Workflow on the Mac based on Capture One and Photos ?

HuguesInParis

Member
Messages
12
Reaction score
6
Hi

Like many people on the Mac, I'm coming from Aperture to Capture One, trying to mimic what was a working workflow in Aperture, and I would like to share ideas.

The subject is known to be complex, because there are different needs, different solutions, different configurations and the software itself is complex.

It is my opinion that Capture One is one of the best raw editor on the market but has a cataloging functionality which can be considered subpar for a lot of usages. More precisely it was developed historically for professional photographers who work in studio on a series of independent projects, hence the session mode, and the cataloging part has been plugged on it in a more or less satisfactory way.

I will speak here from the point of view of an amateur photograph, who has put some money on Capture One, and wants to keep on trying to use it because of development quality, but is still struggling to find the best way to use it as a cataloger.
I have around 25 000 photos covering roughly 20 years, with 500 small videos. And I plan to continue on adding 3-5000 new each year, mixing personal photos and leisure shootings. That puts me in the 500 GB of storage need

While I know Aperture very well and have been using it for 12 or 13 years, I'm still not completely at ease with C1, so pardon me if I make some mistake.

This will cover the following topics :
- Storage
- Backup
- Culling
- Organizing and Tagging
- Sharing

It will not cover the topic of migration, which is a subject in itself, with sometimes different solutions from the ones addressing current workflow.

One of the difficulty of Aperture demise (*) is that Aperture was so easy to use that you could play with it just for the sake of perfectly organizing your Library, without really asking yourself what was the purpose of organizing it perfectly. Now a lot of tricky questions appear, which are difficult to answer. At least for an amateur photograph. And indeed, some of usual workflow modalities are a way to implicitly answer them, without really addressing them as such.

Indeed, in the beginning, with Aperture, everything was easy. With a bit of tweaking you could have all your photos, coming from your DSLR and your smartphone in your Mac and mirrored on your devices so you could access everything from everywhere at any time. Not so, today, and choices must be made.

Sofar, I'm inclined to do the following :

a) Starting from Access (and sharing) need
I want to be able to access my photos from everywhere at any time. Since I'm all Apple (Mac, iPhones and iPads), the easiest way is to use Apple Photos, which handles the synchronization on all Apple devices .
It comes with a map view which I find quite useful to retrieve a particular photo and to keep track of where a photo was precisely shot.
The Face view, while not 100 % efficient, is a cool bonus to find my kids and friends pictures.
Apple now offers an automatic recognition of scene (for example : all "sea" pictures), and it is likely the way of the future, that will prevent from tedious tagging

The trick is that Apple charges you an hefty price for access to the cloud : 10€ per month above 200 GB.
That's too much for me. I feel robbed, for the occasional use I will have of it, and don't want Apple to indulge in such extorsions plans.
So I settled for the 1€/ month for up to 50 GB which I could reach by some size and jpeg optimization. I may eventually end in the 3 € / month for the 50-200 GB plan.

Here all my iPhone pictures are present by default, and back-upped by essence by iCloud. (as far as I don't erase them myself from there).
I used to backup my iPhones pictures in Aperture, since I used Aperture to navigate through my pictures, but it was a PITA to do (mainly because how they wanted to come back as duplicates in the cloud afterwards) and I don't see the benefits of doing this in Capture One.

I don't like Photos automatic organisation, so I replicated my Aperture organisations in Photos albums, which is mainly a high level thematic folder grouping (Shootings, Moments, Holidays, Family, Friends, Pro, Convenient) with inside each maybe around one undred thematic projects of 5 to 200 pictures each.

Here I take care every photo is localized and has its album. Every photo prior to aperture migration has keyword, and rating (** to *****). So far, none has after the migration.

Now I need to come up with a way to upload my pics from C1, which will mainly contains my DSLR photos.
There are some C1 exporting recipes for that. Which brings us to the next topic

b) Culling and rationale for C1 use

Culling iPhones photos is not really a subject : they are often only there for memories, not very heavy or particularly duplicated, nor particularly high quality or sophisticated . I keep almost everything.

By nature on my DSLR, I will typically make several shots of the same subject, each bringing an additional 20MB Raw + 5MB Jpeg.

If I put everything on Apple Photos, I will rapidly go back to the 10€/month plan, and I will clutter my Photos Catalog with duplicates, making it useless.

That's where C1 comes in. As a culling tool, but also as an editing tool, as often I need to enhance the picture before uploading it to the permanent Apple Photos archive.
This is also why it makes sense to have a software which does both, developing and cataloging, as you can sometimes change which picture is a keeper based on your editing work and success.

Also C1 can handle as big as I need photos collections, possibly slicing them for performance issues, but without any size limitations as in Apple Photos Plans.

This is the rationale for splitting the organization and storage : Apple Photos is the source for iPhone pictures, but C1 is the source for High quality DSLR photos.

c) Folder organization and storage

Due to legacy, my Aperture photos have been referenced on a folder hierarchy in the file system that mirrors the project organisation inside Aperture (see above).
I intend to keep the same organisation for future pictures that will go in the C1 catalog.

That way I stay coherent with my Photos organization. Also, if for any reason I need to access to the photos through the finder, it remains transparent.

As a consequence, I need to think it over at import stage in C1.

So every import needs to identify what are the different thematics involved (better if it is done after each unique thematic shooting), define a name for these thematics, group photos in different folders accordingly, and then replicate this is in C1 User collection, by creating a project for each thematic.
And also an album in each project with all images inside. Then move each folder to each album.
Pretty cumbersome. And better done from the C1 User interface.
I tend to put each new import in a big folder then manually separate the photos in the different folders needed, that I create on the fly for that purpose.
There may be room for improvement here using C1 templates, but not sure yet how.

So far my pictures are on a SSD storage that makes the all process smoother, but I may have to deal with separate hard drives in the future

d) Backup
The backup is transparent as the DSLR photos are on my main hard drive and the back-up is done by Time Machine.
Due to historical reasons, I bought also a SSD for the back-up hard drive. That way I have the benefit of silence and speed, and no constant spinning and lagging. It might be overkill, but so far, it works.

There is a caveat for the iPhone photos : Apple Photos only keep deleted files for 30 days, so if I make a mistake without noticing it I don't have a backup inside Apple Photos. You can get around this by asking Apple Photos to store locally your iCloud photos and include them in your Time Machine scope (where they are by default if it 's on your main hard drive)

On top of that, given that the Time Machine disk will ultimately get full and begin erasing the older backups, it is good practice to have an additional hard drive where you once a year backup all your photos.

e) Back to culling

I found I needed a way to retrieve the Aperture stacking feature which is absent from C1.
In my idea, a stack is a group of photos taken a few seconds apart, that are the same in terms of subject and view angle; basically they are redundant.
On top of that, I add the principle of choosing as head of stack the "best" photo of the stack

The benefit of stacking I see is as follows :
- You get a reminder of the process and mistakes that led you to take different pictures and it is an opportunity to become a better photographer.
- It obliges you to think of what is the best picture. You become aware that there is no one single answer to this question; this leads you to think of what you want to do and say with your picture
- you get a (subjective) feeling of accomplishment by mastering your shooting session
- in a way you're advancing yourself for the "sharing" step, so the time is not lost
- It makes it a lot easier to look at a shooting from a reportage "point of view" by selecting only the "head o f stack"
- you can save disk storage and time in organization and tagging, dealing with only one picture instead of a few

What I contemplate to do then is :

- keep shooting in Raw +Jpeg.
  • I don't like the idea of not being 100% sure to visualize my photo now or in the future, either due to apple not upgrading its OS, or C1 providing a bad retro-engineered icc profile (which he does on Canon)
Once I have imported all my photos in my album,
- filter out jpg (ctrl J as personalized shortcut)
- go rapidly through the ones that are flops and tag them red (7 as a personalized shortcut). Possibly delete them later if it is worth the hassle
- for every stack I see flag the head of stack yellow (8 as a personalized shortcut; 6 as "no label" to undo). You can flag two instead of one if you hesitate
- then select every yellow in the album (ctrl 8 as a personalized shortcut)
- rate them (1 to 5 as a shortcut). From a website I visited years ago :

• One-star: Keep• These images aren’t very good, but aren’t accidental photos of my shoes, so they stick around, but are usually excluded from normal viewing.• Two-stars: Show• These are for decent photos that I either have no inclination to share, or it would be redundant to share.• Three-stars: Share• These are for good photos that I want to share.• Four-stars: Boast• These are the ones (along with the fives) that I’d show people as representative.• Five-stars: Call National Geographic

Actually, when I do that I tend to also edit and crop some pictures in order to upgrade them. (the original jpg might be helpful as a reference on how to render some colors)
There's a trade-off here : the more pictures you edit, the more they will be correctly classed, and relevantly shared afterwards, but the more time it takes, and the longer you'll delay the process of sharing them.
I see it optimized as being able to push your pictures in the days after they have been taken, so that you can effectively bring them in discussion. Eventually coming back to a few of them if you want the perfect edit

f) Share
I still am in the process to thinking this over.

When I did the Aperture migration to Photos, I had 20 000 pics to migrate and needed to bring the space ratio in a factor 10 so I was quite drastic :
- discard the *
- separate all raw from raw +jpeg pairs and keep the jpg
- compress quality 20% the **
- compress quality 70% the ***
- compress quality 80% the ****
- compress the files > 5 MB
- keep the other *****

It worked, it saved me a hundred bucks avoiding the 200 GB plan for a few years but I took me a lot of work and I am now wondering if It was not too drastic, as it messes with Apple Photos Face recognition feature for some pics where the face is small.

Now that I'm approaching the point where I need to go 200GB, I'm considering a simpler process where I'l take all my yellows C1 and upgrade them orange selectively on the ** and maybe compress all 80% while scaling the resolution and using a sRGB profile.
Then export all orange to Apple Photos and place them in their appropriate mirrored albums created for the purpose

g) Tagging

Now that Apple Photo would be my software of choice to look at my pictures, I will
- ensure all photos are in a dedicated thematic album (with a smart album chasing the ones that are not)

-> replicating the folder structure on my hard drive

- ensure all photos are properly geolocalized (with a smart album chasing the ones that are not)

-> this seems easier and safer than using an external software embedding gps data in the Raw before exporting from C1

- give-up keyword tagging, except maybe for some 5* with my kids, in order to make sure Apple Face recognition does not miss them
- finding a way for rating propagation from C1 to Photos, either through a dedicated apples script or maybe a simpler two-step process, exporting first all 4* & 5* and tagging them favorites

Conclusion

The process is a lot more complex than before and I lost one-place storage of all my pics, and coherent tagging, rating, and geolocalization.
So it's not ideal.
Anyway I keep trace of all originals (iPhone on Photos iCloud, DSLR in hard-drive and C1), have a backup, have a coherent album structure on Photos, and can access my best "stacked" pics from everywhere.

So what do you think ?
What is your process, Capture One Mac users ?

HuguesInParis

(*) Aperture can still work on Big Sur once patched by an app called Revolut, but
a) it seems to provoke big troubles with the Finder who can be stucked at 100% CPU
b) there is no guarantee it is bug free
c) there is no guarantee it it will continue so in the future
d) it used to interfere with Time Machine provoking huge backups each time it is open
e) the developer part shows its age
f) connection with iCloud is not possible any more, which makes sharing complex
 
The trick is that Apple charges you an hefty price for access to the cloud : 10€ per month above 200 GB.
That's too much for me. I feel robbed, for the occasional use I will have of it, and don't want Apple to indulge in such extorsions plans.
So I settled for the 1€/ month for up to 50 GB which I could reach by some size and jpeg optimization. I may eventually end in the 3 € / month for the 50-200 GB plan.
I'm not sure if it's offered in Europe, but check out the new Apple One plans. They bundle storage, News, Music, Games, etc. And can be shared with family. Since my father uses some of those, and since other family members back up mobile devices to iCloud, we found the bundle was a great deal and now we share like 1TB.
b) Culling and rationale for C1 use

This is the rationale for splitting the organization and storage : Apple Photos is the source for iPhone pictures, but C1 is the source for High quality DSLR photos.
I did something similar when I used C1, and do so now even with LrC. But now with Apple ProRaw images on the iPhone I have to make allowances for some iPhone shots to go along with the DSLR/real camera shots. You might want to do that too. As well as consider Raw Power for some editing chores, since it's the closest thing to Aperture that exists. Very, very similar but only on the processing end (since it's developed by the Aperture developer).

In general though several of us use Photos essentially as the front end to a sharing photo gallery. So my Photos library contains pretty much just finished, developed images and then a big album of junk I don't share (QR codes, bits of maps and menus, that sort of stuff).
f) Share
I still am in the process to thinking this over.

When I did the Aperture migration to Photos, I had 20 000 pics to migrate and needed to bring the space ratio in a factor 10 so I was quite drastic :
- discard the *
- separate all raw from raw +jpeg pairs and keep the jpg
- compress quality 20% the **
- compress quality 70% the ***
- compress quality 80% the ****
- compress the files > 5 MB
- keep the other *****

It worked, it saved me a hundred bucks avoiding the 200 GB plan for a few years but I took me a lot of work and I am now wondering if It was not too drastic, as it messes with Apple Photos Face recognition feature for some pics where the face is small.

Now that I'm approaching the point where I need to go 200GB, I'm considering a simpler process where I'l take all my yellows C1 and upgrade them orange selectively on the ** and maybe compress all 80% while scaling the resolution and using a sRGB profile.
Then export all orange to Apple Photos and place them in their appropriate mirrored albums created for the purpose
Why not just selectively put some images into Photos, and not others? like just the ones you want to share? You wrote a lot about this, but I still don't know why you're using Photos.
g) Tagging

Now that Apple Photo would be my software of choice to look at my pictures, I will
- ensure all photos are in a dedicated thematic album (with a smart album chasing the ones that are not)

-> replicating the folder structure on my hard drive
Folders aren't good ways to keep track of things. I'm not sure about C1's capabilities these days, and whether it even does hierarchical keywords, but even if it doesn't keywords are FAR more flexible, robust, and universal than imparting info via folder names. Sure, we still need albums, but keywords can be used across all devices and are easy to search for.
- ensure all photos are properly geolocalized (with a smart album chasing the ones that are not)

-> this seems easier and safer than using an external software embedding gps data in the Raw before exporting from C1
Be careful. If you add metadata in Photos it means it's in that library's database, not in the images, and if say you want that info to be used in other images shot in the same place, but these are in the C1 catalog, it's hard to do that.

I think a far better practice is to embed the GPS info just as a camera would or the iPhone does, early in the process. Then it follows the image everywhere, to any application, even the Finder. I use Houdah Geo for this and it works well with Lr, Photos, etc. I'd suggest you at least look at it. It can even access Photos libraries. https://www.houdah.com/houdahGeo/?lang=en
- give-up keyword tagging, except maybe for some 5* with my kids, in order to make sure Apple Face recognition does not miss them
- finding a way for rating propagation from C1 to Photos, either through a dedicated apples script or maybe a simpler two-step process, exporting first all 4* & 5* and tagging them favorites
A keyword rating would do that. Like 1star, 2star, etc. At least for discrete finding (obviously not quite the same).
Conclusion
Good luck!
 
I moved, eventually, to Capture One from Aperture. My last photo managed by Aperture was 31 December 2019; I have not yet migrated anything before then to Capture One.

In researching how to move on from Aperture, I came to the conclusion that a good all-in-one RAW converter and DAM (that wasn't Lightroom) probably doesn't exist, meaning I needed to think about essentially two catalogs: the first being all of the raw (mostly RAW, but not always) photos out of the camera, and then a second catalog of photos that were post-processed. For me, that processing is of course the RAW "cooking," making image adjustments and tweaks, but also geotagging, and adding metadata like keywords.

Having resigned myself to this new two catalog world, I can now concentrate on the cooking part with one program, and the organizing part with another. Capture One has been better than Aperture (but not universally better) in processing my raw files, so I've settled on it -- but the beauty with separating your raw materials from a catalog of "finished" pictures is one could also experiment with other RAW converters and their advantages.

So my workflow is based around two computers: a laptop for ingesting, and a desktop computer for managing larger catalogs.

Step 1: I download files manually into one of three folders on my laptop:
  • DNG
  • RAW
  • iphone
The DNGs (shorthand) are simply RAW files from a Sony or Canon camera. The RAW folder is for Fujifilm files that I convert with Iridescent to DNG -- I need to do this for step 2 as I need an embedded jpg in the RAW file. The iphone images are exported as jpgs; until recently Capture One could not read HEIF files.

Step 2: geotagging with HoudahGeo. I either use a GPX track made on my iPhone or manually locate the photos on a map. I like HoudahGeo because it can also add altitude data, and of course because it writes the gps information directly to the file. I do a separate window for each camera type, because no matter how many times you "correct" a camera's clock, it drifts, sometimes significantly. Sidebar: why can't camera makers fix this? Another sidebar: this was better in Aperture, where I could cull before assigning gps data ... now I'm assigning data to photos I may well delete. Oh well.

[Yes, I could cull in Photo Mechanic first. But when I cull, I often tweak a photo before discarding. I find making a judgment about a photo from the embedded jpg is not how my brain works ... though the embedded jpg is fine for figuring out where it was taken.]

Step 3: import photos from the various folders into a Capture One session. Each month, or beginning of a trip, I start a new session, with its name being the date: so e.g., 2021 02 01, followed by 2021 02 06 CT (for a trip to CT), followed again by 2021 02 13 (e.g., now we're back.) The import copies the files into a "Capture" folder from the input folders above, and renames each file with the help of a token, such that a particular file becomes [DATE] ~ [original file name]. At this point with CP1 I cull, rate each photo and make adjustments to the ones I like. A few get exported to an Instagram folder in Dropbox, for use in IG. I rate them as in Aperture, with stars (not using one-star) and mark as "red" anything to be rejected. At the end of each session I select all the red images and delete (they go to the "Trash" subfolder of the session folder if I wanted to revisit them.) In a rare case I feel I have a hero picture I mark it purple, which approximates how I marked flagged images in Aperture.

Step 4: when a trip or month is over, I copy the session to a portable SSD and take it to the desktop computer (a 2018 Mac Mini.) I first copy the session to a back up drive of just sessions (which was previously a backup drive of just monthly libraries in Aperture.) Then I copy to a folder which is for these "raw" unprocessed files all of the photos that are in the "Capture" folder of the session, making sure to include the specific "Capture One" folder in the Capture folder (as that contains all of the image adjustments and ratings metadata.) I then rename the old Capture folder with the right date, that is, the same as the session name.

Step 5: in Capture One on my desktop, I open up my ongoing catalog. Within this catalog I can now import the session pictures: I import the raws or jpegs referenced, in place (as they are where I want them to be already.) Make sure "Include Existing Adjustments" under the "Adjustments" tab is checked! It takes a moment and unlike Aperture, the files don't look like their importing for a long time, which makes you nervous it's not working with a large import, but eventually within the Capture One catalog the new "2021 02 06 CT" folder (or the like) appears under the folder tab, under Folders.

my Capture One catalog, from 2020
my Capture One catalog, from 2020

Step 6, and beyond is what I'm still tweaking. For now, I only have photos in a Capture One catalog since 2020, so the catalog is not huge. However, I'm not sure how well Capture One could manage catalogs the size of what I had in Aperture (about 450,000 images.) I haven't yet migrated my keyword list to Capture One, in part because I keep reading that e.g., Photo Mechanic is so much better with keywords. Perhaps, though of course to make Capture One "see" the keywords means .xlm files, as unlike HoudahGeo Photo Mechanic refuses to write to RAW files, and furthermore I'm not sure keywords can even be written to jpgs. (Tiffs can be written to, so maybe that's the format for "finished" pictures.) Going forward, either I'll work with keywords within Capture One, or figure out how to make the process less painful with Photo Mechanic.

Finally, the construction of a "finished" catalog. Here I think I've settled on making .tiffs -- disk space is cheap. On the other hand, one could settle on jpgs, and make the final catalog be a Photos.app catalog. This would then have the benefit of being pushed to other computers, with the added layer of protection of being in the cloud. Or perhaps there's another DAM that may be better: I'd really like something that let me, like Aperture, see where photos were taken on a map. I've looked at and purchased ACDSee Photo Studio (it's ... OK?), darktable (free), digiKam (free), and Photo Mechanic Plus (no map in that last one.) It may be that Photos.app is the best for this, though I wish I could see the map with pins rather than little thumbnails of the photographs.

I've like keeping track of statistics of my photos -- where taken, how many of this quality or that lens, and the like -- in an ongoing excel file. The demise of Aperture and having access to all of that metadata in one place has been frustrating, but so far that same information can be gleaned from Capture One. Eventually, though, I'll have to give up on that part of this hobby and just switch to keeping long-term track of the metadata of "greatest hits," so to speak. A bummer, but no so much of a bummer that I want to rent Lightroom from Adobe.

HTH.

--
 
Thanks for your answer
b) Culling and rationale for C1 use

This is the rationale for splitting the organization and storage : Apple Photos is the source for iPhone pictures, but C1 is the source for High quality DSLR photos.
I did something similar when I used C1, and do so now even with LrC. But now with Apple ProRaw images on the iPhone I have to make allowances for some iPhone shots to go along with the DSLR/real camera shots.
Good point. I'm still with my old iPhone 7, but it may not be forever, and I might regret having separate catalogs in the future. But then it's an additional import process and it complicates the export from C1
You might want to do that too. As well as consider Raw Power for some editing chores, since it's the closest thing to Aperture that exists. Very, very similar but only on the processing end (since it's developed by the Aperture developer).
I had downloaded and did not get the point that it was synchronizing with Photos. Now I've had a second look, but still a little confused at how it could be used to cull my photos, as its strength seems more on the edit part, which I intend to rather do with C1.
In general though several of us use Photos essentially as the front end to a sharing photo gallery. So my Photos library contains pretty much just finished, developed images and then a big album of junk I don't share (QR codes, bits of maps and menus, that sort of stuff).
The more I think of it, the more I also see it that way.

Plus a front end for retrieving photos.

- The photos that are in the Photos library, though the various modes proposed : albums, faces, keywords, search engine with automatic recognition, places. All this available through all my Apple devices, which makes it possible to access from everywhere

- And the ones that are not in the library, by going to the needed folder in the finder
f) Share
I still am in the process to thinking this over.

When I did the Aperture migration to Photos, I had 20 000 pics to migrate and needed to bring the space ratio in a factor 10 so I was quite drastic :
- discard the *
- separate all raw from raw +jpeg pairs and keep the jpg
- compress quality 20% the **
- compress quality 70% the ***
- compress quality 80% the ****
- compress the files > 5 MB
- keep the other *****

It worked, it saved me a hundred bucks avoiding the 200 GB plan for a few years but I took me a lot of work and I am now wondering if It was not too drastic, as it messes with Apple Photos Face recognition feature for some pics where the face is small.

Now that I'm approaching the point where I need to go 200GB, I'm considering a simpler process where I'l take all my yellows C1 and upgrade them orange selectively on the ** and maybe compress all 80% while scaling the resolution and using a sRGB profile.
Then export all orange to Apple Photos and place them in their appropriate mirrored albums created for the purpose
Why not just selectively put some images into Photos, and not others? like just the ones you want to share? You wrote a lot about this, but I still don't know why you're using Photos.
I believe I appreciate the idea to be able to have a kind of "reportage" set available if I want to, including the nice developed pics that have an artistic value, but also the more common ones that are more a documentation of my memory. 5-10-15 years after the shot, you appreciate to see all of them. also if I keep only the "nice" ones, I often have only too little per album to render the atmosphere of the trip. And also, I don't need to think in advance what is valuable to share and what is not.
g) Tagging

Now that Apple Photo would be my software of choice to look at my pictures, I will
- ensure all photos are in a dedicated thematic album (with a smart album chasing the ones that are not)

-> replicating the folder structure on my hard drive
Folders aren't good ways to keep track of things. I'm not sure about C1's capabilities these days, and whether it even does hierarchical keywords, but even if it doesn't keywords are FAR more flexible, robust, and universal than imparting info via folder names. Sure, we still need albums, but keywords can be used across all devices and are easy to search for.
Actually, I never used folders before Aperture's demise. I had a natural folder-like hierarchy with Aperture imposed projects, and I found it very useful. I actually have 640 of them, which roughly translates in 640 real-life shooting events.

So I keep them out of legacy reasons, but also as it is a security to have this grouping stored independently of any software. It does also make it easier to look at a collection out of any software, and to hop from one software to another, while staying in the relevant collection.

I am however indeed thinking of putting the info in a tag. My first idea was an IPTC tag. I was considering the IPTC "headline" tag, which seems closer to the purpose.

However after having checked, it does not seem to be imported in Photos, neither displayed nor searchable :-(
- ensure all photos are properly geolocalized (with a smart album chasing the ones that are not)

-> this seems easier and safer than using an external software embedding gps data in the Raw before exporting from C1
Be careful. If you add metadata in Photos it means it's in that library's database, not in the images, and if say you want that info to be used in other images shot in the same place, but these are in the C1 catalog, it's hard to do that.

I think a far better practice is to embed the GPS info just as a camera would or the iPhone does, early in the process. Then it follows the image everywhere, to any application, even the Finder. I use Houdah Geo for this and it works well with Lr, Photos, etc. I'd suggest you at least look at it. It can even access Photos libraries. https://www.houdah.com/houdahGeo/?lang=en
It's a fair point, but I'm always reluctant to touch original photos; also it messes with the file date. And it may be a bottle neck in the filing process. On top of the fact that there may be 10 times less photos to tag inside Photos, due to the culling process.

[Edit: and also, touching the original pictures triggers a new backup of all my legacy pics, which is a pain, as it is 400 GB and would likely lead me to manage multiple hard drives back ups)

Conversely, you're right that if I want to extract the data later, it will be difficult.
- give-up keyword tagging, except maybe for some 5* with my kids, in order to make sure Apple Face recognition does not miss them
- finding a way for rating propagation from C1 to Photos, either through a dedicated apples script or maybe a simpler two-step process, exporting first all 4* & 5* and tagging them favorites
A keyword rating would do that. Like 1star, 2star, etc. At least for discrete finding (obviously not quite the same).
Indeed. Good idea, but then you have to make sure the original C1 rating and the keyword stay in sync.
Thanks for taking the time to answer.
 
Last edited:
(...)

f) Share

I still am in the process to thinking this over.

When I did the Aperture migration to Photos, I had 20 000 pics to migrate and needed to bring the space ratio in a factor 10 so I was quite drastic :
- discard the *
- separate all raw from raw +jpeg pairs and keep the jpg
- compress quality 20% the **
- compress quality 70% the ***
- compress quality 80% the ****
- compress the files > 5 MB
- keep the other *****

It worked, it saved me a hundred bucks avoiding the 200 GB plan for a few years but I took me a lot of work and I am now wondering if It was not too drastic, as it messes with Apple Photos Face recognition feature for some pics where the face is small.
Your long post is very interesting. Your classification of 1 to 5 * is well expressed.

I have about 4TB of pictures now. They are in LR6 (no subscription). I will have to migrate to another kind of software and leave the LR catalog (my version is already obsolete). With only 10% of 200K pictures tagged with keywords, it might or not be worth the trouble to find an automated way to port the keywords to my next (future) RAW developer & DAM software.

I think that -- ideally -- a workflow should not be constrained by disk space. 200 GB is not enough. Sooner or later even with a lot of work (and you work very hard to save space), you will outgrow 200 GB.

Also, I've worked in IT for 40 years. If you care for your own data, you should not let someone else store it for you. Never mind who they are or what is the service agreement. Just buy a few more external disks with 4, 8 or 16TB. HDDs are inexpensive. The time you spend is expensive.

Cloud storage is only convenient for sharing. It's not a really really reliable backup. Read the service agreement again: what happens if the service supplier loose your data permanently ?

Perhaps, I'm speaking more about my own needs, but, I will strive to have a simpler workflow.

Nonetheless, it's interesting to read how you manage your pictures data. (and the replies)
 
Your long post is very interesting. Your classification of 1 to 5 * is well expressed.
Thanks. It is not mine, but I have been using for a long time now and it is quite effective.
I have about 4TB of pictures now. They are in LR6 (no subscription). I will have to migrate to another kind of software and leave the LR catalog (my version is already obsolete). With only 10% of 200K pictures tagged with keywords, it might or not be worth the trouble to find an automated way to port the keywords to my next (future) RAW developer & DAM software.
I don't think it will be too hard to automate it. The only caveat is hierarchical keywords that may not be compatible.
I think that -- ideally -- a workflow should not be constrained by disk space. 200 GB is not enough. Sooner or later even with a lot of work (and you work very hard to save space), you will outgrow 200 GB.

Also, I've worked in IT for 40 years. If you care for your own data, you should not let someone else store it for you. Never mind who they are or what is the service agreement. Just buy a few more external disks with 4, 8 or 16TB. HDDs are inexpensive. The time you spend is expensive.

Cloud storage is only convenient for sharing. It's not a really really reliable backup. Read the service agreement again: what happens if the service supplier loose your data permanently ?
Maybe I was not clear. I am already past the 200 GB threshold and indeed intend to keep all my originals(*) on my HD, backupped by my own means. The Photos.app part is to share and access the more nice pictures. However I agree with your point that even with less storage needs, cloud is not your ideal solution. Especially with Apple who likes to change their offer to suit its own strategic goals.

(*) on a second thought, my iPhone originals for the last year are only in iCloud.... Hmm hmm.
Perhaps, I'm speaking more about my own needs, but, I will strive to have a simpler workflow.
I've begun trying to implement it with 2500 pics that were waiting to be organized.

Sofar, it's working, with some limits :

- Photos.app UI for assigning a location is not user friendly, especially for little precisions in batch assignations. I'm definitely considering using Houdahgeo, as advised by @robgendreau

- it's very time-consuming to try to keep the 2 databases in sync. For example, you assigned a 3 stars to a pic, but now you see it as a 4 *. Or you had a go in the C1 database and tweaked a photo to make it look better, that now changed its rating and its appearance and should be reloaded in Photos.app.

Or you did not dedicate enough attention and you have now redundant Photos.app which defeats the purpose of having a diaporama-like selection and you want to delete some , but then you would have to go back in C1 to change their status to "not yellow"

- some iPhone pics that belong to the same shooting session and should be in the same album session as the one from the DSLR are in iCloud and not in C1. This makes even manual syncing more complex

- I've realized that Photos.app has a bug (or is it a feature ?) that makes exporting tags more complicated (their xmp export function only exports the tag that Photos.app can modify, the other one being only in the original Photo). This decreases my trust in using Photos.app as the tag reference database.

As a consequence, I'm gearing towards using C1 as the main database of trust and Photos as a front-end to expose a selection for sharing, and to access a particular photo name (that I will consult later in C1, along with the alternatives of the same session)
Nonetheless, it's interesting to read how you manage your pictures data. (and the replies)
Thanks for the kind words.
 
At this moment, there are no obviously good or better digital asset management (DAM) app for enthusiast photographers. (*)

I use LR6 and I know it is a dead end. I will have to migrate to something else eventually.

If I can put up with LR6 now, it's because I only have older cameras that LR6 supports.

I want to use DxO PL3 (or a newer version) as RAW developer, but, it does not have anything like "Grid" mode in LR. I have tried C1 a while ago. The RAW development was very good, but, the catalog feature was not as good as LR6. (I have 200K pics).

My understanding now is that the only sustainable strategy for long term storage of pictures is to rely essentially on the filesystem (in Finder or Terminal), with searching (filenames, folder names, EXIF, IPTC metadata) using Spotlight (or find and grep, in Terminal).

Using an app like Avalanche to migrate the LR catalog could be interesting... but migrate to which DAM ? LR10 or Luminar ?? No, thanks. I do not want to get stuck with precious information (keywords, tags, etc) stored into a proprietary database (catalog or whatever).

(*) P.S.: I'm not a Pro. My personal decisions are not the same as if they were business decisions.
 
I bought C1, because I wanted to use the edition features and did not really realize the benefits of a good DAM untill I left Aperture.

Now I am learning to use it. I don't think I would recommend it as it has a complex UI and Phase One is a pro oriented company, meaning they're overcharging the software because of a captive audience.

However, now that I have it and see the alternatives, I plan on staying on it.

C1 was developed for studio pros, so it is pretty oriented on session work.

Its main shortcomings come from that : lack of localization edition and mapping, lack of stack features, performance issues so they say over 10 000 pics, navigation between collections a bit clumsy. Filtering is easy for basic logic, but advanced filtering is cumbersome.

Again, I don't think I would recommend it, especially to a non pro user, but I believe when you get used to it, you can get along with it.
 
C1 is an excellent RAW developer.

To live with C1 slowness when managing more than 20 or 50K pictures in a single catalog, creating one catalog per year might be a good enough solution.

Eventually, I will wean myself from LR6 -- it will take more than one year -- and, I will post in this forum to explain the solution I found.
 
Personally, I've found Capture One's clumsiness compared to Aperture, when it comes to culling down and rating a shoot, has pretty much resulted in me not really shooting much since I bought it.

It's just made the process work, and I shoot for the fun of shooting. Aperture was always fun and empowering to work in.

Aperture had such a beautiful workflow - import from card, Aperture auto-creates library albums for every shoot day on the card.

Then, I could select an album, see all the thumbnails on one screen with the browser, and see a full screen image on my second screen - and vitally, all my keyboard controls for viewer control (zoom etc) are hard-bound to the viewer display.

The ability to run a flag pass over all the pics, switch on "flagged" filter, then go through and run star ratings etc was so fast, and required no mouse work - you could drive the whole thing from the keyboard.

Capture One, by comparison:

Can't auto create albums for shooting events, so I have to manually import images from each day's shooting, and manually create the album by name.

Then, once the images are in, the keyboard shortcuts for controlling the viewer aren't actually bound to the viewer, so you select a thumbnail in the browser, then you have to manually click on he viewer with the mouse, then you get access to the zoom key shortcuts, then you have to click back onto the next thumbnail in the browser.

There's no Flag option for simple binary yes / no first pass (the C1 selects folder alternative is clumsy).

Also, no option to auto create a version when you make any changes, unlike Aperture, where you always have an unaltered version as a part of the stack, so you can instantly see which images have had a change, by virtue of which ones have more than one version.

Where I'm at currently - I'm doing all my selects and culling from an import in Aperture, then exporting the finished set of selects from each shoot as a separate Aperture library, importing that library into Capture One, and working on the image processing from there.

All in all, it's a less fun way to work, than when I was Aperture-Only. :(

--
matt godden
http://www.mattgodden.com
 
Last edited:
Personally, I've found Capture One's clumsiness compared to Aperture, when it comes to culling down and rating a shoot, has pretty much resulted in me not really shooting much since I bought it.
Same for me. But I believe a good mastering of C1 could improve this situation.
It's just made the process work, and I shoot for the fun of shooting. Aperture was always fun and empowering to work in.

Aperture had such a beautiful workflow - import from card, Aperture auto-creates library albums for every shoot day on the card.

Then, I could select an album, see all the thumbnails on one screen with the browser, and see a full screen image on my second screen - and vitally, all my keyboard controls for viewer control (zoom etc) are hard-bound to the viewer display.

The ability to run a flag pass over all the pics, switch on "flagged" filter, then go through and run star ratings etc was so fast, and required no mouse work - you could drive the whole thing from the keyboard.

Capture One, by comparison:
Can't auto create albums for shooting events, so I have to manually import images from each day's shooting, and manually create the album by name.
You can decide to create first the album by name then import automatically there. And eventually change names and folders afterwards.
Then, once the images are in, the keyboard shortcuts for controlling the viewer aren't actually bound to the viewer, so you select a thumbnail in the browser, then you have to manually click on he viewer with the mouse, then you get access to the zoom key shortcuts, then you have to click back onto the next thumbnail in the browser.
You can assign a shortcut to that. I use > which on my French keyboard is close to the option key
There's no Flag option for simple binary yes / no first pass (the C1 selects folder alternative is clumsy).
You can assign a shortcut to colors
Also, no option to auto create a version when you make any changes, unlike Aperture, where you always have an unaltered version as a part of the stack, so you can instantly see which images have had a change, by virtue of which ones have more than one version.

Where I'm at currently - I'm doing all my selects and culling from an import in Aperture, then exporting the finished set of selects from each shoot as a separate Aperture library, importing that library into Capture One, and working on the image processing from there.
That's a solution but obviously fragile if you need yo upgrade your Mac . I suppose you used revolut to make Aperture compatible. I've some performance issue on Big Sur with Aperture
All in all, it's a less fun way to work, than when I was Aperture-Only. :(
I agree. I miss the stack feature and the mapping.
 
Thanks for your answer
g) Tagging

Now that Apple Photo would be my software of choice to look at my pictures, I will
- ensure all photos are in a dedicated thematic album (with a smart album chasing the ones that are not)

-> replicating the folder structure on my hard drive
Folders aren't good ways to keep track of things. I'm not sure about C1's capabilities these days, and whether it even does hierarchical keywords, but even if it doesn't keywords are FAR more flexible, robust, and universal than imparting info via folder names. Sure, we still need albums, but keywords can be used across all devices and are easy to search for.
Actually, I never used folders before Aperture's demise. I had a natural folder-like hierarchy with Aperture imposed projects, and I found it very useful. I actually have 640 of them, which roughly translates in 640 real-life shooting events.

So I keep them out of legacy reasons, but also as it is a security to have this grouping stored independently of any software. It does also make it easier to look at a collection out of any software, and to hop from one software to another, while staying in the relevant collection.
Folders are a creation of software. And can disappear (I've had that happen with a disk crash, where upon recovery all folders were gone although the files were saved. And if you accidently move something out of a folder, then that info is gone. Keywords and IPTC metadata in files or sidecars is more robust, and more universal.
I am however indeed thinking of putting the info in a tag. My first idea was an IPTC tag. I was considering the IPTC "headline" tag, which seems closer to the purpose.

However after having checked, it does not seem to be imported in Photos, neither displayed nor searchable :-(
Keywords are. And Photos can also understand I think titles and captions. But yeah, it's sadly deficient in relation to metadata.
- ensure all photos are properly geolocalized (with a smart album chasing the ones that are not)

-> this seems easier and safer than using an external software embedding gps data in the Raw before exporting from C1
Be careful. If you add metadata in Photos it means it's in that library's database, not in the images, and if say you want that info to be used in other images shot in the same place, but these are in the C1 catalog, it's hard to do that.

I think a far better practice is to embed the GPS info just as a camera would or the iPhone does, early in the process. Then it follows the image everywhere, to any application, even the Finder. I use Houdah Geo for this and it works well with Lr, Photos, etc. I'd suggest you at least look at it. It can even access Photos libraries. https://www.houdah.com/houdahGeo/?lang=en
It's a fair point, but I'm always reluctant to touch original photos; also it messes with the file date. And it may be a bottle neck in the filing process. On top of the fact that there may be 10 times less photos to tag inside Photos, due to the culling process.
No competent geotagging software messes with the IMAGE date, unless you want it to. File dates can get changed through all sorts of actions, and are far far less reliable than the exif or iPTC dates. One should rely on those, not file creation or modification dates if possible.

I hope you find an acceptable solution.
 
Then, once the images are in, the keyboard shortcuts for controlling the viewer aren't actually bound to the viewer, so you select a thumbnail in the browser, then you have to manually click on he viewer with the mouse, then you get access to the zoom key shortcuts, then you have to click back onto the next thumbnail in the browser.
You can assign a shortcut to that. I use > which on my French keyboard is close to the option key
You mean assign a key to Switch To Viewer, then press a second key to achieve the zoom level?

That's a terrible kludge (for which I assigned one of my mouse buttons ;-)), but it still makes it a two interaction task, that should really be a single task - when I choose a zoom level, I expect it to apply to whatever window has the Viewer task, regardless of where the mouse focus is.

The reason the behaviour is broken, I'd hazard a guess, is that it was only ever worked on / tested by people using C1 in single window layout.
That's a solution but obviously fragile if you need yo upgrade your Mac . I suppose you used revolut to make Aperture compatible. I've some performance issue on Big Sur with Aperture
Nope, still running High Sierra, and have no real urge to upgrade.
 
Last edited:
Folders are a creation of software. And can disappear (I've had that happen with a disk crash, where upon recovery all folders were gone although the files were saved. And if you accidently move something out of a folder, then that info is gone. Keywords and IPTC metadata in files or sidecars is more robust, and more universal.
That's a fair point even if the event of the disk catalog disappearing and not being restaurable with a normal backup procedure seems quite far-fetched.

On the other hand, when you're juggling with multiple software (Aperture, C1, Graphic Converter, Finder, exiftool, manufacturers DAM,...) it's a convenience to have this folder grouping.
I am however indeed thinking of putting the info in a tag. My first idea was an IPTC tag. I was considering the IPTC "headline" tag, which seems closer to the purpose.

However after having checked, it does not seem to be imported in Photos, neither displayed nor searchable :-(
Keywords are. And Photos can also understand I think titles and captions. But yeah, it's sadly deficient in relation to metadata.
Part of my Photos workflow is to spot photos without a keyword. If they have a session keyword, then it is broken.

Titles are not displayed on iDevices, (how careless from apple !) which makes caption the place to write titles by default. Also, when Title is empty, Photos on the desktop displays the file name, which is more useful than the session name.

Also with 640 albums, I would need 640 keywords, which would make keywords assignment a pain It's a fair point, but I'm always reluctant to touch original photos; also it messes with the file date. And it may be a bottle neck in the filing process. On top of the fact that there may be 10 times less photos to tag inside Photos, due to the culling process.
No competent geotagging software messes with the IMAGE date, unless you want it to.
You may have convinced me on this one (geo tagging beforehand). Photos UI is not very efficient for geotagging
File dates can get changed through all sorts of actions, and are far far less reliable than the exif or iPTC dates. One should rely on those, not file creation or modification dates if possible.
I found there's an option to preserve the modified date on Houdah geo. Problem solved !

I still think that having a more or less reliable file date in the finder makes it easier to work
I hope you find an acceptable solution.
Thanks for your input.
 
Last edited:
At this moment, there are no obviously good or better digital asset management (DAM) app for enthusiast photographers. (*)

I use LR6 and I know it is a dead end. I will have to migrate to something else eventually.

If I can put up with LR6 now, it's because I only have older cameras that LR6 supports.
May I ask what is wrong with LR Classic (v10.x)? Is it only the subscription model?
 
At this moment, there are no obviously good or better digital asset management (DAM) app for enthusiast photographers. (*)

I use LR6 and I know it is a dead end. I will have to migrate to something else eventually.

If I can put up with LR6 now, it's because I only have older cameras that LR6 supports.
May I ask what is wrong with LR Classic (v10.x)? Is it only the subscription model?
Yes, I'd rather pay once every 3 or 5 years.

Also, the default development done by LR is not as satisfying as what C1 or DxO PL or even On1 do. It's not impossible to attain similar results with LR, but, it requires several manual adjustments to get as good results. Of course, YMMV, depending of your skills, your preferences, etc.
 
Yes, I'd rather pay once every 3 or 5 years.

Also, the default development done by LR is not as satisfying as what C1 or DxO PL or even On1 do. It's not impossible to attain similar results with LR, but, it requires several manual adjustments to get as good results. Of course, YMMV, depending of your skills, your preferences, etc.
I am glad there are so many good options. I have also used LR for years, currently subscription model. I purchased perpetual license C1Pro-20 last year and find I still struggle to get the results I get so easily with LR, find myself gravitating back to the familiar. I do like the layers and skin tone features in C1. Notifications for C1 update available almost always seem to be attempts to sell the annual upgrade, which of course is significantly more than the annual subscription fee for LR/PS. I do agree LR import is less aggressive in applying interpretive adjustments than C1.
 
After using Lightroom before, I am now using DxO as my RAW converter, Affinity as my pixel editor, and Photo Supreme as my DAM. Photo Supreme can also convert a Lightroom database .
interesting

A caveat though, PhotoSupreme does not read the LR database directly. The user has to make LR create .XMP files -- one for each picture. So, LR will create the .XMP files and PhotoSupreme will read the .XMP files.
 
After using Lightroom before, I am now using DxO as my RAW converter, Affinity as my pixel editor, and Photo Supreme as my DAM. Photo Supreme can also convert a Lightroom database .
interesting

A caveat though, PhotoSupreme does not read the LR database directly. The user has to make LR create .XMP files -- one for each picture. So, LR will create the .XMP files and PhotoSupreme will read the .XMP files.
Not sure what gives you that idea. Did you try it? Afaik, Photo Supreme converts the Lightroom database. Including hierarchical keyword structures and albums.
 
Last edited:

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top