Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Keywords in C1  (Read 3276 times)

Hoggy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 195
  • Never take life, or anything in it, too seriously.
Re: Keywords in C1
« Reply #20 on: December 19, 2017, 10:38:38 PM »

I am considering moving from LR6 to Capture One.  However, I have an extensive keywording hierarchy that I could not afford to have corrupted in the process of moving.  I have perhaps a thousand macros of plant and animals with a keyword hierarchy like Flora>Family>Genera>Species.  I need to be sure that this will translate easily.  To have to recreate this manually would be horrendous.  Can anyone assure that this can be done and how would I go about it?

I'm curious about this as well.  A while ago when trialing C1 (I think I also retried it in the previous version, IIRC), the convert-catalog refused to work - so I had to rely on a complete import with the DNG files containing all the LR hierarchical keywords.

C1 did a thorough job of mangling them.  Rather impressively, I might add - in a bad way.

If nobody else comes along with a way to make it work, you could just try doing it and see if it works for you.  If you have a large library, just try doing a subset.  Just be warned that for large catalogs, C1 sucks donkey balls.
Logged
Cams: Pentax K-3, K-30 & Canon G7X, S100
Firm supporter of DNG, throwing away originals.
It's the hash, man..  That good hash!

bobtrlin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 43
Re: Keywords in C1
« Reply #21 on: December 19, 2017, 11:49:29 PM »

Just be warned that for large catalogs, C1 sucks donkey balls.
That's a worry.  Why would this be?  Surely it doesn't have a limit to catalogue size?
Logged

Hoggy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 195
  • Never take life, or anything in it, too seriously.
Re: Keywords in C1
« Reply #22 on: December 20, 2017, 12:25:40 AM »

That's a worry.  Why would this be?  Surely it doesn't have a limit to catalogue size?

I don't think it actually has a hard limit.  Rather, things just get slower and slower.  For instance, you start up the program and it has to reorder all the images in the current collection right away.  Switch to collection x, another re-ordering - switch to collection y, another re-ordering - switch back to collection x again, yet another re-ordering.  In LR, all that happens instantly.  .... And I've only trialed a measly 3000 image catalog in C1!

In the past C1 has enjoyed the excuse of having been first built for session workflows.  But after so many versions with no improvement, that excuse is worn thin, IMNSHO.  It apparently will just suck forever for catalog use.
Logged
Cams: Pentax K-3, K-30 & Canon G7X, S100
Firm supporter of DNG, throwing away originals.
It's the hash, man..  That good hash!

BartvanderWolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6857
Re: Keywords in C1
« Reply #23 on: December 20, 2017, 06:14:36 AM »

I am considering moving from LR6 to Capture One.  However, I have an extensive keywording hierarchy that I could not afford to have corrupted in the process of moving.  I have perhaps a thousand macros of plant and animals with a keyword hierarchy like Flora>Family>Genera>Species.  I need to be sure that this will translate easily.  To have to recreate this manually would be horrendous.  Can anyone assure that this can be done and how would I go about it?

Hi Bob,

Migrating between systems is usually a painful process. Companies seem to make it more difficult than it needs to be, just to lock in existing customers and discourage switching. How well Capture One has managed to reverse engineer the LR keywording, I don't know, but you can try it without risk because you still have your LR setup.

Capture One uses a very transparent way of importing (and exporting/backing up) keyword lists, it's just in the form of a simple text file. I'm not sure if Lightroom can export the keywords in such a flexible way?

As said, very large Catalogs can slow down operations in Capture One, so it might be useful to consider working in Sessions mode. Having some structure in your stored files never hurts. So you may want to do some homework before diving into the deep end. Look at some of the tutorials or stored Webinars about the Cataloging and Sessions workflow, and about keywording, on the Phase One website, and on their channel on YouTube.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

David Grover / Phase One

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1297
    • Phase One
Re: Keywords in C1
« Reply #24 on: December 20, 2017, 07:44:32 AM »

I don't think it actually has a hard limit.  Rather, things just get slower and slower.  For instance, you start up the program and it has to reorder all the images in the current collection right away.  Switch to collection x, another re-ordering - switch to collection y, another re-ordering - switch back to collection x again, yet another re-ordering.  In LR, all that happens instantly.  .... And I've only trialed a measly 3000 image catalog in C1!

In the past C1 has enjoyed the excuse of having been first built for session workflows.  But after so many versions with no improvement, that excuse is worn thin, IMNSHO.  It apparently will just suck forever for catalog use.

Hi Hoggy,

FYI, Large Catalogs in Capture One 11 has been much improved.  Please try it if you haven't yet.

My own catalog of 20,000 images opens considerably faster, and the ALL IMAGES collection is also much snappier.

David

Logged
David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4297
    • My photography site
Re: Keywords in C1
« Reply #25 on: December 20, 2017, 02:05:51 PM »

Capture One uses a very transparent way of importing (and exporting/backing up) keyword lists, it's just in the form of a simple text file. I'm not sure if Lightroom can export the keywords in such a flexible way?

Of course it can, and has been able to do so for over 10 years. As was recently pointed out, its keywording is more advanced than C1's in a number of ways.

Hoggy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 195
  • Never take life, or anything in it, too seriously.
Re: Keywords in C1
« Reply #26 on: December 21, 2017, 12:34:14 AM »

How well Capture One has managed to reverse engineer the LR keywording, I don't know, but you can try it without risk because you still have your LR setup.

Also, on this point, LR certainly doesn't make it hard to decode..  It's written as standardized plain text in both xmp sidecar files as well as the embeds in dng/jpg/tiff/psd.  Especially for someone that knows how to code, figuring it out should be child's play.
Logged
Cams: Pentax K-3, K-30 & Canon G7X, S100
Firm supporter of DNG, throwing away originals.
It's the hash, man..  That good hash!

Hoggy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 195
  • Never take life, or anything in it, too seriously.
Re: Keywords in C1
« Reply #27 on: December 21, 2017, 01:22:47 AM »

FYI, Large Catalogs in Capture One 11 has been much improved.  Please try it if you haven't yet.

My own catalog of 20,000 images opens considerably faster, and the ALL IMAGES collection is also much snappier.

Thanks for replying, David.  I did just install C1-11, and unfortunately it's still quite bad in regards to the continuing re-ordering..  As in, switching back and forth between the 'all images' and a smart collection that filters on 'keyword - doesn't contain - Testing'.  It will look like it does it quickly, but go down further in the filmstrip-equivalent and things will still be shifting and re-ordering for quite a while.

But the worst part is the keywords that 'transferred' over via DNG-embeds (yes, that word that shall not be spoken here  :D ) - they're a mess.  And I wouldn't want to have to redo them all.

But perhaps Bob could still try it if he uses native raw with sidecars..  Maybe that will work better for that situation.  After all, C1 has a consistent history of kicking and screaming against DNG.  It still refuses to even recognize DNG's made from LR-merges, even though ON1 already does if I'm not mistaken.  ACDSee doesn't, last I checked, but I think it was ON1 that did recognize those.

I do want all these programs to get closer to LR..  I despise the software-as-a-service mindset that is unfortunately taking over the corporate world.  But unfortunately nothing comes close just yet - ON1's DAM features still seem quite primitive as of now.
Logged
Cams: Pentax K-3, K-30 & Canon G7X, S100
Firm supporter of DNG, throwing away originals.
It's the hash, man..  That good hash!

budjames

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 802
    • http://www.budjamesphotography.com
Re: Keywords in C1
« Reply #28 on: December 22, 2017, 08:42:31 AM »

I am new to C1 (just going through the LuLa videos starting with C1-7) but have been a Lightroom user since day one. C1 is impressive but truthfully, I haven't see anything I couldn't do in LR.

However, there is one aspect of C1 that I think is terrible: keywords. LR leaves something to be desired in keywords, but C1 really sucks IMHO.

Anyone agree or disagree?

Check out version 11. Very stable and fast. The layers function as massive improvements and new capabilities. Since switching to Capture One Pro, I retired all of the plug-ins that I used to use with LR and PS.

For FujiX, the IQ is way better out of the box. That was my major motivation to leave LR after using for over a decade since the first pre-public beta.

Regards,
Bud James

www.budjames.photography
Logged
Bud James
North Wales, PA [url=http://ww

FranciscoDisilvestro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1140
    • Frank Disilvestro
Re: Keywords in C1
« Reply #29 on: December 22, 2017, 03:00:15 PM »

How well Capture One has managed to reverse engineer the LR keywording, I don't know,

Well, it seems to me that they have not even tried. Just comparing the database structure and how the data is stored (using a SQLite management tool) shows that LR is much better at keyword handling, or at least the database schema follows better practices.

LR:
Each keyword has a code, there is a table that relates image code to keyword code. If an image has multiple keywords, there will be multiple entries in this "mapping" table. Since this table only contains the codes it is small and efficient.

C1:
Even if there is a table for keywords, they don't use codes. Instead, they parse the entire text of the keywords in a field of a table (ZVARIANTMETADATA) along with the rest of metadata for each image. This way of handling keywords is not what I would call a "Best practice".

Just performing a search of images by keywords would be simpler and quicker in LR.

Final note: C1 and LR are both great in their own ways, but if keywording is very important in your workflow, stay with LR (you may use C1 just for raw processing if you prefer the results)
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up