Which Version of Photoshop?

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Greg Berchin, Feb 9, 2014.

  1. Greg Berchin

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Eric Stevens, Feb 15, 2014
    1. Advertisements

  2. Greg Berchin

    Savageduck Guest

    Yup! I have a pretty good idea of how it works.
    All of that data is stored in the "Lightroom 5 Catalog.lrcat" &
    "Lightroom 5 Catalog.lrcat-journal" files which are located in the
    Lightroom folder. (note I also have LR2 & LR4 catalogs)
    That is why if you move the master you have to re-associate the image
    files with the appropriate catalog.
    Not at all. That is found in the "Lightroom 5 Catalog.lrcat" and in the
    backup folder where each back up is a back up of the latest "Lightroom
    5 Catalog.lrcat", which in my case contains 1.01GB of LR edit &
    metadata for 394GB of image files.
    Most of my GPS stuff is done via LR.
    Savageduck, Feb 15, 2014
    1. Advertisements

  3. Greg Berchin

    Alan Browne Guest

    Open enough to that level then. Could one delve into lrcat and find
    data specific to a given image and its virtual casts?
    That's about the one thing I really wish they had added to Bridge..
    Alan Browne, Feb 15, 2014
  4. Greg Berchin

    Sandman Guest

    Sandman, Feb 15, 2014
  5. Greg Berchin

    Savageduck Guest

    The nice thing about the LR map module is the ability to take image
    files without GPS tags and drag them from the "film strip" window to a
    specific position on the map provided. The GPS data is then
    automatically written to the metadata.
    I have found this useful for my G11 shots as that does not have a GPS
    unit such as the GP-1 I use with my D300S. So, it is simple enough to
    take a reference shot with my iPhone (or just use a known location)
    which gives me a good enough fix. I can then use that for more precise
    placement on the map and have my G11 shots tagged.
    Savageduck, Feb 15, 2014
  6. Greg Berchin

    Alan Browne Guest

    Useful - tedious - but useful.
    I just use EXIFTOOL to tag from my GPS once I've imported to the
    computer. There are a variety of tools with GUI/map interfaces that do
    as you state above, as well.

    I could also record positions (tracks) with my iPhone in MotionX or GPS
    Kit and tag with those. Not quite as accurate but sufficient in most cases.
    Alan Browne, Feb 16, 2014
  7. Greg Berchin

    David Taylor Guest

    On 16/02/2014 14:04, Alan Browne wrote:

    I use GeoSetter which does the same thing automatically:

    David Taylor, Feb 16, 2014
  8. Greg Berchin

    Alan Browne Guest

    EXIFTOOL does it automatically too once you've entered the command line.

    A big issue I have with these tools (there are several) is the tediously
    bad designed GUI's. GPSBabel is another. It could have a default or
    flag setting to look for the GPS file in the same location as the photo
    files. But no, you have to select each. Tedious.

    I keep a sample command line in a text file:
    exiftool -geotag=GPS_20120603_120712.log -overwrite_original_in_place
    -geosync=-4:00:00 *.dng

    And then just copy and paste the GPS file log name to replace the one
    above. This works on Mac, PC, Linux.

    I suspect that under geosetter's hood lies EXIFTOOL just as it does in
    most such programs.
    Alan Browne, Feb 16, 2014
  9. Greg Berchin

    Savageduck Guest

    Useful, and not all that tedious. Quite quick and simple actually, and
    I don't have to type in any coordinates. Editing and adding to the GPS
    metadata is simple enough if I need to, but for the most part the Nikon
    GP-1 on my D300S does a good enough job.
    You remember this particular foggy sunset, I'm sure.
    < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_593.jpg >

    If I need to I can import a track log into LR when using the Map
    module and then add image files along the track either by placement or
    auto time sync.
    LR uses GPX for adding track log and image location data via the Map module.
    Yup! MotionX and GPS kit are pretty good trackers. There are a couple
    of others which do a reasonable job of plotting marked locations,
    waypoints, etc.
    Savageduck, Feb 16, 2014
  10. Greg Berchin

    Alan Browne Guest

    What I find tedious is locating the location in the map interface, then
    dragging the photo to the location. One photo? 10. Okay.

    50? 100? (all different locations, of course). Oyy.
    That's fine - and welcome. But believe me the CLI is very quick and
    fussless (as long as you keep a template command as I show in the reply
    to David).

    Manually doing individual locations I'd either:
    1- set them all to the same fixed location using EXIFTOOL (if the event
    were in one spot - like a reception or some such).
    exiftool -GPSLatitude=45.634512 -GPSLatitudeRef=N
    -GPSLongitude=72.706213 -GPSLongitudeRef=W *.dng

    2- use a tool such David mentioned (one came with the photo tracker -
    don't recall its name though). I really haven't had to do so in years
    though as when I think I'll need geo tagging I bring the GPS with me.
    But never more accurate than the GPS/GLONASS in the iPhone, which per my
    various tests has an error of about double that of my photo tracker.
    This is due to the energy saving design (and possibly really inefficient
    GPS antenna) in iPhones (and I assume other smart phones).

    I look forward to a new phototracker that has GPS, GLONASS and Galileo
    in it. Should keep the error well bounded.
    Alan Browne, Feb 16, 2014
  11. Greg Berchin

    John Turco Guest

    You've both made some valid points, in my estimation. However, I don't
    want the file system to "go away" entirely; I've always used Windows
    "Explorer" to manually organize my data.

    Plus, Explorer allows me to see, and back up, certain folders. That
    way, for instance, I can later restore "Thunderbird" to its current
    state, containing all of my e-mail and Usenet messages.

    Alas, Windows versions newer than "Vista" hide such things from the
    user...which is why I'm staying with Vista, as long as possible.
    It's just too bad Microsoft no longer gives people a choice, about
    what remains visible.

    John Turco, Feb 18, 2014
  12. Greg Berchin

    David Taylor Guest

    On 18/02/2014 00:36, John Turco wrote:

    You can set Windows 7 and 8/8.1 to show just the same as in Vista. I
    don't understand where your problem is - what do you think is hidden?
    David Taylor, Feb 18, 2014
  13. Greg Berchin

    Eric Stevens Guest

    When this argument started, about the middle of last year, nospam was
    arguing that eventually the file system as we know it would disappear
    altogether and be replaced by some kind of database. My point was, and
    still is, that the fact that the user was presented with a database
    type of interface did not mean that there was not an underlying file
    system by means of which database kept track of where it's data was

    I'm glad to see that nospam now agrees with me to the point that he
    has written above " there may be a file system internally. nobody
    cares, other than those creating the operating system itself ....".

    A second point is that there are within industry, engineering and
    architecture an enormous number of applications comprising data and
    program files which have to be made to interact in ever changing
    patterns through the use of scripting languages. I can't see these
    abandoning a conventional file system of one kind or another for a
    very long time. And I do mean an enormous number.

    Now that I have said this I am not going to relitigate the argument.
    Eric Stevens, Feb 18, 2014
  14. Greg Berchin

    Guest Guest

    you're used to it. that's why.
    which you can easily without direct access to the file system, although
    not necessarily with thunderbird.
    further evidence that direct access is going away.
    Guest, Feb 18, 2014
  15. Greg Berchin

    Guest Guest

    no, that's not what i said at all.

    i said it *could* be replaced by a database or something else entirely
    and the user would be none the wiser, nor would they care. none of that
    which is wrong.

    there might be a file system today, but there might not be one in the

    either way, the user doesn't care.
    currently there is a file system, but that won't always be the case, a
    concept you still do not grasp.

    and once again, users don't give a shit what happens under the hood.
    what they care about is getting their tasks done.
    those are specialized use cases. the vast majority of computer users
    today do not do anything close to that.

    nevertheless, those you list absolutely can move beyond the limitations
    of a file system. just because they're using scripts now doesn't mean
    they're stuck with that forever.
    too late, especially when you misrepresent what i said.
    Guest, Feb 18, 2014
  16. Greg Berchin

    John Turco Guest

    Well, my eMachines "E725-4520" notebook PC has "Windows 7" [and my
    Hewlett-Packard "Pavilion Media Center" (model "m8407c") desktop
    machine contains Vista].
    Setting Win7 to "show just the same" as Vista does, seemed to be
    merely a cosmetic change...as I still couldn't access "Documents
    and Settings\User\Application Data\Thunderbird" on the main hard
    drive ("C:").

    I rarely operate the E725-4520, incidentally.

    John Turco, Feb 19, 2014
  17. Greg Berchin

    John Turco Guest

    Hence, I need Explorer, for accessibility to Thunderbird's data folder.
    Having more options is usually better, no? I really don't see these
    restrictions as being beneficial to everybody -- although, you're
    welcomed to your opinion.

    John Turco, Feb 19, 2014
  18. Greg Berchin

    Guest Guest

    all that means is it's time to look at some of the advancements that
    have happened. technology changes quickly.
    further evidence that thunderbird is very primitive and stuck in the
    past. it even makes elm look good.
    exactly why being restricted to the file system's limitation is a

    by going past the file system, you get more options.
    they're not, which is why more capable methods are available.
    as is everyone.

    you don't have to like that what you're used to is going away, but it
    is and it's being replaced with the very thing you say you want, more
    Guest, Feb 19, 2014
  19. Greg Berchin

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Do you have administrator powers?
    Eric Stevens, Feb 19, 2014
  20. Greg Berchin

    David Taylor Guest

    On 19/02/2014 01:24, John Turco wrote:

    That's because the path is now:

    David Taylor, Feb 19, 2014
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.