Images from catalog to Session

[Phil Indeblanc]

OK, so I figured how the catalog works, but have no use for it. Anyone can explain a few good reasons for Catalog, please list them.

Anyway, now I need the images I shot in a Catalog back with the session, as I care none for the catalog. I managed to find them and copy them over.

Anyone?  I know I had a use for them...but somehow it slipped my mind!

(Goodness gratious I miss the speed and simplicity of C1v3.7x!!!)  Make a folder you want to shoot into, and DONE!!! (Gordon Ramsey explicatives listed as long as you like here)

[Doug Peterson]

Starting a new capture folder is still a one step action. What's the difference?

[David Grover / Capture One]

There are many great reasons for using a Catalog.

However, if working with Sessions works with you, then nobody is forcing your hand - thats why they are still supported. 

Sessions are job specific - i.e. you create a new Session for every job you shoot and it neatly packages up all the Raw Files, Selects and Output.

A Catalog can do the same thing and additionally give you access to your whole database of imaging with much more powerful virtual organisation options and a whole host of search options.

- Want to find all your images tagged with a particular keyword in a particular year? Done with two clicks.  Thats the whole Catalog, not just one Session.

- With a Catalog we don't have to physically move the raw files to organise it (Virtual Organisation).  We can use Albums, Smart Albums, Projects and Groups to create the structure that makes sense to you.

- A Catalog can store the files inside of itself so you don't even have to consider where to put your images.  The Catalog takes care of that.

- OR reference the files in an existing location.  Think about this scenario..

You have many Gigabytes (maybe Terabytes!) of images stored on external storage / Server.  The Catalog was created on your laptop and has referenced the files in that location.  What if that server is no longer available, if you are away from the office / studio?

Doesn't matter as the Catalog holds a preview of each image so that even when the originals are 'offline' you can still browse, organise, search, filter and even make adjustments!.  The only thing you can't do of course it export a final image.  You do need the original for something. 

See here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IgzqVLtuoE&feature=share&list=SPDMRz3ssFQH6HhCcWLh7xL0SapRxUNzs9

- Sharing.  Want to share that server full of images amongst several users?  Easy with a Capture One Pro 7 catalog.  The Catalog can be Locked so multiple people can open it, or it only one person can view / adjust at once.  Simple mechanisms to avoid damage to the catalog.  Try doing that with Lightroom?

- Catalog as a document.  A CO7 catalog opens like word opens a word doc.  Have several open at once!  Have a Catalog for each client?  Have a Catalog and Session open at once!  Again, show me that with Lightroom.  Only one Catalog at a time.

Shall I continue?

For me, and why I like Catalogs is the virtual organisation.  I import the raw files, and then forget about them.  All management is then done with Projects, Groups, Albums and Smart Albums.  See the screen grab for my arrangement.

If I am diligent with keywording then finding images in my entire catalog is a breeze with just a few clicks. 

David

[wattsies]

I have always used sessions to date.  Is it possible to keep using sessions and then have one large catalog with all the session files bought into it to allow searching/organising across the entire library?  Is this something others are contemplating?  I would be interested in other people's session/catalog strategies as there is not a lot of information out there on this at the moment.

[Remko]

Thanks for the excellent explanation, David! You answered a lot of questions I had 

cheers,
Remko

[cunim]

David, I see the theoretical benefits of catalogs but don't see them addressing any needs that I actually have.  Worse, I don't understand the fundamental concept.  It is just too different from the way I think.  I am used to catalogs (e.g. LR) which allow me to organize data under various tree structures.  Having used directory trees all my life I am not about to change.  The day I made a C1-7 catalog and found out that it trashes my tree structure I ceased to have any interest.

I am concerned with feature creep.  Remember Phocus!  What is critical to me is that the software be rock solid, especially when tethered.  There are a few practical features (e.g. dual focus windows to facilitate tilts) that I would really like to see but no indication that P1 cares (sob).  On the other hand, better rendering is a key plus and I would update just for that.  Sadly, there are also flaws (e.g. slow, won't import really large images so you can't use it to manage a library, nonintuitive application of LCCs) and - other than the rendering - nothing that I actually want.  Think about it - we want speed.  When was the last time you ran C1 and wished you had catalogs?  Remember when Microsoft took a reasonably simple program (Word) and turned it into an icon-clogged monstrosity?  After 10 years of using it I still have not figured out Word styles, though I had them right down in the older versions. Just saying...

My advice to P1 is to prioritize making fast, stable code.  I still see crashes when tethered (IQ back) and that should not be.  C1 is weak with movements and that is fixable.  If you are going to spend money integrating a major new organizational aspect instead, don't make it so different that many users will see it as a complication.  For example, why not have the option to create date-coded capture, ouput and selects folders within a catalog?  Why not allow a directory tree structure?

Peter

[john beardsworth]

Feature creep is always an easy accusation, just as analogies with what supposedly happened to other programs are usually pretty thin. Companies don't just address "needs" but offer ways to do things better, faster etc. Ever heard the Henry Ford quote about not offering his customers the faster horse they would have said they needed?

[Doug Peterson]

When was the last time you ran C1 and wished you had catalogs?

I'd estimate from our workshops, customer calls, 1v1 training, and corporate consultations that around 30% of Capture One Pro customers considered adding cataloging their #1 request. I am among that 30%.

This is not meant as disagreement; simply highlighting that other users might have different priorities/needs than you.

For example, why not have the option to create date-coded capture, ouput and selects folders within a catalog?  Why not allow a directory tree structure?

I think that's a great idea and I suspect something like that will be implemented. Remember this is the very very first release that supports cataloging. I'm sure more and better cataloging options/features/workflows will be implemented in the future. Some of the cataloging implementation is best-in-class (filtering, offline-adjustments) while others are just not great (importation method / logic, interaction with the "session" concept, creating new keywords while in the filter view).

[john beardsworth]

- Sharing.  Want to share that server full of images amongst several users?  Easy with a Capture One Pro 7 catalog.  The Catalog can be Locked so multiple people can open it, or it only one person can view / adjust at once.  Simple mechanisms to avoid damage to the catalog.  Try doing that with Lightroom?

I agree that's a genuine advantage for small studios.

- Catalog as a document.  A CO7 catalog opens like word opens a word doc.  Have several open at once!  Have a Catalog for each client?  Have a Catalog and Session open at once!  Again, show me that with Lightroom.  Only one Catalog at a time.

Fragmenting control of your images across a few catalogues may be superficially attractive but isn't really that wonderful an idea. Only being able to open a single Lightroom catalogue gently nudges folk into the more robust approach of using metadata to categorise their pictures. Of course, nothing forces CO7 users to try to use lots of catalogues, but you'll soon see lots of problems from images being duplicated in different catalogues or slipping through the cracks between them, keyword spellings differing or singular/plural issues (unless you've salvaged the MediaPro controlled vocab feature). So a superficial advantage - at best!

[john beardsworth]

I'd estimate from our workshops, customer calls, 1v1 training, and corporate consultations that around 30% of Capture One Pro customers considered adding cataloging their #1 request. I am among that 30%.

I think it's the right move, but it does seem a bit of a reversal from the line that was taken when MediaPro was acquired - that separation of catalogue and raw converter was a good thing....

[Phil Indeblanc]

David, I see the theoretical benefits of catalogs but don't see them addressing any needs that I actually have.  Worse, I don't understand the fundamental concept.  It is just too different from the way I think.  I am used to catalogs (e.g. LR) which allow me to organize data under various tree structures.  Having used directory trees all my life I am not about to change.  The day I made a C1-7 catalog and found out that it trashes my tree structure I ceased to have any interest.

When was the last time you ran C1 and wished you had catalogs?   Just saying...

My advice to P1 is to prioritize making fast, stable code.  I still see crashes when tethered (IQ back) and that should not be.  C1 is weak with movements and that is fixable.  If you are going to spend money integrating a major new organizational aspect instead, don't make it so different that many users will see it as a complication.  For example, why not have the option to create date-coded capture, ouput and selects folders within a catalog?  Why not allow a directory tree structure?

Peter

AHHHHHHHHHH.........For CRYING OUT LOUD....Thank you.....!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YES....LISTEN TO THIS MAN, AND ME!!

This would be the basic foundation of any company that wants to stay in business!! Think Gordon Ramsey's Kitchen Nightmare show....Just cook fresh, simple food with prompt fast service!! That's it!!
People will come and stay! Not have a flock of useless industry folks with certs and diplomas push their "respected" concepts of something structurally sound to something useless.
(I'm not saying it is, but that is the direction), Pull back!

Dump this fussy, pumpus BS and let the power users do what we do! WORK on developing photographs. I totally salute and CHEER the new developing engine, I see great difference JUST in that for the upgrade. 

Whats done is done....I think we need a C1v6.99 or a v7 Pro-Lite.

Honestly, if I had gotten over the importing problems and if all this didn't add weight, and slow me down, I would ignore it and move on, as I'm sure many did, whilewondering what all the fuss is about.
But it didn't work out that way. And thats due to complicating something that needs simplicity.

[Phil Indeblanc]

this is a great post David, as I quickly read it up until "the scenario" example which sounds like something I would be interested in. Will post follow up.

[Doug Peterson]

I think it's the right move, but it does seem a bit of a reversal from the line that was taken when MediaPro was acquired - that separation of catalogue and raw converter was a good thing....

Indeed. That is still my point of view (that they should be separate). However, I welcome this attempt to convince me. Perhaps with time to adjust (and additional cataloging features) I will come fully on board that cataloging and processing should (best) reside in the same program.

[Phil Indeblanc]

I think it's the right move, but it does seem a bit of a reversal from the line that was taken when MediaPro was acquired - that separation of catalogue and raw converter was a good thing....

From years of posting with you John, I didn't think you'd take that perspective. The love is still there.:-)


I don't think they should reside together at all.

Referring to files/folders AS THE FOLDERS ARE is fine, but any more is messing about. (if you have to in the background do your thing and make a catalog, go ahead, but don't get in my way about it.

I had initially thought the major reason of the catalog is to have the visuals and processing display faster as you make the adjustments on catalog files while in the background it links to the actual Raw to continue the process at points of zooming in and displaying from the raw)
But that maybe wrong?

The no catalog approach is the Reason I used C1 as LR has been a Catalog based converter. But LR did have a lot of developing options/features for me to want to break that hurdle. It was easy to use and making the Catalog was rather SIMPLE.
It was easy enough for me to keep my file structure as it IS, and simply make catalogs on my Local drive reference to them by not Moving, or Copy, but simply Adding them. EASY to see where things were going and what was taking place. 


I have had this discussion before. I think I'm losing my position by force, as the softwares released is what will do the driving.....for now at least :-)

[john beardsworth]

Perhaps you misunderstand me, Phil. My perspective is that it is a good move and I was not complaining about it - more like giving Doug and P1 a gentle poke about the change of direction.

[Phil Indeblanc]

A Catalog can do the same thing and additionally give you access to your whole database of imaging with much more powerful virtual organisation options and a whole host of search options.

1- Want to find all your images tagged with a particular keyword in a particular year? Done with two clicks.  Thats the whole Catalog, not just one Session.

2- With a Catalog we don't have to physically move the raw files to organise it (Virtual Organisation).  We can use Albums, Smart Albums, Projects and Groups to create the structure that makes sense to you.

3- A Catalog can store the files inside of itself so you don't even have to consider where to put your images.  The Catalog takes care of that.

4- OR reference the files in an existing location.  Think about this scenario..

You have many Gigabytes (maybe Terabytes!) of images stored on external storage / Server.  The Catalog was created on your laptop and has referenced the files in that location.  What if that server is no longer available, if you are away from the office / studio?

5- Sharing.  Want to share that server full of images amongst several users?  Easy with a Capture One Pro 7 catalog.  The Catalog can be Locked so multiple people can open it, or it only one person can view / adjust at once.  Simple mechanisms to avoid damage to the catalog.  Try doing that with Lightroom?

6- Catalog as a document.  A CO7 catalog opens like word opens a word doc.  Have several open at once!  Have a Catalog for each client?  Have a Catalog and Session open at once!  Again, show me that with Lightroom.  Only one Catalog at a time.

Shall I continue?

For me, and why I like Catalogs is the virtual organisation.  I import the raw files, and then forget about them.  All management is then done with Projects, Groups, Albums and Smart Albums.  See the screen grab for my arrangement.
If I am diligent with keywording then finding images in my entire catalog is a breeze with just a few clicks. 

David

1. Yes, a Passive Catalog is great for all these reason, It doesn't need to mess about with file structure. Period.
I'm not even sure if C1 does make changes or additions within the existing structure? If it does, they got to fix that. LR makes the catalog allows you to place it locally or any folder. You can name it whatever needed, and it doesn't add Anything to my existing server/folders/files.
So my stock imagery does get Cataloged and Keywording.

2. Yes, if you use it as a passive catalog. Careful not to move images into the catalog.

3.  Software is blind and only knows where things are based on a specific state of being true. Most environments change over time, and software usage changes. The LAST thing you want to do is LOCK in your images to a software.

4. Same as #2

5. Great advantage for some larger studios that have more than 2 editors with physical location distances.

6. Not sure if this is a plus or not. But sure is confusing at times.  Perhaps they can allow changing the background of the app to custom colors so we can identify between Sessions, Catalogs, or other perameters, perhaps even by client if need be( thats a stretch, but something to distinguish)

Anyways, YES there are strong organizing advantages to having a Catalog. That's why there are DAM applications like MediaPro, IDImager, ACDSee that do EVERYTHING these RAW developers do, WHY not let each task be done Better, Faster with less issues?

If RAW developers weren't so protective of their formats the photography world would be a MUCH better place.

So far Adobe LightRoom is the ONLY Raw developer I know that can process IIQ files besides C1. Why is this? Are they the only ones who could afford licensing, or is that not even the issue?

Why can't Acdseeand others see previews of IIQ? It's almost as if C1 is pushing Adobe to be its only contender.

If MediaPro wasn't clumbsy (at best, besides the odd ways it behave with different options enabled) with formating, it would be a good DAM. Why it only integrates well or "better" with C1 may sound natrual, but thats where Raw specific DAM's Fail!
DAM's need to just handle and dish out without prejudice. Unless they can do that, they will implode at some point.

[David Grover / Capture One]

David, I see the theoretical benefits of catalogs but don't see them addressing any needs that I actually have.  Worse, I don't understand the fundamental concept.  It is just too different from the way I think.  I am used to catalogs (e.g. LR) which allow me to organize data under various tree structures.  Having used directory trees all my life I am not about to change.  The day I made a C1-7 catalog and found out that it trashes my tree structure I ceased to have any interest.

I am concerned with feature creep.  Remember Phocus!  What is critical to me is that the software be rock solid, especially when tethered.  There are a few practical features (e.g. dual focus windows to facilitate tilts) that I would really like to see but no indication that P1 cares (sob).  On the other hand, better rendering is a key plus and I would update just for that.  Sadly, there are also flaws (e.g. slow, won't import really large images so you can't use it to manage a library, nonintuitive application of LCCs) and - other than the rendering - nothing that I actually want.  Think about it - we want speed.  When was the last time you ran C1 and wished you had catalogs?  Remember when Microsoft took a reasonably simple program (Word) and turned it into an icon-clogged monstrosity?  After 10 years of using it I still have not figured out Word styles, though I had them right down in the older versions. Just saying...

My advice to P1 is to prioritize making fast, stable code.  I still see crashes when tethered (IQ back) and that should not be.  C1 is weak with movements and that is fixable.  If you are going to spend money integrating a major new organizational aspect instead, don't make it so different that many users will see it as a complication.  For example, why not have the option to create date-coded capture, ouput and selects folders within a catalog?  Why not allow a directory tree structure?

Peter

Hi Peter,

Long time no speak!  

You can still organise your images under a file/folder type tree structure a la Lightroom if you wish.  I personally prefer the virtual organisation but if you want to keep your original tree structure intact you can do so.  When you import to the catalog just nominate to keep the images in their original location.

Dual focus windows - in Live View or otherwise?  If so noted.

LCC's - thats a huge ++++ in V7!  Now you can create multiple LCC's in one go and apply as a batch!  Have you tried?  Have you watched the demo video on how to do it?  It should be a massive time saver.

There are plenty of customers who want a catalog facility to avoid chopping and changing between applications.  Otherwise as a business we potentially lose out compared to Adobe and Apple.

For your final comments, yes you can use directory tree structure and secondly it sounds very much like a Session which is still supported.  Or why not create this in the catalog yourself?

David

[David Grover / Capture One]

1. Yes, a Passive Catalog is great for all these reason, It doesn't need to mess about with file structure. Period.
I'm not even sure if C1 does make changes or additions within the existing structure? If it does, they got to fix that. LR makes the catalog allows you to place it locally or any folder. You can name it whatever needed, and it doesn't add Anything to my existing server/folders/files.
So my stock imagery does get Cataloged and Keywording.

2. Yes, if you use it as a passive catalog. Careful not to move images into the catalog.

3.  Software is blind and only knows where things are based on a specific state of being true. Most environments change over time, and software usage changes. The LAST thing you want to do is LOCK in your images to a software.

4. Same as #2

5. Great advantage for some larger studios that have more than 2 editors with physical location distances.

6. Not sure if this is a plus or not. But sure is confusing at times.  Perhaps they can allow changing the background of the app to custom colors so we can identify between Sessions, Catalogs, or other perameters, perhaps even by client if need be( thats a stretch, but something to distinguish)

Anyways, YES there are strong organizing advantages to having a Catalog. That's why there are DAM applications like MediaPro, IDImager, ACDSee that do EVERYTHING these RAW developers do, WHY not let each task be done Better, Faster with less issues?

If RAW developers weren't so protective of their formats the photography world would be a MUCH better place.

So far Adobe LightRoom is the ONLY Raw developer I know that can process IIQ files besides C1. Why is this? Are they the only ones who could afford licensing, or is that not even the issue?

Why can't Acdseeand others see previews of IIQ? It's almost as if C1 is pushing Adobe to be its only contender.

If MediaPro wasn't clumbsy (at best, besides the odd ways it behave with different options enabled) with formating, it would be a good DAM. Why it only integrates well or "better" with C1 may sound natrual, but thats where Raw specific DAM's Fail!
DAM's need to just handle and dish out without prejudice. Unless they can do that, they will implode at some point.

Hi Phil,

If you don't want to mess with the file structure then just reference the files where they exist in their existing structure.  Done.  The files will show in the 'Folders' area as they exist on your storage.  Same great search and filtering functionality still apply.

Please don't bash the software if you are not fully aware of the functionality.  Rather take time to explore it and evaluate it.  We have tried on this launch to accompany the software with as much help as possible.

Videos with subtitles which can be auto translated.  40,000 word help guide translated into 10 languages.  There is a lot of resources out there to help people to this new concept.

Personally for my catalog at home, I reference the files in their original location and they are in folders for 'events' i.e. "Canada Summer", but I use Projects Albums and Groups which I think are much more powerful to help me organise the images.  The catalog file is on my laptop so I can always view my pictures, but if my laptop gets stolen, lost, destroyed I still have the originals on the external storage AND I have a backup of the Catalog database on their too.  Not to mention a complete backup once more of all of those elements.  I feel very comfortable with this arrangement.

Catalogs / Sessions as a document is a great convenience.  Having to relaunch the software just to switch a Catalog is crazy.  It makes no sense.  Plus I don't believe colour coding one to the other is necessary as they both look different in the library tool and I would hope you would know what you are working with?  If some people want to work with multiple catalogs then this is an important feature.

Capture One Pro 7 is a DAM application. You have to consider that some customers want an all in one solution not work with different applications.

And lets remember if you don't want to use the Catalog feature don't!  Stick with Sessions as before and carry on as normal.

David

[cunim]

Yes, long time.  I appreciated our interactions during the Blad days.

Well, I stand corrected.  The tree structure is there.  When I first installed C17 I tried both in catalog and current location modes. 

With current location selected the folder structure was there, but the folders were all empty and - yes - I drilled down to the file source.  In other words, current location was just like in catalog and I couldn't understand why.  This happened on both home and office computers.  I filed a case with P1.  They did not seem to understand my problem so I assumed it was a "feature" and never went back to catalogs. 

Doing the same thing today it works fine and current location shows me images within the tree structure.  Either I messed something up last time or something in my environment has changed with reboots and all.  This removes my primary criticism.  Now, just fix the import of large images and I will give catalogs another try.  At the moment, it refuses to import any of my larger files into catalogs.  Case filed for that.

Another of my problems has vanished.  I was unable to enter lens data into the fl and aperture windows under the movements tab - grayed out.  Works today.  Go figure.

Let me give LCCs another try.  The need to order the images for the LCCs seemed a complication.  I usually take a set of left, middle, right images, then remove my lens shade and acquire a pair of LCCs (left and right) at the end.  Just being lazy because I do have to take the shade off to position the LCC glass.  It seems I have to drag the LCC files to the end of each set to use batch mode?  On the other hand, I really should do the LCC after each position set, especially for multi-row cases.  If I accept that discipline batch LCC would save time.

Re dual focus windows - live view please.  Just want to get near and far focus adjustments for t/s speeded up.

Peter

[David Grover / Capture One]

Yes, long time.  I appreciated our interactions during the Blad days.

Well, I stand corrected.  The tree structure is there.  When I first installed C17 I tried both in catalog and current location modes. 

With current location selected the folder structure was there, but the folders were all empty and - yes - I drilled down to the file source.  In other words, current location was just like in catalog and I couldn't understand why.  This happened on both home and office computers.  I filed a case with P1.  They did not seem to understand my problem so I assumed it was a "feature" and never went back to catalogs. 

Doing the same thing today it works fine and current location shows me images within the tree structure.  Either I messed something up last time or something in my environment has changed with reboots and all.  This removes my primary criticism.  Now, just fix the import of large images and I will give catalogs another try.  At the moment, it refuses to import any of my larger files into catalogs.  Case filed for that.

Another of my problems has vanished.  I was unable to enter lens data into the fl and aperture windows under the movements tab - grayed out.  Works today.  Go figure.

Let me give LCCs another try.  The need to order the images for the LCCs seemed a complication.  I usually take a set of left, middle, right images, then remove my lens shade and acquire a pair of LCCs (left and right) at the end.  Just being lazy because I do have to take the shade off to position the LCC glass.  It seems I have to drag the LCC files to the end of each set to use batch mode?  On the other hand, I really should do the LCC after each position set, especially for multi-row cases.  If I accept that discipline batch LCC would save time.

Re dual focus windows - live view please.  Just want to get near and far focus adjustments for t/s speeded up.

Peter

If you can't see the tree structure at any point, right click on one of your folders and select 'Show Folders Hierachy'.  You get the complete tree then otherwise it is just the root and the last child.

Regarding LCC's..  As long as you follow the same order.  image, image, image, LCC, image image image, LCC, image, LCC.. then it doesn't matter if they are before or after or only refer to one or several images.

Of if you don't want to do it that way, you can always create your LCC's 'Old style' by using the preset pull down menu.

D