Before discussing the nuts and bolts of using Lightroom 2 to catalog our photo library, I do want to mention one cautionary note about "collections."
While the ability to create collections or smart collections or "nested groupings" (a concept developed by Peter Krough in his superb DAM Book) is one of the most valuable features of Lightroom, sadly they cannot be shared between and among multiple users, not yet at any rate.
The important thing is that, as I understand it, catalogs can be shared among different users, and that's something we'll look into more closely in future postings.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Thursday, April 21, 2011
A very brief review of cataloging software
No matter how well Bridge works right now, at some point it will no longer do what we want and expect it to do -- of course, it shouldn't be doing it now but it does. And for that we should be thankful.
For those of us in search of the holy grail of photo archiving, finding a resource that compares the wide variety of tools is scarce indeed. Fortunately, there is an excellent, albeit dated source on the Impulse Adventure website. There you can find a very helpful table comparing the various large- and small-scale programs. (You can also cut and paste this URL: http://www.impulseadventure.com/photo/flow-catalog-compare.html.)
For enterprise level collections (50k images on up) you would probably do well to consider cross-platform systems with robust cataloging features:
Of course, licensing for large numbers of users will drive the costs up no matter which catalog program you settle on.
Anyway, last year I tested Expression Media 2 and Portfolio 8.5 (single user) products. My primary criterion was discovering how many image files could one catalog handle before it slowed to a crawl or simply stopped working altogether. Our unique situation requires that users in our creative group be able to search as many images as quickly as possible. It's pointless to create 10, or 30 or 50 or more catalogs since searching requires searching across ALL images, and not just selected catalogs. And searching across catalogs is not possible.
That's the challenge.
I spent some time with Expression Media 2 (before it was sold to Phase One) and found its features robust and catalogs responsive. I liked it's easy to learn and easy to use interface. Cataloging was not a problem and searching within catalogs seemed to work fine. Please note I only catalogued a fraction of our image library, however. The process at the time was simply too tedious and time-consuming.
Portfolio 8.5 also has a nice interface but I found the cataloging of our large library incredibly slow and the catalogs it did produce were often unresponsive in searching. In earlier tests with Portfolio I was disappointed in the program's handling of xmp metadata, particularly keywords created in Adobe programs.
I have to admit that my tests were by no means systematic and I never did catalog the entire library so your experience may be different.
I am presently finishing cataloging our entire library using Adobe Lightroom 2 and my next series of posts will focus on the ongoing lessons from that experience.
If you have any questions or comments, don't hesitate to contact me: steve at steve soper dot com.
Have a great spring.
But someday the image library will have to migrate to a program specifically designed to manage a large collection of photos, probably a catalog-based, database software program that focuses on organizing and cataloging images and digital assets.
Adobe Lightroom, Apple's Aperture (Mac only), Expressions Media (Phase One) and Extensis Portfolio are four of the more well-known programs that also allow non-destructive image editing and offline workflow as well.
Adobe Lightroom, Apple's Aperture (Mac only), Expressions Media (Phase One) and Extensis Portfolio are four of the more well-known programs that also allow non-destructive image editing and offline workflow as well.
I should mention that hybrid programs such as Apple's iPhoto and Photoshop Elements both have cataloging and image adjustment features. However, iPhoto is Mac only and neither were really designed to handle the demands of large image libraries. iPhoto also lacks the more (much more) robust tagging, search and editing features required for anything other than the most basic of image collections.
For enterprise level collections (50k images on up) you would probably do well to consider cross-platform systems with robust cataloging features:
- ACDSee Pro 4 (WIndows only) - $240
- ACDSee Pro (Mac) - $170
- Expression Media 2 - $200
- FotoStation Pro - €489/$700
- Lightroom (Adobe) - $300
- Photo Mechanic - $150
- Portfolio 8.5 (Extensis) - $200
Of course, licensing for large numbers of users will drive the costs up no matter which catalog program you settle on.
Anyway, last year I tested Expression Media 2 and Portfolio 8.5 (single user) products. My primary criterion was discovering how many image files could one catalog handle before it slowed to a crawl or simply stopped working altogether. Our unique situation requires that users in our creative group be able to search as many images as quickly as possible. It's pointless to create 10, or 30 or 50 or more catalogs since searching requires searching across ALL images, and not just selected catalogs. And searching across catalogs is not possible.
That's the challenge.
I spent some time with Expression Media 2 (before it was sold to Phase One) and found its features robust and catalogs responsive. I liked it's easy to learn and easy to use interface. Cataloging was not a problem and searching within catalogs seemed to work fine. Please note I only catalogued a fraction of our image library, however. The process at the time was simply too tedious and time-consuming.
Portfolio 8.5 also has a nice interface but I found the cataloging of our large library incredibly slow and the catalogs it did produce were often unresponsive in searching. In earlier tests with Portfolio I was disappointed in the program's handling of xmp metadata, particularly keywords created in Adobe programs.
I have to admit that my tests were by no means systematic and I never did catalog the entire library so your experience may be different.
I am presently finishing cataloging our entire library using Adobe Lightroom 2 and my next series of posts will focus on the ongoing lessons from that experience.
If you have any questions or comments, don't hesitate to contact me: steve at steve soper dot com.
Have a great spring.
Friday, April 8, 2011
Smart Collections won't help reindexing
If you have a large photo library and are sharing it from a central server/hard drive among other creative team members (and why else would you be here, right?) then you already know what a hassle it is to continually and constantly have to reindex your images.
In our case we have a fairly simple folder hierarchy of (right now) 61 folders of images, each containing between 1-3k image files. But new metadata is added frequently to images and so not a week goes by when at least several folders have to be reindexed in order for each machine to be able to effectively and accurately search the entire library. But reindexing is time-consuming and is affected by the variety of workflows within the department. So, naturally this results is a fairly long process for some team members.
As a consequence, I'm always on the lookout for some workaround that might expedite the reindexing process and thought I had struck pay dirt with Smart Collections (SC).
Here's what happened:
Last week, for no particular reason, the question popped into my head that since SCs seemed smart enough to update itself automatically when an image with specific search criteria was added to the library, did it do this on its own without any further attention from my part? The short answer, for you spoiler fans, is no.
Anyway, my first thought (prayer really) when working with a SC the other day was, "Hey, maybe I can use this as a workaround for continually reindexing!" I ran a quick test by creating a new smart collection, then added an image to the library with the same search criteria and went back to the SC to see if it updated automatically.
No such luck.
I had to go in and reindex the folder where the test image resided and then sure it popped up just fine in the SC.
Two other rather unpleasant side notes: (1) They don't like lots of photos -- my SCs take several minutes to load each and every time I launch it. And (2) when going from one to another (with large number of files in each) and back again the SC selected always takes a long time to load, leading me to believe that the SCs are not indexed of course and wondering how/where Bridge stores these beasts.
Ciao for now
In our case we have a fairly simple folder hierarchy of (right now) 61 folders of images, each containing between 1-3k image files. But new metadata is added frequently to images and so not a week goes by when at least several folders have to be reindexed in order for each machine to be able to effectively and accurately search the entire library. But reindexing is time-consuming and is affected by the variety of workflows within the department. So, naturally this results is a fairly long process for some team members.
As a consequence, I'm always on the lookout for some workaround that might expedite the reindexing process and thought I had struck pay dirt with Smart Collections (SC).
Here's what happened:
Last week, for no particular reason, the question popped into my head that since SCs seemed smart enough to update itself automatically when an image with specific search criteria was added to the library, did it do this on its own without any further attention from my part? The short answer, for you spoiler fans, is no.
Anyway, my first thought (prayer really) when working with a SC the other day was, "Hey, maybe I can use this as a workaround for continually reindexing!" I ran a quick test by creating a new smart collection, then added an image to the library with the same search criteria and went back to the SC to see if it updated automatically.
No such luck.
I had to go in and reindex the folder where the test image resided and then sure it popped up just fine in the SC.
Two other rather unpleasant side notes: (1) They don't like lots of photos -- my SCs take several minutes to load each and every time I launch it. And (2) when going from one to another (with large number of files in each) and back again the SC selected always takes a long time to load, leading me to believe that the SCs are not indexed of course and wondering how/where Bridge stores these beasts.
Ciao for now
Monday, April 4, 2011
Using Collections to Manage Search Results in Bridge CS4
Using Bridge CS4 as the linchpin in our image library development has certainly made it much easier to both find and track specific images among more than 140,000 photos. But with our robust search and keywording strategy, searching can often produce many dozens or even hundreds (even thousands) of images.
The easiest way to manage such large searches -- particularly when you find yourself performing the same search again and again, is to create a collection out of the search results. And to make things easier, you can create a "smart" collection that will automatically update your collection when new images with specific metadata are added to the library.
To create a collection after you perform your search, select all the images you wish to use in the new collection.
Go to the collections panel and click either the "New Collection" or "New Smart Collection" icon at the bottom of the panel, give it a name and voila! That's it!
If you created a smart collection, each time an image or images are added to the library with the search criteria you used that image or those images will automatically be added to your collection.
Please note two important things:
- collections cannot be shared
- you must be connected to the image source to view the images in your collection (you cannot work offline)
Take care and good luck!
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Image cataloging software: the browser approach
There are few low-cost database digital asset management systems available today, and with the growing trend toward cloud computing and storage that number is likely to decrease in the years to come. Extensis Portfolio 8.5 (standalone), Adobe Lightroom 3, Apple Aperture 3 and Phase One EM2 are the only serious reasonably-priced DAM options available. But even those programs can become costly when you starting adding up the licensing fees for multiple users.
If you need to organize your organizations image collection and can't afford an enterprise-level digital asset management system or a catalog-based (i.e., database) program your best bet is a browser-driven program.
Perhaps the best known browser program is Adobe Bridge CS4 that ships with nearly all Adobe image editing and suite programs. Easy to set up and easy to use, Bridge is in some ways a more sophisticated "Finder" (for the Mac).
A stand-alone program, Bridge also possesses a very robust set of organizational tools. In fact, my browser of choice for the Johnson & Wales University image library is Bridge CS4. But Bridge is not, as we discussed in a previous entry, a cataloging program, and as a result has several important drawbacks, particularly non-accessibility offline and the need to continually update the local cache.
Bridge is ideal primarily for its ease of use, ubiquitous nature and of course cost (free). But it is, really, only a stopgap method for any large image collection. If you're using Bridge (like we are) you must start planning for the next phase in managing your image library. Given the nature of software Bridge will eventually reach its breaking point -- you need to be prepared for that eventuality.
Next: catalog or database software for image archiving.
If you need to organize your organizations image collection and can't afford an enterprise-level digital asset management system or a catalog-based (i.e., database) program your best bet is a browser-driven program.
Perhaps the best known browser program is Adobe Bridge CS4 that ships with nearly all Adobe image editing and suite programs. Easy to set up and easy to use, Bridge is in some ways a more sophisticated "Finder" (for the Mac).
A stand-alone program, Bridge also possesses a very robust set of organizational tools. In fact, my browser of choice for the Johnson & Wales University image library is Bridge CS4. But Bridge is not, as we discussed in a previous entry, a cataloging program, and as a result has several important drawbacks, particularly non-accessibility offline and the need to continually update the local cache.
Bridge is ideal primarily for its ease of use, ubiquitous nature and of course cost (free). But it is, really, only a stopgap method for any large image collection. If you're using Bridge (like we are) you must start planning for the next phase in managing your image library. Given the nature of software Bridge will eventually reach its breaking point -- you need to be prepared for that eventuality.
Next: catalog or database software for image archiving.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Microsoft drops Expression Media 2 and Phase One picks it up
Just in case you didn't get the word last year:
On May 25, 2010, Microsoft announced that Phase One had acquired Expression Media 2 (EM2); as of August 25 Phase One took full control of customer support for the product.
Phase One is widely known for their high-end digital camera systems, digital backs and digital photo software and their acquisition of EM2 provides them with a robust and competent digital asset management program.
As of this writing, Expression Media 2 upgrade is selling on Amazon for a little over 80 bucks and the full product is available on the Phase One website for $199 (Windows and Mac versions available).
Next: I'll talk a bit about the handful of low-cost DAM programs available today.
On May 25, 2010, Microsoft announced that Phase One had acquired Expression Media 2 (EM2); as of August 25 Phase One took full control of customer support for the product.
Phase One is widely known for their high-end digital camera systems, digital backs and digital photo software and their acquisition of EM2 provides them with a robust and competent digital asset management program.
As of this writing, Expression Media 2 upgrade is selling on Amazon for a little over 80 bucks and the full product is available on the Phase One website for $199 (Windows and Mac versions available).
Next: I'll talk a bit about the handful of low-cost DAM programs available today.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Tweaking Photoshop to Save your Metadata
Well, I learned something about Photoshop and metadata recently and thought I would share it with you. For some this little thing may be no big deal but if you're keen on preserving metadata across users and platforms, if providing lo-rez images for 3rd-party vendors or to scattered staff where the need to view metdata might be crucial, then this little tip may help.
Oh, and this predicated on the idea that you're using Photoshop in prepping images for the web.
If you "Save for the Web" in Photoshop (keyboard: Option+Command+Shift+S), on the right side of the large dialog box, directly above the Color Table is a drop-down menu for metadata. I believe that by default it is set to "Copyright and Contact Info" but don't quote me on that. Anyway, whatever the setting I suggest you set this to "All." It will stay that way by default until you manually change it to something else.
If you don't make this adjustment then none of the metadata embedded in any image you run through this feature of PS4 will be saved. And that's a fact.
Forewarned is forearmed. (Click on the screenshot to enlarge.)
Oh, and this predicated on the idea that you're using Photoshop in prepping images for the web.
If you "Save for the Web" in Photoshop (keyboard: Option+Command+Shift+S), on the right side of the large dialog box, directly above the Color Table is a drop-down menu for metadata. I believe that by default it is set to "Copyright and Contact Info" but don't quote me on that. Anyway, whatever the setting I suggest you set this to "All." It will stay that way by default until you manually change it to something else.
If you don't make this adjustment then none of the metadata embedded in any image you run through this feature of PS4 will be saved. And that's a fact.
Forewarned is forearmed. (Click on the screenshot to enlarge.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)