Custom XMP in Info vs Details Panel?

Post Reply
Mike Buckley
Posts: 4561
Joined: 10 Jul 08 14:18

Re: Custom XMP in Info vs Details Panel?

Post by Mike Buckley » 04 Jun 15 21:12

weidmic wrote:this threat...
It's clear that Frank felt threatened by the possibility that he wouldn't be able to get everything to work. :mrgreen:

fbungarz
Posts: 3250
Joined: 08 Dec 06 5:03
Location: Galapagos, Ecuador

Re: Custom XMP in Info vs Details Panel?

Post by fbungarz » 04 Jun 15 22:04

Thanks for the compliments...
:twisted:

fbungarz
Posts: 3250
Joined: 08 Dec 06 5:03
Location: Galapagos, Ecuador

Re: Custom XMP in Info vs Details Panel?

Post by fbungarz » 04 Jun 15 22:18

But more seriously: I do still hope that both bugs get fixed :shock:. Vlads script is very useful for migrating from IDI and making sure my custom placeholders will make it across. Still this is not ONLY about ICS tags not being read/written correctly (http://bugs.idimager.com/view.php?id=2870). The custom placeholder are generally not correctly recognized/assigned via CTRL+SHIFT+V (http://bugs.idimager.com/view.php?id=2864).
This means, even if I now manage to get everything across (thanks to Hert's catalog-mapped-label migration script and thanks to Vlad's ICS placeholder re-assigning script) - it still means using version detection still remains dysfunctional and I cannot rely on using it in the future.
Oh dear, I am still feeling threatened by the possibility that I won't be able to get everything to work :mrgreen:
Cheers,
Frank

Mike Buckley
Posts: 4561
Joined: 10 Jul 08 14:18

Re: Custom XMP in Info vs Details Panel?

Post by Mike Buckley » 04 Jun 15 22:22

fbungarz wrote:Oh dear, I am still feeling threatened by the possibility that I won't be able to get everything to work :mrgreen:
Told ya so! :mrgreen:

Hert
Posts: 21192
Joined: 13 Sep 03 7:24

Re: Custom XMP in Info vs Details Panel?

Post by Hert » 05 Jun 15 0:19

vlad wrote:
P.S. @Hert: is there any way to programatically define placeholders? (I'm talking about placeholder creation, not assignment.)
Create a TCatalogPlaceHolder and store it with Catalog.UpdatePlaceholder
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

vlad
Posts: 969
Joined: 01 Sep 08 15:20

Re: Custom XMP in Info vs Details Panel?

Post by vlad » 05 Jun 15 6:56

@Hert:
Thanks for the info.

@Frank:
Once you complete the migration and the dust settles a bit, maybe you could give some more thought to Tom's suggestion. It would be good for all of us to understand if using placeholders simply to distinguish versions of different file types is really needed. (Fwiw, I defined a single placeholder for all my RAW files - NEF and RW2 - although I haven't really used it so far. In my mind - or in my case, at least - placeholders have an informative rather than a functional role.)

vlad
Posts: 969
Joined: 01 Sep 08 15:20

Re: Custom XMP in Info vs Details Panel?

Post by vlad » 05 Jun 15 7:22

Btw, here's another side note about version placeholders: I have realized that one issue I had previously raised (what happens if multiple placeholder filemasks overlap and match the same filename) is not really a concern, since the same version could be assigned multiple placeholders. I applaud this design choice, although I don't personally have a use for it.

fbungarz
Posts: 3250
Joined: 08 Dec 06 5:03
Location: Galapagos, Ecuador

Re: Custom XMP in Info vs Details Panel?

Post by fbungarz » 05 Jun 15 10:04

Dear Vlad,
Once you complete the migration and the dust settles a bit, maybe you could give some more thought to Tom's suggestion. It would be good for all of us to understand if using placeholders simply to distinguish versions of different file types is really needed.
You are right. Apart from being annoyed about these bugs, there is actually a positive aspect about all this. It forces me to re-assess my workflow and think about how to perhaps change and possibly improve it.
I think I have outlined the following benefits from being able to use versions instead of just developing files "on-the-go" pretty well in my response to Tom - the proprietary raw converters can lock you in and the ability to keep the various legacy versions together.
Still, you are correct to ask, if one needs placeholders for that. You might think it might suffice to simply keep the bunch of files together and else not mind much about it.

For me placeholders are about functionality. For example, in IDI5 I have used the print placeholder extensively to generate custom prints of images that I had edited to fit into a page with their metadata captions. That way it was easy to very quickly update a colorful identification guidebook of Galapagos lichens (if you are interested, you can download this guide here: http://checklists.datazone.darwinfounda ... ion3_1.pdf)
[A side note: I thought it was easily possible to migrate this important functionality from IDI to PSU, because Hert has suggested that print templates in both programs are compatible with one another, but unfortunately this is not the case: http://bugs.idimager.com/view.php?id=2876, see screenshot]
IDI_Print-templates.jpg
IDI_Print-templates.jpg (466.26 KiB) Viewed 3115 times
All I needed to do to update the pages with the pictures for this guide was to select the edited print versions and then choose the appropriate printing template and print the file into a PDF. Perfect.
I admittedly used the other placeholders less, the email version, the web version - I now think those are perhaps better be generated on the fly with a raw converter. But the idea behind it is of course the same: you assign placeholders to the files according to how you might want to use these files. And you then can access these files very quickly, once the need arises to have some files ready for that particular use.

Now, in this context you point out a very more interesting advantage of PSU's approach to versioning: In IDI5 you could assign one version to multiple placeholders, but it was not possible to assign several placeholders to the same file. So, in my case, if I had two versions that were good to be printed (sufficiently more resolution than a web or email version), I could not both assign them to the print placeholder. Or, if your case you may argue that all kinds of raw files simply could be assigned to the same placeholder because those are generally the files that need adjustment in some external raw converter.
In IDI5 I would have to add an additional placeholder, which I called "edited" if I wanted to keep two separate files as print versions.

This is potentially quite an advantage. Under one placeholder (= function, purpose for which you use the file) it is now possible to store several different files. In my case I could have all the print versions together in one place, quickly compare them side by side and then select exactly the ones I want to use for the guidebook update (for example by bookmarking them and choose only the bookmarked images to be printed on the custom contact sheet. In your case you could quickly access all raw files and, if you are using several different raw converters, quickly decide, which raw version to use (for example DNGs for Lightroom, and NEFs for Capture One, since that program does not work well on DNGs).
Then, if you have assigned email versions, sending files by email from within PSU obviously could automatically be sending these versions, if you have versions designated as web versions these would automatically be uploaded to sites like Flickr, Zenfolio, etc.
etc. etc.

So, apart from just having versions, the ability to have placeholders at hand to distinguish which version is suited for a particular purpose is, in my opinion, very useful. But of course it all goes back to a destructive workflow, the need for keeping derivatives of your original files together with your originals. And with the concept of non-destructive editing, I can see why the idea of having versions and placeholders to identify the purpose of these versions to most users seems much less necessary today.

Tom of course has a point: one can much achieve the same with consistent file naming rules, always appending a string like "print", "web", "email" etc. to the file name. Before I used IDImager, I used to manage my images with a program called ThumbsPlus (might even still be around ;-) - and I used such file nameing rules to distinguish the derivatives from their main version. It was a complete pain, though and one of tghe main reason I migrated my ThumbsPlus database into IDimager. Now it is migrating time again and I am very glad PSU's concept of using versions with placeholders was inherited from IDI and has potentially even become more powerful (several images can be assigned to one placeholder now!).

But enough about philosophy of the digital workflow now...
:wink:

Cheers,
Frank

fbungarz
Posts: 3250
Joined: 08 Dec 06 5:03
Location: Galapagos, Ecuador

Re: Custom XMP in Info vs Details Panel?

Post by fbungarz » 10 Jun 15 19:06

Hi Vlad,
it just occurred to me: considering that you spent quite some time writing the script (Assign Placeholders By Extension.psc) perhaps it would make sense uploading it to the resource repository (http://scripts.idimager.com/cgi-bin/idi ... to+Supreme). Not sure if anyone else would be using it :wink:
Cheers,
Frank

Post Reply