Get Photos From Camera ...

[Walter]

Has anyone tried this script in CS3 Bridge 2 Beta? It is similar to "Import from Camera" but in my opinion not as flexible or powerful. It requires the camera to be directly attached to the host, and it doesn't provide all of the flexible renaming options of "Import from Camera". I posted a message on the CS3 Beta message board asking about added flexibility and the direct attach camera limitation. It went unanswered.

Does anyone know if more changes will be coming in "File > Get Photos From Camera" under the Bridge 2?

[peterkrogh]

Walter,
I would say that this is likely not in its final form.
I don't think it will be nearly as powerful and robust as ImageIngester Pro.
Perter

[Walter]

Thanks Peter. Is ImageIngesterPro compatible with CS3 Beta?

[peterkrogh]

It should be: it's pretty application independent.
There might be some testing needed, to make sure that the XMP is not incompatible.
So far, our tests (limited) show no real problems.
Peter

[Chris Bishop]

Isn't ImageIngesterPro just for pros? Obvious question, but not being one-currently (have been) I cannot see the advantages as an non-pro over the Import from camera script in CS2--cannot comment on CS3
Chris Bishop

[peterkrogh]

I'd say taht it has more to do with shooting volume and workflow environment than whether you charge for shooting photos.
If you shoot high volume, and/or need to do field downloading, then ImageIngesterPro should be well-worth the price.
Peter

[Marc Rochkind]

Regarding IIP and Photoshop CS3: I use that combination all the time. ACR 4, also. No problem with the XMP files.

Also, if you don't need dynamic metadata templates, a database, or the multi-camera shoot feature, ImageIngester is even more likely to be worth the price, since it's free. I like to think of it as being worth MORE than the price. ;-)

A major difference between II/IIP and a script is the error checking. In an app, it's possible to be very careful about read/write errors, and II/IIP are, but in a script you often can't check for errors very well.

--Marc

[peterkrogh]

I'll be a little more blunt that Marc.
While I had very high hopes for Import From Camera, I eventually became quite disappointed that the interface was never cleaned up, that the functionality was never improved, and that the bugs were never fixed. Add to that the inherent limitations of a script compared to an application.

ImageIngester Pro is an entirely different beast.  Well designed and robust, with superior logic and error checking built in. In many ways, it's like comparing Bridge to iView: at first they appear to do the same thing, but closer examination reveals a huge difference in functionality.  And the *real* difference shows up when something goes wrong.  All your past work disappears in IFC, where IIP gives a permanent record that can help you sort out what has happened.

Of course - at least from my perspective - it helps greatly that IIP was a toolset designed around an asset management workflow - mine - rather than a collection of tools that one can cobble together to support a workflow. 

There are still issues to work out: the applications need to integrate more smoothly.  A good sign from my perspective is that Tom Hogarty, the (smart) Adobe product manager for Lightroom and ACR is a big fan of ImageIngester, and would like nothing more than to help Marc make it as good as it can possibly be. (This, BTW, is another one of those instances where Adobe proves to be a reasonably benevolent giant: they understand that giving small software makers the ability to bolt on good helper applications is in their customers' best interest - and so they encourage and assist it.)

Peter