Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
An institutional archive probably has significant value for the organization, including history, fundraising, and partner development. Because of that value, I would recommend that the client use software like Meg mentions above to tag these photos so they’re in control of them longterm and the photos are tagged using industry standards.
I just completed a project for a local non-profit and tagged at least 1,000 faces an hour using Lightroom Classic to make their archive searchable for staff, board, faculty, and other important members of their community.
Apple Photos catalogs are proprietary Mac-only file formats that can contain hundreds of thousands of images, thumbnails, and sub folders. Bridge is showing you exactly what it should because it lets you browse what is available at the OS level.
If you want to see what’s inside the catalog you’ll have to extract the content first.
Also, Apple Photos doesn’t support industry best practices of embedding metadata in the images. The only way to embed metadata with Apple Photos is by exporting images OUT of their ecosystem, and when you do that the file size are typically increased significantly or compressed significantly.
If you want to embed industry-standard metadata the workflow I use is to extract photos from the Apple Photos library and use other software and keep the files available in the native file system instead of keeping them in a proprietary catalog.
Welcome, Tom. It sounds like you have an interesting background that has prepared you well for this new work.
I’ve used cleaning tapes on my camcorders when their playback became flaky and it definitely cleared things up.
Thanks for joining live or watching the replay. If you’re ready to learn Adobe Lightroom Classic, we decided to offer 10% off for all TPM members through August 5, 2020. Use the code “save10” and join us today!
I have shot tethered with the Canon T7 with no issues, so it should work. I think I had the Canon software installed also, not because I use it but just because I was testing some things. Maybe that Canon software made it work and I didn’t realize the connection. There should be a dependency, but since it’s free software it wouldn’t hurt to try.
Apple Photos doesn’t follow industry standards from the IPTC in embedding metadata into the images. Therefore, I consider virtually all “organizing” in Apple Photos a waste of time that will need to be re-done if you want your photos to follow open standards and be accessible in other software apps and services.
I would extract all the content from Apple Photos, organize it chronologically, and apply industry-standard metadata with other software.
Yup, this is just how Apple designed their Photos app. If you want your photos with metadata outside of their ecosystem they’re going to re-write your photos and bloat them 50-100%. If they did this following industry standards by injecting the metadata losslessly into the header of the images, the file size would probably 0.01% larger. The crazy part is that the one piece of metadata that people would want to retain, the names of people, doesn’t come through at all.
It’s a shame and yet another reason that my first step is to extract content from Apple Photos and follow industry best practices to get them organized for the long term. I just extract the originals for a few reasons: 1. It’s WAY faster (17.x faster in your example) 2. The file sizes don’t increase 50-100% 3. Most people haven’t applied much metadata anyway. And if they did, I can always open the Photos Library for clues.
If it’s not yet clear from these threads, I don’t believe Apple cares about people’s photos. They care about people continuing to use their iPhones and iPads. It’s a lock-in strategy as far as I can tell.
This means that Apple is making their database even more cryptic and proprietary. You should be able to extract this nonsense and use the embedded capture dates to organize the original files following the workflow I teach in my Lightroom course, but if this isn’t yet another reason for people who care about the longevity of their photos then I don’t know what is.
- If the Photos library is not optimized and you can access the computer locally then copying will definitely be faster. However, I find that most clients have an optimized Photos library, many aren’t comfortable with in-person meetings in light of health concerns, and some are remote clients. For any of those reasons, syncing from iCloud is a great, albeit slow, solution.
- I would recommend that clients not optimize their library on their phone and computer, but most of my clients have more photos than local storage. Your mileage may vary.
- The time it takes to sync depends on many variables including internet speed, connection type (ethernet is generally better than wifi), number of files, size of files, and how many are not stored locally. In my experience this sync process often takes hours or days and I would never attempt to do it live with a client. I start it with the client, but I never expect it to finish.
It isn’t a sample contract, but I think it’s a good list of topics that should be covered: https://thephotomanagers.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/The-photo-managers-Client-agreement-information.pdf
Welcome, and good for you for making something new instead of waiting for the next thing!
For scanning you have three main categories: 1. Flatbed scanners which are fine but very slow. 2. High-speed photo scanners such as the Epson FastFoto which you can get for about $500. The downside to these devices is they are prone to streaks from dust, can be a bit finicky, and can only scan standard prints. If you want to scan slides, negatives, mounted prints, oversized prints, scrapbooks, etc. you’ll need a second piece of equipment. 3. My favorite is camera scanning because it’s fast, high-quality, and you can scan virtually any format of photo at high resolution. The downside of this approach is the up-front cost (at least $1500) and more time learning how to get everything setup. Once you get over the hump, I believe this is the highest quality and most profitable option.
All current versions of Lightroom have some cloud syncing capabilities, but that’s not the same thing as how you purchase/license the software. The “cloud” syncing is a feature that allows you to access your files from other devices. The subscription model is a way for Adobe to constantly deliver new features, support for new cameras, etc. Without the subscription model, you’d have to decide if you wanted each new feature, which you’d have to pay for, but different people would be on different versions and it would make collaboration a nightmare.
Believe it or not, this goes all the way back to the Enron scandal of 2001 and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. I know that not everybody is thrilled with the subscription model, but there are significant legal and financial audit reasons behind this. Maybe more detail than you wanted, but there’s more of a backstory than people realize. Here’s an example: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070115/163130.shtml
Recent Comments