from IM5 to 3.6

[HansEverts]

At work I have introduced IMatch 3 a couple of years ago. to organize some 20 000 photos. Since then nobody followed up and as a consequence there are about 5000 unorganized photos.

Can I do that with IM5, 1) no, not at all, or 2) yes, but under the following conditions:

I needs to be done pretty soon, so I cannot really wait for IM5 and if IM5 comes out in the mean time, I will be lucky.

I tested with a few photos and it seems Okay.

I would convert the old IM3 database, add new photos, keyword, caption, etc.. At the end I would create a new IM3 database, including the new images.

[sinus]

You mean, at a real database?

If yes: no, I would not do it, IM5 is still Beta.

[HansEverts]

Problem is that I would hate to have to do it with IM3 now that I am used to IM5 and I have no clue as to when IM5 alpha can be expected. My tests show that keywords, caption, file name, etc., come out in the right fields. I would not do more complicated operations like GPS, attributes. But that is exactly why I posted this thread, to see if my idea is totally idiotic or just a little bit.

[jch2103]

Interesting question!

The official (and reasonable) answer, of course, is that IM5 is still in beta and shouldn't be counted on to be 'safe' for your images. On the other hand, IM5 uses the (presumably) reliable ExifTool to write metadata to files (and/or sidecar files). So, IF you have all your data reliably backed up AND you have a reliable way to confirm the changes/additions to your metadata AND you're prepared to risk the time investment on an experiment with unknown risk parameters, perhaps it's something you'd be willing to try (or not!). There's no way to quantify all this at this point; I guess it all depends on your risk tolerance...

[HansEverts]

Sure I realize IM5 is a beta version and I will of course not hold Photools responsible if something goes wrong. But I will minimize the risk by working only with copies of the old IM3 database, of the photos. As I said, I will not touch complex operations like versioning, etc..

The "simple" operations that are written to the image file - keywords, renaming, captions - can also be read by LR, Bridge and others. Simple and Complex are probably not the appropriate terms. Better to speak about operations that are IM5 specific and the generic ones, that can be read across the board. But if I understand it well, the first ones exist only in the database without affecting the image file (is that correct?).

So in the best case it works out fine, as my tests did, and I safe a lot of time. In the worst case I waste a bit of time, gained an experience, and without any harm to the original database and images. Having retired 2 days ago, time is not an issue anymore.

[sinus]

So in the best case it works out fine, as my tests did, and I safe a lot of time. In the worst case I waste a bit of time, gained an experience, and without any harm to the original database and images. Having retired 2 days ago, time is not an issue anymore.

Well, in this case, I would go ahead with IM5! 

[HansEverts]

Right, point well taken. However, I may not be in a hurry, but my former employer who asked me to do this, would like to see it finished within 3 months.