How do your Orgainze??

Hi Pedro,

I'd be interested to know what you have compared Fotostation to? Have you tried IView?, IMatch, IDImager?...

Fotostation Classic costs over 500$ and when you need offline storage server you need to buy another Index Manager software several hundred bucks. Is that basically right? Sounds expensive to me!

I heard once they have a non-standard way of storing metadata. Do you have open access to your metadata to migrate to another application or are you rather stuck with Fotostation forever?

Does it have hierarchical keyword trees? does it support XMP? Can you script it? How is support? Since Fotoware is selling to companies rather than single photographers, I guess they are not responsive?

Sorry for the many questions, I'm just curious because I rarely hear anybody recommending Fotostation.

--
Matteo Del Grosso
http://www.delgrosso.de
 
For file naming in-camera I turn on sequence numbering and use my initials as the prefix.

I always remove the CF card from the camera and download via a card reader (faster).

I create FOLDERNAME based upon the following scheme:

YYYYMMDD_INI_LOCATIONorEVENT

Where INI = my initials

LOCATIONorEVENT = logical tag for where or what the subject is

I use PhotoMechanic during the download process to rename all the files based upon the following scheme:

FOLDERNAME+SEQNo.EXT

In this fashion all files and folders can be sorted correctly in chronological order with locations and events grouped together also.

Works for me.
--
Cheers.
 
Been using Photo Mechanic for a while. I like it alot. There are plenty of features to tag photos and add meta data. My favorite feature is dual ingest. Two paths can be specified for file downloads from memory cards. I save to my laptop and backup HD simultaneously.
 
I don't have faith on ACDSee. It crashes so often and slow. And I suspect it has memory leaks.
Use Photoshop Organiser - there is a facility to "write tag into
files"

I couldn't agree more about the fickle nature of proprietary
product database standards. Compounded when (like me) you have a
server upstairs, and a couple of workstations in the house that
would benefit from sharing the same metadata.

ACDSee's implementation of the descript.ion file worked for me, but
when they went proprietary, I lost that faciltiy.
--
Dave
--
===
Sandy
 
I don't know why you have WHY category. It could be belong to EVENT under WHAT.
In the Event - weding, party, etc...
All of the previous suggestions work fine, as long as you are
organized by client, or by time. But, if your photo's are all over
the place (litterally and pictorially), a client based or time
based will not work for searching later on. Lets say you are
looking for a photo of a child riding a carousal.

A system with categories works much better, IMVHO. (iMatch for
example) It takes work setting up the categories, and then
assigning a photo to one or more categories, but it pays off in the
long run.
My top-level categories are Who, What, Where, When, Why
Who - Could be specific, or generic (Baby, child, pre-teen...
What - Architecture, People, Still-life...
Where - Studio, Beach, Park, Amusment Park, City x, City Y...
When - Used when photo's are shot "off-season", since you can
always use the photo-date (Like Christmas pictures taken in Sep
would have a Sep date, but a Christmas category)
Why - Wedding, Party, event X...

Its not perfect, and it is still evolving, but I could find a
picture of a 5 year old riding a carousal in 2 clicks and 2 minutes

With categories, it doesn't really matter how you physically store
them on your hard drive. I used to group them into 640 MB folders,
now I do it by month, if for no other reason than simplicity
--
Warm regards,
Dad-of-four
--
===
Sandy
 
Hi Pedro,

I'd be interested to know what you have compared Fotostation to?
Have you tried IView?, IMatch, IDImager?...
Fotostation Classic costs over 500$ and when you need offline
storage server you need to buy another Index Manager software
several hundred bucks. Is that basically right? Sounds expensive to
me!
I heard once they have a non-standard way of storing metadata. Do
you have open access to your metadata to migrate to another
application or are you rather stuck with Fotostation forever?
Does it have hierarchical keyword trees? does it support XMP? Can
you script it? How is support? Since Fotoware is selling to
companies rather than single photographers, I guess they are not
responsive?

Sorry for the many questions, I'm just curious because I rarely
hear anybody recommending Fotostation.

--
Matteo Del Grosso
http://www.delgrosso.de
Hello, Matteo, no problem at all, that's why we have discussion boards, to discuss and change opinions :)

I compared FS with iMatch, if you can call it a comparison at all. At the time, hands down, iMatch was nothing compared to FotoStation. You may require the image server after a while, but that isn't something you need to get yourself going. It just helps you with performing better searches as well as handling way lot more images.

There is nothing non-standard in FS that I know of, except for one thing: EXIF information (which is ONE of the 255 IPTC fields any given file can have) is not handled very well, and can be "lost" when you dupllicate an image. The exif information is stored in a different field, but the copied file will no longer contain it. I work around this by doing most of the color adjustments in NC4.4 before converting to JPG where I apply the rest of the modifications.

IPTC text is the industry standard for storing text with images (for ANY kind of document, that is) and to my knowledge, the only standard that is platform independent. Because text about the image is stored IN the image, any application can read that text back again later. This is true for me. Whenever I apply text from FotoStation, that text is extrapolated in things such as Coppermine gallery viewer, any of your thumbnail viewers etc. I hear XMP is coming stronger and stronger. FS does not support XMP at the moment, but they're stating that they will soon as well as "solving" the exif problem (yup, they admit it).

Here's the "standard issue" text editor of FS. ANY text can be stored as a text template in a whiff and accessible via the templates menu:



The way I see it, the higher price of FS against any other app, is directly related to how fast and easy you can set up texting of your images.

Searches are also powerful, but for the full power of searching (i.e. in ranges of values) you'll need to buy Index Manager too. I don't really find it expensive. CS2 suite cost over one thousand dollars where I live. Index manager itself does not work with any other applications than fotoware's own though, so you can't use index manager with any other application that I know of.

Remember also that FotoStation is an industry grade application. It's not fancy, no bells or whistles, just down to the bone "this is what you need" type of functionallity. It does so well, and it is not jumpy of a few hundred thousand images. What truly convinced me to buy this application to begin with, was a friend of mine that showed me how he worked with a little over half a million images in FS. As painless and effortlessly as if he was working with 2-3 images.

BUT, there are shortcomings. You need an Image Editor (CS), and you also WANT a RAW converter. FotoStation is neither of these. It's an image librarian only, but at that, in my view, the best. As I said originally, adding text to images is one of the things FotoStation really excels at

Their target audience is not the photographer market though, it's designed for newspaper editors and such that have little time to find that one perfect image for their articles, that may explain the rather high price.

--
The sixth sick shiek's sixth sheep's sick
--
Stuff about me at: http://www.digitaldias.com
 
Thanks for your detailed answers Pedro.

If you compare a 1000$ product with a 60$ IMatch product, FS looks very expensive! IMatch has a very powerful IPTC-Editor as well and many more features that I'm not sure FS provides as welll:

Scripting?
Hierarchical categories?

If FS uses only IPTC how does it handle RAW files, i.e.: where does it store metadata for RAW files?

--
Matteo Del Grosso
http://www.delgrosso.de
 
I use Compupic Pro. I have all my images in year files with each date also a separate sub file. Sometimes it is difficult locating something because I have over 50 thousand images taken in the past 7 years. Cpic uses thumbs so it is not to difficult finding something. If it is a major set of pics, I rename it to something easy to remember.

I keep all my work backed up on four separate hard drives,
--



Photography http://www.garymayo.com Body Arts http://www.guns2roses.com

Anyone Seen A Really Big Brown Truck Anywhere?

These comments are here to delight and confuse the masses.
 
I don't know why you have WHY category. It could be belong to
EVENT under WHAT.
In the Event - weding, party, etc...
There my stink'n categories, I'll do it any way I darn well please!!! (LOL)

Actually, my "WHAT" category refers to the subject of the picture: Landscape, Buildings, Nature, etc.

My WHY contains the Donation, Insurance, as well as the subcategory Events. Under Events, then is Wedding, party, etc.

A picture of a bride would be in several categories
1. Why -> Event - Wedding (as opposed to engagement)
2. What - Bride
3. Where - Church, beach, park

A little over-kill, perhaps, but if I want a picture of a Bride at the beach during her wedding, voila, I can find it in 3 clicks. If I only had her under Wedding, I'd need to search every wedding picture to find brides, then every bride to find one at the beach.

As always, YMMV.
All of the previous suggestions work fine, as long as you are
organized by client, or by time. But, if your photo's are all over
the place (litterally and pictorially), a client based or time
based will not work for searching later on. Lets say you are
looking for a photo of a child riding a carousal.

A system with categories works much better, IMVHO. (iMatch for
example) It takes work setting up the categories, and then
assigning a photo to one or more categories, but it pays off in the
long run.
My top-level categories are Who, What, Where, When, Why
Who - Could be specific, or generic (Baby, child, pre-teen...
What - Architecture, People, Still-life...
Where - Studio, Beach, Park, Amusment Park, City x, City Y...
When - Used when photo's are shot "off-season", since you can
always use the photo-date (Like Christmas pictures taken in Sep
would have a Sep date, but a Christmas category)
Why - Wedding, Party, event X...

Its not perfect, and it is still evolving, but I could find a
picture of a 5 year old riding a carousal in 2 clicks and 2 minutes

With categories, it doesn't really matter how you physically store
them on your hard drive. I used to group them into 640 MB folders,
now I do it by month, if for no other reason than simplicity
--
Warm regards,
Dad-of-four
--
===
Sandy
--
Warm regards,
DOF
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top