Messages - zevel [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: [1] 2 3next
1
General Software Discussion / Let's get back on topic
« on: March 06, 2012, 08:48 PM »
Gentlemen,

I appreciate the active participation of tool developers in this thread but not to the point of completely hijacking it.
This thread was about comparing the features, performance and capabilities of different image organizers, let's not turn it into a beta-testing thread for a single one.

You can always create another thread and link to it from this one.
Maybe the admins can even transfer some of the existing posts to the new thread.

Thank you for understanding.

2
Hi K.Murat,

Our test databases contains 500k medium sized images.

Sounds like a good fit for my needs.
I'd like to apply as a beta tester.

3
The answer should be yes, depending on precisely what you mean by FAST. Especially for indexing.

When the colection was somewhat smaller, I tried Adobe Lightroom.  It took 4 or 5 days to index the collection on my (admittedly underpowered) machine.  That is *not* fast.

And depending on what you want indexed and what else you want it to do.

I don't know yet. I'm new at this.

Complex changing of tags and hierarchies of tags could also take a while across a huge number of images if the tags are attached to the file rather than simply living in the database; with images most info is usually kept with the image so that tagging etc is independent of the program that created them - but it will have an impact on speed if you want to do a lot of complex changes.

Firstly, I'm OK with everything residing in the DB, provided that I can:
- Export the DB into the EXIF/IPTC if I want to switch programs.
- Move the images around between folders and have the changes reflected in the DB (I'm OK doing it within the program).

Secondly, changing the tag structure can be handled on the query level, without having to retag anything.  That may complicate and slow down the queries though.

There's nothing in your post to suggest that the program needs specific image cataloging abilities. Does that mean that a general cataloging program/database would be fine? Or is there something else you need it to do (such as read/index the EXIF)?

I'd like to view the files as thumbnails when I operate on them or see the results of a query.  Additional image-related functionality can be detecting similar images (although I have VisiPics and Similar Images to do that).  I probably would not need photo-specific functionality though.

All the programs mentioned in this thread are specifically intended for photos and photographers. They are looking for a lot of specific features that you may or may not need - with an overhead in speed that you appear not to want - and permit changes of tagging structures, but do not expect that this will happen very often.

Well, I have somewhat atypical requirements.  Maybe one of the programs will fit the bill, even if I end up not using 90% of its capabilities, or maybe you could recommend something else (or another place to ask the question).

Thanks for your help!

4
A cataloger stores details of all your photos, allowing very fast searches, allows you to keep lots of different virtual collections, keep track of different versions of the same thing.

A browser, sorter, tagger is like a file explorer taking in details of all the files, allowing you to browse them and add tags, ratings etc. It allows you to sort them rapidly, so that you can decide what to keep or not etc. PM allows you to add tags to the photo itself as well as to a sidecar (not many progs did that at the beginning though a number do now). Most cataloging products allow you to do all of these as well as being catalogers, but they won't (usually at least) be so fast.

You need to realise that this market is full of very, very specialised programs mostly at high prices. Adobe Bridge is another example of the same sort of product. Some progs specialise purely in downloading images from cards and cameras (eg Breeze Downloader).
Fair enough.

Let me tell you what I am looking for in a photo organizer/cataloger. I appreciate your suggestions.
I currently have about 250K images, disorganized into some 4K folders that people lumped them into, taking over 100GB with more coming once in a while.  By and large they are JPEGs with a handful of GIFs and PNGs, no RAWs.
I need to assign multiple tags to them so that I can say, for example, "give me the images tagged as sports, kids, outdoors" or be more specific and request "soccer", "baseball" or "tennis" instead of "sports.
I want the tags to be hierarchical, so that tagging an image as "dolphin" will implicitly return it when searching for "mammals" or "animals".  Ideally, it would be possible for tags to participate in multiple hierarchies so that the "dolphin" tag above will also match "marine", etc.  I expect to have lots of tags and categories, including cross-category tags.  This should probably be a feature of the search, see below.
I also need the program to be flexible: allow adding/removing/changing tags on single images, folders, folder trees or just groups of selected images; changing the tag/category structure and having the changes automatically applied; moving images between folders; etc.
And last but not least, I want it to be FAST, both when indexing and when searching.

Does such application exist?

5
If you are going to look at PM, you need to be very clear about what it is.

It is a browser, sorter, tagger - and it is fast.

But it isn't a raw converter, an image editor or a cataloger.

I'm confused.
What's the difference between a browser+sorter+tagger and a cataloger?

Pages: [1] 2 3next
Go to full version