Use of Catalogs

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
Abbott Schindler Senior Member • Posts: 2,779
Re: Use of Catalogs

DerKeyser wrote:

PS: I dont accept the “incompatibility” argument that says you cannot move to different software. Sure you can, you export all your files - orginals and copies with edits baked in -, and you are in the EXACT same situation as from any other non catalog software.

[The rest of this post is above, no need to quote it.]

Yes, it's true that you can keep all edits by exporting processed files as [preferably] TIFF or [less desirable for many things]  JPEG. The disadvantages of this approach, though, include:

- Additional files to keep track of (not a big deal for most people)

- Once baked in, all changes made in your Raw processor are, well, "baked in" and you can't go back and modify. You need to either edit the new "baked" file, or clone it and edit that, or start over in your new Raw processor. Either way, you've lost the original, reversible, step-wise work done in the original Raw processor.

- TIFFs consume significantly more disk space than Raw + adjustments made in LR, etc. This could be a big deal. For example, an EOS 5Ds R Raw file consumes ~50-70 MB of disk space, while a 16-bit TIFF from that file is a whopping 306 MB. Smaller Raw files scale similarly. So if I wanted to migrate from one DAM to another and bake in my edits, that one Ds R image would consume 350-375 MB of disk space. Multiply that appropriately if you have multiple virtual copies in your Raw processor. For example, different crops, color and B&W versions, and so on. So while that one Raw file + several virtual copies could predictably consume 700-1000 MB of disk space.

While changing Raw developing apps is definitely doable, appropriate forethought needs to be given to the migration scenario, including what one wants to do with edits already done.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow