply! Hopefully the developers will give in and implement such a feature.

Regards

Hans

Hert
Posts: 5874
Joined: 13 Sep 03 7:24

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by Hert » 07 Apr 12 13:35

weidmic wrote:It has been discussed a few times, but never made it on the to-do list of the developer.
And it never will...that is because versioning is intended to collect images together that reflect the same image, meaning they are different versions of the same entity, reflecting the same content; for instance a RAW image and a JPG derived from the RAW image.

If you need different labels for each image in the version set then they are not versions, but probably images that "logically belong together". And then you shouldn't define them in a version set.

Btw; the topic starter uses the term "paired photos", but Supreme doesn't support anything named "paired photos". Versioning is not photo pairing! Stacking is what Hans's looking for, and that didn't make it into Supreme yet.

Hert
This is a User-to-User forum which means that users post questions here for other users.
Feature requests, change suggestions, or bugs can be logged in the ticketing system

weidmic
moderator
Posts: 834
Joined: 04 Dec 06 22:21

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by weidmic » 07 Apr 12 14:20

Hert,
And it never will...that is because versioning is intended to collect images together that reflect the same image, meaning they are different versions of the same entity, reflecting the same content; for instance a RAW image and a JPG derived from the RAW image.

If you need different labels for each image in the version set then they are not versions, but probably images that "logically belong together". And then you shouldn't define them in a version set.
That is how you look at it and only half of the truth... :wink:

Cheers
Michael
PSUServer 5.x, PostgreSQL 10.x
My homepage http://www.michaelweidner.com
PSU Tips and Tricks http://www.michaelweidner.com/WP/psu/

Lars
Posts: 65
Joined: 13 Nov 09 6:44
Location: EU

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by Lars » 07 Apr 12 15:31

HvTFoto wrote:I've spent the better part of the last two days trying to figure out if it is possible to have partly different labels assigned to paired photos, but have had no luck. The lack of a manual is annoying for someone without any previous experience with DAM software. I've paired photos with different quality (raw, tiff and jpg) and would like to assign "Quality raw", "Quality tiff" and "Quality jpg" respectively. Can't seem to do that as long as they are paired, if I break the link I can assign different labels but when I re-link it merges the labels together.

Anyone knows if what I'm trying to achieve is possible, and if so, how to go about to active this.

Regards

Hans
Hi Hans

I would create version placeholders with the names you refer to "Quality raw", "Quality tiff" and "Quality jpg".
You can do that in Preferences > Catalog > Version Place holders.

You always need a main version so perhaps you should skip one of them and make it the main version (e.g. use the "Quality jpg" as "main version" )
W7/64bit, IDimager V5 ProSL

Hert
Posts: 5874
Joined: 13 Sep 03 7:24

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by Hert » 07 Apr 12 21:19

weidmic wrote:That is how you look at it and only half of the truth... :wink:
Not sure if I follow you here. What is half the truth? Am I missing a part?

Hert
This is a User-to-User forum which means that users post questions here for other users.
Feature requests, change suggestions, or bugs can be logged in the ticketing system

Mike Buckley
Posts: 1194
Joined: 10 Jul 08 14:18

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by Mike Buckley » 07 Apr 12 22:37

Hert/IDimager wrote: If you need different labels for each image in the version set then they are not versions, but probably images that "logically belong together". And then you shouldn't define them in a version set.
I believe that depends on how one views the definition, meaning and helpfulness of a version set.

If one of my versions is black-and-white and all of the others are color, I might want to apply a catalog label, "B&W," only to the pertinent image. I also might want to include all color and black-and-white versions of the image in one version set.

Hert
Posts: 5874
Joined: 13 Sep 03 7:24

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by Hert » 07 Apr 12 22:53

Mike,

If that is how you organize your versions then I would say that you'd create a B/W version place holder.

The architecture of version sets is that they *always* share catalog labels. When one's version sets don't match this definition then a different approach should be considered.

Hert
This is a User-to-User forum which means that users post questions here for other users.
Feature requests, change suggestions, or bugs can be logged in the ticketing system

george
Posts: 213
Joined: 24 Jun 07 15:57
Location: USA

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by george » 08 Apr 12 2:11

Hert/IDimager wrote:Mike,

If that is how you organize your versions then I would say that you'd create a B/W version place holder.

The architecture of version sets is that they *always* share catalog labels. When one's version sets don't match this definition then a different approach should be considered.

Hert
I think Hert's spot on. Labels and versions are two different dimensions for describing images. Labels describe the physical scene or subject of an image, rather than the way the image was processed. Thus, for example, we have labels for people or objects in the actual, physical world. Versions, on the other hand, described how an image is acquired or what is done to the image rather than its subject/content. The example of black and white is a good one. If a photographer makes a regular habit of generating black and white images, then the solution is to create a black & white version place holder as Hert indicated. Thus one could have jpg, tif, png versions, as well as versions of a certain size or intended use (think email, high resolution for printing, etc). This does not change the physical scene or subject of an image. Of course, the concept of labels being constant for all images in a version set can get complicated if, for example, an individual is cropped out of one version but remains in another.
George

Mike Buckley
Posts: 1194
Joined: 10 Jul 08 14:18

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by Mike Buckley » 08 Apr 12 2:15

Hert/IDimager wrote: The architecture of version sets is that they *always* share catalog labels. When one's version sets don't match this definition then a different approach should be considered.
Hert
I understand, Hert. Indeed, I do use a different approach as a workaround. However, it would be ideal in my mind if the software was adaptable to the approach that each of us considers ideal rather than we having to adapt to the architecture.

Mike Buckley
Posts: 1194
Joined: 10 Jul 08 14:18

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by Mike Buckley » 08 Apr 12 2:54

George,

At the risk of belaboring the subject...
george wrote:Labels describe the physical scene or subject of an image, rather than the way the image was processed.
IDimager not only supports the David Reicks Controlled Vocabulary, but provides a free excerpt of it with every shipment. Your thinking that the labels describe only the physical scene or subject is just plain inaccurate when using the Controlled Vocabulary; the Vocabulary includes over 50 labels dispersed among various levels of the hierarchy that have absolutely nothing to do with the physical scene or the subject. You're probably aware that David is widely recognized as a preeminent member of the industry when it comes to issues pertaining to photography metadata.
If a photographer makes a regular habit of generating black and white images, then the solution is to create a black & white version place holder as Hert indicated.
I wasn't going to mention it, but considering that you are repeating Hert's suggestion, I'm compelled now to openly disagree with both of you. Creating a black-and-white placeholder is not a solution. If I am looking for black-and-white images, I have to apply a catalog label to them. One workaround (not a solution) is to include the black-and-white image in the version set along with the color images. That makes no sense to me because the "B&W" label is assigned to images that are color. Worse yet, when synchronizing, the color image has embedded metadata describing it as black-and-white. Another workaround is to assign the catalog label to the black-and-white image and *exclude* the image from the version set that includes corresponding color images. That's the workaround that I use.

george
Posts: 213
Joined: 24 Jun 07 15:57
Location: USA

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by george » 09 Apr 12 23:52

Hi Mike,

I wasn't trying to be dogmatic, just stating how I think about labels/keywords. I have no doubt Riecks & Hert both know more about image metadata than I ever will. I do read authorities, but then I make up my own mind how best to categorize images in a way that makes the most sense to me.

After thinking about it for a while, I agree wtih Hert's implementation of labels and versions. In my opinion, labels/keywords and versions are different dimensions of categorization and it's easier for me to keep them straight. So for me, it makes sense to think of labels/keywords and metadata in general as properties of the physical scene depicted in an image. These include people, objects, location in the universe, time the scene was recorded, etc. For me, black & white, color, file format, printing, emailing, 800x600, etc. are not properties of the physical scene but rather properties of the image file. As such, it makes sense for to think of them as versions of same entity and assign them a version placeholder. If it makes sense to you to attach a label "black & white" to your various images to make it easier to retrieve them, then go right ahead.
George

Mike Buckley
Posts: 1194
Joined: 10 Jul 08 14:18

Re: Different labels to paired photos?

Post by Mike Buckley » 10 Apr 12 1:48

In my mind, George, you weren't being at all dogmatic...and I don't remember ever thinking that about your posts.

To emphasize my take on the discussion, even when resorting to workarounds as opposed to solutions, they aren't so difficult or time-consuming that they are fundamentally problematic, at least not for me. Just the opposite, I'm grateful that IDimager makes it possible to implement such reasonable workarounds.

Post Reply