Capture One will operate as 1a or 1b, Wayne. At home on my iMac I operate
using 1a, sometimes called Referenced Files, I believe. This will run my
database/catalogue with whatever file structure I fancy.
When I’m on the road I operate with 1b with a new catalogue, then import the
catalogue to my main one when I get home. I can then move all the image files
to the hard drive so that they become referenced like the remainder.
I posted a comparison between LR and C1 a few days ago, but your youtube video
is made by Dave Grover who does most of the Capture One tutorial videos and
webinars; he’s pretty good at explaining stuff.
Chris
> On 7 Jan 20, at 19:14, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Reading through this thread, there seem to me to be a lot of possible
> confusions and/or misunderstandings.
>
> 1. There are two models:
> a. Leave all the files where they are and create a catalog of them, including
> thumbnails. Browsing is fairly quick; viewing full size or editing loads the
> original from disk. Catalogs are relatively modest in size.
>
> b. Suck up the original files and move them into a catalog/database.
> (Madness!!)
>
> LR allows either model. My impression is that most other converter/editors
> use model 1.a.
>
> Model 1.a. has an inherent problem with keeping catalog and image files in
> sync. In LR, it's relatively easy. When any photo had had metadata changes,
> there is a little arrow on the thumbnail. One may choose to import the
> metadata changes, or overwrite them from LR.
>
> If a file name is changed, one must delete the catalog entry and re-import
> under the new name. Not a personal problem, as I don't change the file names
> that the camera assigned, nor do I move original files.
>
> 2. I'm not sure, but it seems as though there is some confusion about
> switching to a new/different DAM. LR stores its image specific data, such as
> geocode, keywords, star ratings and ACR/Develop Module settings, in XMP
> "sidecar" files in the same directory as the image file.
>
> I can see all these things in an external EXIF viewer, so they are not hidden
> away somewhere in LR.
>
> As far as I can tell, LR does not store Collection data in the XMP files.
>
> It would appear that I could try out a different DAM by simply using it to
> index/catalog my existing photos. Perhaps all I would need to recreate would
> be its version of Sets/Collections?
>
> Confuse A Moose
>
> --
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|