Capture One and iMatch

[terrylw64]

I own Capture One 20 and looking for a DAM that will compliment it and provide functions that C1 doesn't have.  Such as reverse Geotagging.   Is anyone using C1 with iMatch.  How is the integration and maybe a brief description of your workflow.

thank you

[Carlo Didier]

Hello and welcome here!

I have only been using C1 for some months now, my old workflow being exclusively with Bridge/ACR und all DNG files.

First, I am not a professional photographer and I don't submit images to agencies or sell them to clients, so you may have very different requirements.

The DNG workflow had the advantage (for me) that I only had to manage a single file for each image, which included a full size preview which iMatch displayed in thumbnails and viewer, so I could see the "developed" version of the images. Simple, easy, uncomplicated.

Now, with C1 it's gotten much more complicated, but it works.
What I do is process the images, once I'm satisfied with the treatment, to export to a full size JPG in a subfolder named "JPG" under the folder containing the raw files. You can, of course, use any other path to put them in and you can use a lower resolution JPG.

What annoys me very often is that when I re-process an image in C1, there is no option to simply overwrite the old JPG.

In iMatch I have defined a buddy file relation so that iMatch will use the processed JPG for displaying the raw files (see attached screenshot).

It's more complicated and more work, but it works for me.

I hope this helps a bit and maybe you could give us more details what exactly you want to know.
Remember that you can use the fully funtional trial version of iMatch to test all this.

Carlo

[Mario]

In general, to cooperate with other applications, there are some points you want to check:

Opening Files in Other Applications

which explains how you can open files from IMatch in other applications. Although I remember that C1 does not really support the Windows standard protocols for "file open" and hence this may not work that well. Other C1 users here in the community can surely help.

The other application may produce buddy/sidecar files (for settings or similar) which you will want to keep together when renaming, moving, copying or deleting files in IMatch.
This is done in IMatch by defining a buddy file relation: File Relations: Buddy Files

If you don't use DNG, but keep the original RAW file and one or more renditions of the file you produce in your RAW processor separate, you should setup a file version in IMatch: File Relations: Versioning
This unique concept allows you to tell IMatch to consider the JPG/PSD/TIFF ... you produce from your RAW file as versions of that RAW file. IMatch can then keep metadata synchronized, show you the versions you have created, you can automatically stack versions etc.
You can specify one of the versions to be used as the Visual Proxy for the RAW, which allows you to see the RAW in IMatch as it looks in your RAW processor.

When you add/edit metadata, it is usually best to do it in IMatch.
Many RAW processors out there have a somewhat sub-optimal metadata handling. Sometimes even outright destructive.
Proper metadata management is important for optimal compatibility and longevity. But it is nothing flashy that looks good on the web site, the magazine ads or reviews. Hence companies tend to not put too much work into it. A new filter or UI feature is more impressive.
IMatch takes great care of your metadata and uses the renowned ExifTool software to read and write metadata. Which is the gold standard.

Since every RAW processor out there handles things differently, the detailed configuration depends on the RAW processor you use and sometimes even which version you use.
IMatch is thankfully flexible enough to fit into your workflow and application setup.

[plastikman]

When you add/edit metadata, it is usually best to do it in IMatch.
Many RAW processors out there have a somewhat sub-optimal metadata handling. Sometimes even outright destructive.

Consider Capture One in the destructive category. Besides being extremely slow, it is destructive and before you know you will end up with duplicates. It also doesn't right .xmp files for .DNG files if I remember right, so you end up with outdated XMP data and sync conflicts.

At the moment I rather have IMatch as my single-source of truth and not have any external application f#*$ something up. So I use metadata as read-only (called "load"in Capture One, the others being manual and Full Sync -- avoid that one at all costs). Major downside is that you cannot make quick label/rating changes in Capture One.

I mainly use DxO PhotoLab nowadays and it doesn't write metadata out to begin with

[Carlo Didier]

I mainly use DxO PhotoLab nowadays and it doesn't write metadata out to begin with

But DxO arrogantly refuses to read a single one of my >30000 DNGs, just because they are not directly from a camera. Killed DxO for me forever.

About C1 and DNG/XMP: Why would you want an XMP file with a DNG?

[Aubrey]

But DxO arrogantly refuses to read a single one of my >30000 DNGs, just because they are not directly from a camera. Killed DxO for me forever.

Not quite true, quote from Dxo support site.
DxO PhotoLab 3 supports DNG format files as long as they have been generated by Adobe Lightroom, or Adobe DNG Converter, and as long as the original RAW format is also supported in the program. DxO PhotoLab 3 will also accept DNG files created natively by supported cameras.

Aubrey

[Mario]

How strange.

DNG is supposed to be a standard RAW data exchange file format.
Probably they have some dependencies on the embedded metadata to interpret the Bayer mosaic or something...

So much for DNG as a 'standard'...

[Aubrey]

So much for DNG as a 'standard'...

Yes it is odd. Also DXO cannot open the DNG that they write (from support website https://support.dxo.com/hc/en-us/sections/115003068827-Error-conditions-messages-FAQs), they have a very different philosophy for DNG's:

The DNG files DxO PhotoLab created are only meant to be used as intermediate files for further processing in other applications. Additionally, some corrections have been applied in a non-reversible fashion, such as demosaicing, noise reduction, etc.

DNG files created by DxO PhotoLab are not equivalent to the original RAW files, and for this reason, you should not consider DxO PhotoLab as a DNG converter. It only makes sense to produce DNG files with DxO PhotoLab if you wish to use these files in another program other than DxO PhotoLab.

If you want to return and continue working on an image you exported from DxO PhotoLab, we strongly recommend that you use the original RAW file and its .dop (sidecar) file, which remembers the initial settings you used to process the image.

This,kind of, makes sense in that if you keep the original file and the sidecar you can easily "re-edit" an image. I currently keep the DXO exported DNG, the NEF and dop (sidecar file). I usually don't make a tiff. (I expect to get some grief on here from this statement    ). DNGs appear to load OK in Affinity Photo when I want to do further processing.

Aubrey.

[claudermilk]

So how do the DxO generated TIFFs compare against DNG? I pretty much actively avoid DNG in part because of DxO not handling it well, and mostly because I don't have a good reason to mess with it (I pretty much go straight from CR2 to JPG).

I'm only interested because of taking advantage of the Affinity promo, which also allowed me to grab the older Nik 2 tools to play with. So I might be moving some files there for intermediate processing.

[Aubrey]

When I do make both files, the Tiff files and DNG files look exactly the same when loaded into Affinity (and when viewed in IMatch).
Not compared with Lightroom, but I would expect the same.

Terrylw64: your question looks like it has got hijacked - apologies, it was not intentional.

[claudermilk]

Thanks, and sorry for the brief hijack.

[plastikman]

I mainly use DxO PhotoLab nowadays and it doesn't write metadata out to begin with

But DxO arrogantly refuses to read a single one of my >30000 DNGs, just because they are not directly from a camera. Killed DxO for me forever.

About C1 and DNG/XMP: Why would you want an XMP file with a DNG?

1. Then that is not their fault. The only way to properly convert is using Adobe DNG converter (also used by Camera Raw and Lightroom). Any other way results in a so called "Linear DNG" which is already demosaiced. Because this is the case, DNG cannot use their RAW pipeline. Linear DNG is basically the same as Tiff but smaller filesize.

2. Because in Capture One you have to chose embedded or sidecar and they don't properly separate DNG and NEF.

[plastikman]

Regarding DNG format:

DNG has two varieties that deserve different names on this page:

"Raw DNG": The familiar variety of DNG, containing the raw image data plus added-value metadata. Almost all of the products that support DNG support at least this variety. (There are exceptions). This variety of DNG will gradually become the de facto standard raw file format.
"Linear DNG": A rarer variety of DNG, containing RGB image data (or not just RGB!) arranged in a rectilinear format. (Most practical examples of Linear DNG hold RGB image data, but it isn't a constraint, and 4 or more colours are allowed. For example, a Linear DNG obtained by converting the raw file from a Sony F828 has an extra channel, "Aqua", rather like Cyan). This RGB image data may have come from demosaiced raw image data, or from another source such as TIFF or JPEG or something else. (There is little difference between "demosaiced" and "never mosaiced").

And this is from Adobe's chief scientist if I am right (Eric Chan), regarding TIFF vs Linear DNG:

" A usual TIFF file that comes out the back end of a raw converter has already been rendered, i.e., it has been mapped to a standard color space, it has been tone mapped, white balancing has been done, etc. More technically, the image is output-referred.

" In contrast, the linear DNG is still scene-referred and can still benefit from many of the operations typically performed by a raw converter, such as white balance, the application of a camera color profile, HDR compositing, etc.

" So the underlying internal file format looks similar, but the actual image contents and the types of operations that can be applied to that image are quite different. "

Source: http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/dng/linear.htm

If DxO can't work with your DNG files, it means they are Linear DNG. This means you didn't convert your RAW files properly (and likely that your DNG files have edits-changes you made to them in some software, meaning they are not RAW anymore by definition).

Also: DxO cannot export their conversion to Raw DNG, no application can except the DNG converter from Adobe which 1:1 converts the RAW file but doesn't contain/add any edits or image conversions. Raw DNG files can be written by cameras that support it (mostly available for RAW video DNG codec).

[Carlo Didier]

When I last tested DxO a while ago, it woudn't open any of my DNGs (created mostly from Adobe ACR, partly with the DNG converter).
ANY other raw converter I ever tested could open them just fine.

[plastikman]

When I last tested DxO a while ago, it woudn't open any of my DNGs (created mostly from Adobe ACR, partly with the DNG converter).
ANY other raw converter I ever tested could open them just fine.

All my DNGs from 10 year back till today open just fine in DxO PhotoLab. They support RAW DNG files for sure.

Do yo happen to be a Fuji user? They don't support X-Trans so that might be the issue. Also, if you're camera isn't supported they support neither the original file nor the DNG conversion.

So I guess either your camera is incompatible, the DNG conversion wasn't done right (either by app or you) or you're using Fuji X-Trans camera.

[Carlo Didier]

When I last tested DxO a while ago, it woudn't open any of my DNGs (created mostly from Adobe ACR, partly with the DNG converter).
ANY other raw converter I ever tested could open them just fine.

All my DNGs from 10 year back till today open just fine in DxO PhotoLab. They support RAW DNG files for sure.

Do yo happen to be a Fuji user? They don't support X-Trans so that might be the issue. Also, if you're camera isn't supported they support neither the original file nor the DNG conversion.

So I guess either your camera is incompatible, the DNG conversion wasn't done right (either by app or you) or you're using Fuji X-Trans camera.

I rather think they may have changed their philosophy since I last tried it out. I am now a fUji user, but back then, my DNGs came from Minolta, Sony and Nikon converted raws. The original raws were accepted by DxO, but none of the converted files (from Adobes DNG converter or ACR). When I once asked them why, their very arrogant answer just closed the coffin on DxO for me for ever.

[terrylw64]

Thank you for the information.

I'm using Capture One's  sessons.   The sessions folder being the root, then Capture One creates a 'Capture', 'CaptureOne', 'Output', 'Selects' and 'Trash' folder  inside the sessions folder. 

If I use say,  use NIK or some other third party component, it creates a psd, or  tif version of my RAW file (NEF) inside my sessions folder.  The name of the RAW file could be _DSC1705.nef,   Each time, I do an edit with the party party app, it created a new psd or tif file with the name such as '_DSC1705-Edit', _DSC1705-Edit_1,  _DESC1705-Edit_2, and so forth.  And those link fine with my RAW file. 

The issue I came across is when I do my final export to say jpeg or tif, it goes to my 'Output' subfolder, now if I do more than one export then I start getting file names such as _DSC1705-Edit_1_1, DSC1705-Edit_1_2, and so forth.  And these won't link.

Any help?

Thank you

[Mario]

And these won't link.

Any help?

Link with what and help with what?

The C1 scheme do spreading files all over your hard disk seems a bit convoluted. Don't they give you control over naming and placement?
And do you really want to manage all these temporary and settings files in your DAM? DAM is for long term archival, not necessarily for managing temporary 'work' or intermediate files.

[terrylw64]

My apologies,  I didn't explain the issue very well.   But I was able to fine the solution by modifying the Link Expression in  Relation Definitions | Detection to

^(_*{name})[+\-_]*[0-9|a-z]*[+\-_]*[0-9|a-z]*\.(nks|jpg|jpeg|dng|tif|psd|nef.dxo|nef.bib|nef.dop)$

There are times when I want to have multiple final exports.   Say for different processing techniques.     By using the Link expression above, I can now use naming conventions, such as _DSC0779_KODAKGold100_PRINT.tif  or _DSC0779_KODAKGold100_Web.jpg, etc...


P.S. I've purchased IMatch and really like it. 

[Mario]

You see why I decided to support regular expressions for this feature in IMatch (and others).
While regexps seem daunting for many users (at first), they allow users to handle virtually any weird naming scheme software- and camera vendors come up with.

Note: If the file name is always _DSC0779_ (independent from whatever is appended) you can use a simpler regular expression with just a .*