Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/60/9972860/html/smf/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
Anyone using ImageIngester with LR?
The DAM Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 21, 2020, 11:40:33 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
28033 Posts in 5147 Topics by 2903 Members
Latest Member: kbroch
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  The DAM Forum
|-+  Software Discussions
| |-+  Lightroom
| | |-+  Anyone using ImageIngester with LR?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Anyone using ImageIngester with LR?  (Read 8096 times)
jljonathan
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 76


View Profile
« on: January 25, 2010, 01:56:57 PM »

Importing from a card into LR 3beta doesn't allow the use of loupe view to check focus etc. unless the files have been copied to the desktop or a drive. Is anyone using ImageIngester to download from a card, or do you just copy files to desktop before importing into LR? Or, any other suggestions.
Jonathan
Logged
Ken
Full Member
***
Posts: 186


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2010, 09:31:46 AM »

Jonathan,

I use an older verseion of II with Lightroom, but I always copy my files to my computer before they see the light of either program.  This way I still have the files on the card in case something should go wrong during processing.

--Ken
Logged
jljonathan
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 76


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2010, 09:56:25 AM »

Ken
If you copy to your computer's drive, why do you use II? LR would now allow you to view in loupe and import as is. What is the advantage and use of II?
Thanks
Jonathan
Logged
Ken
Full Member
***
Posts: 186


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: January 27, 2010, 09:16:47 AM »

Hi Jonathan,

I use II because it can handle multiple tasks the way I want with just one command.  I shoot raw files.  When I am ingesting these files, I want them renamed and converted to DNG, and I both copies, raw and DNG, to also be backed up to a second drive.  Yes, these actions can be handled in Lightroom, but I prefer II because it gives me greater control.  The other big advantage of II is if you are using a netbook while in the field.  It has a much smaller footprint, and can handle the "front end" work so files are ready for ingestion when you return home.  II is a great addition to Lightroom, and I only use a fraction of its capabilities.  Of course, YMMV.

--Ken
Logged
jljonathan
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 76


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2010, 01:14:21 PM »

Ken
I finally got everything installed and organized here, and I am about to try this out. Could you be a little more specific as to how and why you use II before going into Light Room. For instance, I will be converting to DNG by checking the box to use the DNG converter. What size previews to you make if any, do you check a viewer if going to Light Room?
How have you verified the files? Before, I use to download with II and use Bridge to verify.
Using II instead of LR to accomplish similar actions, you then import the DNGs into LR by adding?
Thanks
Jonathan
Logged
Ken
Full Member
***
Posts: 186


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 02, 2010, 09:46:36 AM »

Hi Jonathan,

I do not have my computer with II and LR with me now, so I will try to answer as best I can, and of course, others can chime in with their experiences as well.

First, two disclaimers.  I am using the last version of II.  It works for me, so I have not felt the immediate need to upgrade to a more current version.  I eventually will because I want to support Marc's efforts, but right now its on my list of things to do.  Second, at present, I am only using a small number of features that II offers.  I am not a professional photographer, so I am content to use collections in Lightroom to help me manage my images.  This is far more basic than what most people would do to manage their collections (i.e. keywords, managed vocabulary, embedded metadata), but I only have so many hours in the day that I can devote to DAM.

After downloading my images from my CF cards to my hard drive, I use II to rename and then back up my NEF files according to my naming scheme.  Then I let II use Adobe's DNG converter to create the DNG files with the same name (but different file extension)  I choose not to embed the NEF file into the DNG as it is saved and backed up separately in the previous step.  Even though it may increase the size of the DNG file, I like having a 1:1 preview embedded into the file.  Do realize that LR is also going to create its own separate previews, so you need to balance processing time and sotrage according to your needs and workflow.

The DNG files are also backed up (next to the NEF files in a date-based folder scheme) and a working copy is also placed on my working hard drive.  to date, I have not run any verification programs on the files, but I have considered adding this to my work flow.  Right now, I usually view the images in LR after importing, and I figure that I have the NEF files to fall back on, but that arrangement, IMHO, would not suffice for a professional who relies on their images to earn a living.

Now that the files are backed up, renamed and converted, the working copies are ready to be imported in place into LR.  Here again, you will need to decide the size of preview that works best for you.  Once this step is complete, I make a second back up copy of the files, and am now free to post -process my images with what little time remians in my day. Wink

I hope this was helpful, and I hope that others who use more II features will feel free to contribute to this thread.  My work flow is somewhat minimalist by DAM standards, but my needs are not great at this time.  As always, YMMV.

Good luck,

--Ken
Logged
peterkrogh
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5682


View Profile Email
« Reply #6 on: February 03, 2010, 12:10:53 PM »

Jonathan,
I use IIP with LR.  I think its a great combination.
It's outlined in the new book.
Peter
Logged
jljonathan
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 76


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 04, 2010, 12:46:38 PM »

Peter
I have read through the book's information, and after comparing ingestion to LR only vs. using II, I don't see a reason for continuing to use it. In LR 3 Import you can Convert to DNG, Render previews, Back up (granted it's to one drive and without re-naming), Re-name files, use Develop setting, and it has a full metadata compliment in it's template including keywords. I can download from a card and go right to both primary archive and backup archive external drives (if I really want to include the basic metadata in a backup, I could use Chronosync, Primary to Backup archive instead). What's not to like? Don't get me wrong. Before I started using LR, I always used II for the ingestion phase, but now I don't see the need for it.
Jonathan
Logged
peterkrogh
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5682


View Profile Email
« Reply #8 on: February 05, 2010, 04:18:31 PM »

Jonathan,
Sounds like you have a good grasp of the issues and are making an informed decision, which is what I'm after.
As a matter of fact, I outline the workflow you are using for ingestion on the dpBestflow website.

http://www.dpbestflow.org/batch-output-workflow

I personally think IIP is better, safer and more convenient, but chacun à son goût.
Peter
Logged
aramb
Newbie
*
Posts: 38


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: October 20, 2010, 03:58:59 PM »

Peter:

After watching the workflow videos on dpBestFlow, it appears that you are maintaining the files as NEF files and not converting them to DNG as you suggest in the book. Did I miss something?

Thanks for explaining.

Aram Basmadjian
Macungie PA
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!