Seeing the posting for the book was very timely for me. I bought the book yesterday and I am about 1/3 the way through it. I have been digital for only a few years, but in that time I have gone from 4Mp jpeg files, to 6.2Mp jpeg files to 8Mp Raw files. What I thought was a lot of storage is almost full! So his discussions around scalability make a lot of sense.
I have found a couple other areas extremely interesting, one in particular is the keywords and the topic of controlled vocabulary. I have always struggled in the keyword area and he highlights very compelling reasons for following a structured approach.
Another part that I have read that is of great interest is Iview Media Pro, Adobe Bridge, and metadata. I have been using Iview for about a year, cataloging happily away. When CS2 came along, I started to do some of my initial metadata updating in Bridge. But because Adobe uses the XMP sidecar file, there were problems with IMP v.2 not picking up the metadata changes from Bridge. So it's been a bit of a pain in the xxx trying to figure out what is the best workflow for me. But there is a solution for this.
To cut to the chase, Krogh strongly advocates using the DNG file format. I have been reluctant to try the format, only for the reason that I hadn't taken the time to really look at it. Using the DNG format brings in all the added metadata information into the single file.
I am interested in knowing how many of our Dgrin Raw photographers are using DNG. I was surprised to see that a very tangible benefit is a reduction in file size (as long as you don't embed the original Raw file). In the end, what we all truly want is to be able to read our files decades from now and not be worried about file format compatibility. DNG is likely one of the best starts to achieve that end. And I guess if it's good enough for Hasselblad, it should be good enough for me ...
I have recieved my copy of 'The DAM Book' this morning and I was wondering how anyone else rates it and the workflow suggestions made by Peter Krogh? I am thinking of redoing my file structure to the 'buckets' system but I would first like to know how anyone else finds the books and if anyone has implimented the solutions showed?
"It is a magical time. I am reluctant to leave. Yet the shooting becomes more difficult, the path back grows black as it is without this last light. I don't do it anymore unless my husband is with me, as I am still afraid of the dark, smile.
This was truly last light, my legs were tired, my husband could no longer read and was anxious to leave, but the magic and I, we lingered........" Ginger Jones
To cut to the chase, Krogh strongly advocates using the DNG file format. I have been reluctant to try the format, only for the reason that I hadn't taken the time to really look at it. Using the DNG format brings in all the added metadata information into the single file.
I am interested in knowing how many of our Dgrin Raw photographers are using DNG. I was surprised to see that a very tangible benefit is a reduction in file size (as long as you don't embed the original Raw file). In the end, what we all truly want is to be able to read our files decades from now and not be worried about file format compatibility. DNG is likely one of the best starts to achieve that end. And I guess if it's good enough for Hasselblad, it should be good enough for me ...
Brad
I always convert to DNG. I can't see any downsides. It saves file space and I never, ever have to worry about keeping track of sidecar files again!
I always convert to DNG. I can't see any downsides. ...
A lingering concern I have is to maintain the ability to use RAW processors other than Adobe Camera Raw (ACR), specifically Capture One (C1) and Raw Shooter Premium (RSP).
My experience is with C1 and now RSP, rather than ACR. I have read that C1 and RSP can really excel compared to ACR, but I have yet to see an objective, unbiased comparison.
More generally, to encourage competition among software developers and to be able to take advantage of the best RAW procesor that may appear, I am leery of locking myself into one particular processor vendor's RAW processor.
Unfortunately for a flexible, comprehensive DAM workflow, C1 does not yet support DNG or smooth metadata tagging ("promised" for version 4), RSP does support DNG but metadata support is not smmoth, and ACR has the best metadata support, but may not produce the best conversions.
An imperfect world, I guess.
Dan Dill
"It is a magical time. I am reluctant to leave. Yet the shooting becomes more difficult, the path back grows black as it is without this last light. I don't do it anymore unless my husband is with me, as I am still afraid of the dark, smile.
This was truly last light, my legs were tired, my husband could no longer read and was anxious to leave, but the magic and I, we lingered........" Ginger Jones
Comments
I have found a couple other areas extremely interesting, one in particular is the keywords and the topic of controlled vocabulary. I have always struggled in the keyword area and he highlights very compelling reasons for following a structured approach.
Another part that I have read that is of great interest is Iview Media Pro, Adobe Bridge, and metadata. I have been using Iview for about a year, cataloging happily away. When CS2 came along, I started to do some of my initial metadata updating in Bridge. But because Adobe uses the XMP sidecar file, there were problems with IMP v.2 not picking up the metadata changes from Bridge. So it's been a bit of a pain in the xxx trying to figure out what is the best workflow for me. But there is a solution for this.
To cut to the chase, Krogh strongly advocates using the DNG file format. I have been reluctant to try the format, only for the reason that I hadn't taken the time to really look at it. Using the DNG format brings in all the added metadata information into the single file.
I am interested in knowing how many of our Dgrin Raw photographers are using DNG. I was surprised to see that a very tangible benefit is a reduction in file size (as long as you don't embed the original Raw file). In the end, what we all truly want is to be able to read our files decades from now and not be worried about file format compatibility. DNG is likely one of the best starts to achieve that end. And I guess if it's good enough for Hasselblad, it should be good enough for me ...
Great book so far. I highly recommend it.
Brad
www.digismile.ca
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Hi Gang
I have recieved my copy of 'The DAM Book' this morning and I was wondering how anyone else rates it and the workflow suggestions made by Peter Krogh? I am thinking of redoing my file structure to the 'buckets' system but I would first like to know how anyone else finds the books and if anyone has implimented the solutions showed?
Seb (talking from the Mac side
"It is a magical time. I am reluctant to leave. Yet the shooting becomes more difficult, the path back grows black as it is without this last light. I don't do it anymore unless my husband is with me, as I am still afraid of the dark, smile.
This was truly last light, my legs were tired, my husband could no longer read and was anxious to leave, but the magic and I, we lingered........"
Ginger Jones
I always convert to DNG. I can't see any downsides. It saves file space and I never, ever have to worry about keeping track of sidecar files again!
My experience is with C1 and now RSP, rather than ACR. I have read that C1 and RSP can really excel compared to ACR, but I have yet to see an objective, unbiased comparison.
More generally, to encourage competition among software developers and to be able to take advantage of the best RAW procesor that may appear, I am leery of locking myself into one particular processor vendor's RAW processor.
Unfortunately for a flexible, comprehensive DAM workflow, C1 does not yet support DNG or smooth metadata tagging ("promised" for version 4), RSP does support DNG but metadata support is not smmoth, and ACR has the best metadata support, but may not produce the best conversions.
An imperfect world, I guess.
"It is a magical time. I am reluctant to leave. Yet the shooting becomes more difficult, the path back grows black as it is without this last light. I don't do it anymore unless my husband is with me, as I am still afraid of the dark, smile.
This was truly last light, my legs were tired, my husband could no longer read and was anxious to leave, but the magic and I, we lingered........"
Ginger Jones