Today I noticed that somebody commented about versioning in IMatch 5 at dpreview.com.
I tried to be helpful and explained how versioning works, and why I decided to use Perl regular expressions. I did support like that hundreds of times before I created the IMatch user forum.
I noticed that my text vanished and just received an email that I have been banned for "commercial advertisement" for 7 days. I tried to reply to the email informing me about this, but I'm also banned from contacting the moderator. So I had to use the normal feedback form to ask why, exactly, my post was considered an advertisement. Or how I can get the text of my post back. because it was a rather cool tips text for how to use versioning...
I think I will never look at dpeview.com again.
Their loss Mario.
Aubrey.
This is really absurd. Responding to someone else's post with helpful on-topic info about how something works is not advertising. I like dpreview because it has a lot of info and knowledgable users. Please keep us posted if you receive a response.
At least, I can not come up with a good reason why a developer should be prevented from answering questions about his/her product.
I would have thought that also their forums benefit from it as getting the reputation that experts are present and are willing to answer and help. :(
When looking for test reports on different raw converters, I found their test(s) and read also some comments and in one comment was mentioned that they have an affiliation with DxO.
Also knowing that they are owned by Amazon, it makes me wonder their motive:
Who knows if you are a comptetitor for a co-operation partner or what expectations they have for allowing you to post on their site (at least DxO, Adobe seem to have official? accounts)?
Anyhow, this does not give a good impression of dpreview to me.
Regards,
Ralf
I think they don't care. If you don't pay them you are no longer allowed to post anything that may be remotely commercially. They come quickly up with an advertisement plan, of course. But in monetary ranges which are way beyond my reach.
I notice the over-commercialization of so many things in recent years. It's all about how to get our money and our data.
Another example I recently got upset about: I use WhatsApp (paid for it!) to exchange messages with friends and family. Every new WhatsApp version requires more rights, from sending SMS ???? to InApp buying ???. Since I don't like to hand over too much control to Apps, I did not update my version. It worked flawlessly. But yesterday WhatsApp expired, told me to download and install the latest version in order to use it again. So this company (Facebook now) basically forces me to install the version of the App which is allowed to do almost anything, in order to get the service back I already paid for.
I wrote an email to their support. The first four responses where all boiler plate automated responses, based on keywords fished from my email. I wonder if and when a real person can be bothered to read my request "I paid for your App, and I don't want to install your update. How can I get the service pack I already paid for". I bet that they will just not answer that. Knowing that a normal person cannot afford to go to a lawyer for such a tiny issue. The companies are getting bigger all the time, and we users are more or less cash cows. We give them our money, and then they stop caring. Until your due for your next camera, car, fridge or software update. Then they are all friendly and supportive again.
Or the power of search engines these days. If you are not really careful how you structure your web site, how large you make your graphics, how fast your web site loads, you can get easily moved down the search results a couple of pages. Which makes you virtually invisible for everyone.
Creating a good product and providing good support is not worth much anymore these days...
Quote from: Mario on June 10, 2014, 10:40:41 PM
Creating a good product and providing good support is not worth much anymore these days...
Without fear of contradiction, I know I speak for this board by saying that you & IMatch are worth a lot to us.
I would certainly not contradict you, medgeek! I'm new here, just registered, and got IMatch5 the moment it was available. I have the greatest respect for Mario who has been there to specifically answer my queries. I do not understand the behaviour regarding that website dpeview and, as Aubrey said, 'their loss'. It's a disservice to their members to ban someone who has intimate knowledge of the product. If someone asked the question and the person answering it was banned, why on earth was the question not banned in the first instance?
I don't like the intrusions that some of these apps and social sites can make into our lives and I would like that if I paid for something, regardless of whether there's a 'newer and brighter' version available, my original would still be usable. To have it not be so is unreasonable and unacceptable. It's money-grubbing.
I am concerned at some comments about the way the internet seems to be following on in the manner of other huge corporations/industries like drug companies, etc, that are very powerful and controlling, and try to shut others down that get in their way. I hope it can remain as a free flow of all sorts of information. I don't have an online presence but if I did, I'd holler the praises of IMatch. I'm out of the loop but if there's ever the opportunity, I'll be letting people know about this company and its product. Word of mouth counts too.
So happy to have found this place.
~ Robin
Thanks for the info on Dpreview .. had noticed over time that some of their reviews, and indeed comments to comments were showing bias/not telling the whole truth. Some camera's are not reviewed. I suspect they may not have paid money, or , indeed the camera may have been not up to scratch and so they did not want to expose it as the Maker was among their "favoured" ones.
This has convinced me to follow my gut instincts , and take their website as a " info-mercial" .... I no longer take it as a real reviewing site.
If anyone has better suggestions re site's ... let us know.
Ridiculous and disappointing but don't let it put you off dpreview altogether because, as you know, there is so much valuable information available within forums et cetera that to ignore it would be a case of cutting of your nose to spite your face. As a matter of interest, do you have 'signature' a the bottom of your posts which mentions that you are the IMatch developer? This could be construed (narrowly) as advertising even if it shouldn't. Otherwise, dpreview has just disaffected someone whose expertise they should cultivate.
Quote from: Sorted on June 11, 2014, 07:36:59 AM
As a matter of interest, do you have 'signature' a the bottom of your posts which mentions that you are the IMatch developer? This could be construed (narrowly) as advertising even if it shouldn't. Otherwise, dpreview has just disaffected someone whose expertise they should cultivate.
Yes I have. I have created my dpreview account in 2001 (!) and since then my signature states that I'm the Author of IMatch and my support email address and the URL of my web site. Since 2001, seems not to have bothered anybody. I'm not hiding behind false identifies to silently promote things. I show my flag.
In the early IMatch days, before we had the user forum, an increasing amount of support was done at dpreview. Users would ask questions about IMatch and I was checking at least once day, providing answers as needed. That was before Amazon bought dpreview and turned it into a sales and advertisement outlet.
Because the amount of support become so massive, I decided to setup my own user forum and traffic moved from dpreview to my own (ad-free!) user forum. Since then I did not visit dpreview often because when I need info about a camera or purchase decision, I ask other audiences. I'm not keen on the often "my gear is better than thou gear" approach, or the squirrel photos posted from users who just bought a D4 ;)
Anyway, since IMatch 5 is out for only a couple of days, I decided to check the typical forums for posts regarding to IMatch 5. And I stumbled upon this post from a user who pondered whether to switch to IMatch 5, but mentioned that he finds the file relations overly complex, especially the regular expressions. So I explained why I used that (because of what I learned from my users during the Alpha/Beta test) and explained how simple a typical version setup is when you use standard workflow, e.g. \.raw for the master and {name}\.jpg for the versions.
I think, and I have not received any comment from them yet, they puked at my note that users who would like to know more about versioning in IMatch can download the help file or the trial version.
Looking back, I'm glad that I restrained myself from posting a notice that IMatch 5 is available (which would have been no problem a few years back). That would have probably banned me for life and Amazon would have taken 100 dollars out of my account and then close it for good. Maybe sent over some angry mob with pitch forks and torches to give my little development garage a good thrashing ;) ::) ??? :o :-\
I bet 5 dollars that they will happily sell me some advertisement packages for a few thousand grand happily, though.
Indeed there is much garbage on the dpreview forums so all the more pity that they took exception to your perfectly legitimate reply. Trouble is, they don't want to spend the time making decisions about whether yours is a useful/non-promotional reply or blatant advertising. They probably use an automated system to pick up URLs etc. There is a stark contrast between your business ethos which centres upon personal response and responsibilty, which clearly you take seriously, and the corporate approach whose chief aim is profit and an impersonal approach. Microsoft typifies this attitude. Australia is largely run by big business (just two large supermarkets, no choice of engergy providers etc.). Well, there's no answer but to soldier on regardless.
......... That would have probably banned me for life and Amazon would have taken 100 dollars out of my account and then close it for good. Maybe sent over some angry mob with pitch forks and torches to give my little development garage a good thrashing ;) ::) ??? :o :-\
Mario,
my mental image of your "little development garage getting a good thrashing" is hilarious.
You've certainly got a second career opportunity as a comedy writer. I love your sense of humour. Wish you would write a book sometime.
Chris
I actually authored or co-authored some books about programming and object orientation (back in the time when there was still some money in writing books). And about 50 articles in various computer magazines.
I started my career giving tutorials and trainings on programming, OO and even Office products. I learned that humor is a good medium to carry ideas and to drive the point home. Students learn better when they remember the jokes and have a general good time in classroom. I took over from my predecessor with one course a week, and ended with 8 courses per week ;-)
QuoteStudents learn better when they remember the jokes and have a general good time in classroom.
I used jokes a lot when I was an instructor and it does help the students. Even in tests I would add something funny early in the test. During the test one student would laugh and I would tell the class that he just got a "test-tickle". That would get a laugh from everyone and put them more at ease for the rest of the test.
Quote from: Mario on June 10, 2014, 07:46:49 PM
I noticed that my text vanished and just received an email that I have been banned for "commercial advertisement" for 7 days.
As a general comment, this probably reflects the moderators for that particular forum. In my experience, moderation is highly inconsistent across the dpreview forums. I have no doubt that they get some general guidelines from dpreview, but from what I have seen the interpretation is nowhere near consistent. So it's hard to know whether to blame dpreview or the moderators in this instance.
Which forum was it? The one that I most closely follow is the Fuji X forum. In there, at one point last year you couldn't even post a link to the fuji x rumours site, but that policy has now changed, so policies can change, but it takes time.
It's also interesting that the developer of the IDImager RAW converter posts there quite a lot about his converter with seeming impunity, which demonstrates the inconsistent in the way the guidelines are interpreted and applied.
Quote from: Ferdinand on June 12, 2014, 12:05:26 AM
It's also interesting that the developer of the IDImager RAW converter posts there quite a lot about his converter with seeming impunity, which demonstrates the inconsistent in the way the guidelines are interpreted and applied.
You meant IDimager Photo Supreme? He didn't programmed a RAW-Converter, as I know. But interesting; I changed from IDimager PRO to IMatch because IDimager PRO was stopped and been replaced by the new lite-software Supreme and seconded because of his behavior deleting and changing posts without saying anything.
Quote from: Mario on June 11, 2014, 08:32:53 AM
I'm not keen on the often "my gear is better than thou gear" approach, or the squirrel photos posted from users who just bought a D4 ;)
Ha! My personal favorite is "Do you think I should buy this-or-that product (in the hope it will make me a better photographer)?" Precisely why I dropped out of the DPReview forums (fora?) several years ago. Too much noise, babble, and discourtesy, not enough meaningful discussion (and of course, the dreaded "measurebaters") - totally the opposite of this forum, of course 8)
Quote from: Mario on June 10, 2014, 10:40:41 PM
I notice the over-commercialization of so many things in recent years. It's all about how to get our money and our data.
Creating a good product and providing good support is not worth much anymore these days...
Please don't get discouraged. I've been developing software for a living for 40 years (and playing with photography for a while longer). In that time, I've come across many people who appreciate a well made product and superior support, and I still do - every day. We all just need to help you get the word out.
Now to put the camera and iMatch away for a little while. It's World Cup time . . . . .
Quote from: Menace on June 12, 2014, 12:16:19 AM
You meant IDimager Photo Supreme? He didn't programmed a RAW-Converter, as I know.
It was late when I posted that and I was tired after a long day on the road, so I mis-spoke. Sorry. I meant Iridient Developer, which is abbreviated as ID hence my confusion. For Mac only, so most people here won't be familiar with it. Fuji X users on Macs swear by it. The developer seems to post on the Fuji X form with impunity and responds to user questions fairly frequently. I can't see that Mario did much different to what he does.
Quote from: lenmerkel on June 12, 2014, 01:05:13 AM
Quote from: Mario on June 11, 2014, 08:32:53 AM
I'm not keen on the often "my gear is better than thou gear" approach, or the squirrel photos posted from users who just bought a D4 ;)
Ha! My personal favorite is "Do you think I should buy this-or-that product (in the hope it will make me a better photographer)?" Precisely why I dropped out of the DPReview forums (fora?) several years ago.
For those who haven't seen it, here is a useful antidote for those who spend too much time on dpreview and who therefore take it too seriously:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/hammerforum-com (http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/hammerforum-com)
LensRentals is always worth a read. Lot's ta learn and often funny to. Was never banned there :D
Hopefully the forum moderators here don't get any funny ideas now...who knows what happens if I get banned here to...
QuoteHopefully the forum moderators here don't get any funny ideas now
As one of your longest running moderators and the orneriest (only one to cause members to leave) I will say that you are in no danger. You will not start calling forum members names or making derogatory comments about them. It has been years since we had members who wanted to flame other members and I hope the IMatch user forum always stays a friendly and helpful forum.
Quote from: Mario on June 12, 2014, 10:25:22 AM
...who knows what happens if I get banned here to...
Heaven help any moderator who tries ::)
Quote from: Ferdinand on June 12, 2014, 08:24:13 AM
............
For those who haven't seen it, here is a useful antidote for those who spend too much time on dpreview and who therefore take it too seriously:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/hammerforum-com (http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/hammerforum-com)
Thank you Ferdinand, excellent reading, and it drives the nail zlammmm in.
Francis
Quote from: Ferdinand on June 12, 2014, 08:24:13 AM
For those who haven't seen it, here is a useful antidote for those who spend too much time on dpreview and who therefore take it too seriously:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/hammerforum-com (http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/hammerforum-com)
Really funny! ;D
I read it and enjoyed it very much.
Satire at its best. Hilarious.
Quote from: Mees Dekker on June 13, 2014, 12:04:21 AM
I read it and enjoyed it very much.
Satire at its best. Hilarious.
+1
But I think, for a LOT of people this is no satire, it is simply the reality! ;D
A few days ago I tried to put a good word in for the new release of iMatch 5 and had my posts deleted.
The moderator said:
"please be so kind to re-read the forum rules, your other post has been deleted for commercial website linking which is a violation of the forum rules.
your other post was identical and therefore its deleted as well."
To which I responded:
I respect the rules ... but I am unclear how this is interpreted, "Commercial website linking or advertising is not allowed".
When I search dpreview for "www." I return 11,556,761 results. Many are photo galleries and personal pages, but why is a link like this allowed?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/207373-USA/Nikon_4730.html or this https://www.wetransfer.com/
If I have a photo-related product I am excited about sharing, dpreview allows me to discuss it but not tell people where to find it? Please explain further.
Moderator's response:
as you might know we dont read each and every post.
sometimes commercial links get missed and they slip thru, often we get notified by members who use the complain option or we recieve a PM about a violation of the rules.
on top of each forum you intended use for it, its about Sony cameras.
So I assume a fellow forum member turned me in for announcing a great product??
QuoteA few days ago I tried to put a good word in for the new release of iMatch 5 and had my posts deleted.
The moderator said:
"please be so kind to re-read the forum rules, your other post has been deleted for commercial website linking which is a violation of the forum rules.
your other post was identical and therefore its deleted as well."
Outrageous! This is how powerless we all have become. If they don't like any of your post, it gets deleted. If we like a product they don't have any financial interest it, your post is very likely deleted.
I mean, how can you speak about products or camera models without linking to the web site of the product vendor? Or a Facebook post? The Internet is all about links. Are only links to Amazon or sites owned by Amazon allowed? Or links to sites of companies and vendors who purchase advertisements at dpreview.com? What's commercial? If you buy a camera from Nikon and point at the Nikon web site, is this a commercial link? If you have IMatch and you include a link to my web site, this is a commercial?
When I ever get un-banned (I have never received a reply from the moderator and I'm also blocked from sending PM to the moderator) I don't think I will ever even attempt to try to provide support at dpreview.com again. All my replies will look like
Thank you for asking a question about <the product>.
I'm not allowed to answer your question here due to dpreview.com forum rules.
I would point you at my web site or give you my email address but I'm not allowed to because this could be considered as "commercial" and get me banned again.
Please find and visit my web site and there click on "support" to get my contact info. I'll be happy to assist you in any way. But not here.
Sincerely
-- Mario
Author of <product>
<email not allowed to be included in post>
<web site not allowed to be included in post>
But at last and and least: there is an entry (brief review) of IMatch 5.1 in DPReview.
See http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53849860
Oh, I would so love to comment on that. Because his review has some real technical errors in it (for example, there is a "Google-like" search box (Search bar above the file window) and the scripting object model is document, and ... or his comment that software is getting cheaper these days... or a 40 US$ price tag would be OK for a software as little sophisticated as IMatch. If Canto and Fotoware charge thousands, Extensis about 500 hundred...
But I'm still banned. And replying to this may get me banned again.
And somebody with a beta from January (!) replied, complaining that it no longer runs...and I cannot reply that the Beta from January has long expired and that there have been maybe 20 versions after it...
Can somebody please at least reply that I cannot reply because I have been banned?
Quote from: Mees Dekker on June 14, 2014, 09:01:20 AM
But at last and and least: there is an entry (brief review) of IMatch 5.1 in DPReview.
See http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53849860
Just reading this thread as it is building up. Quite amusing. I try hard not getting involved in taking the arguments to pieces :)
QuoteThe next challenge was to use the search feature. You also mentioned the Filter Panel and after looking and seeing this many options in a single small panel I wasn't motivated to use it and I didn't even bother.
When I read such quotes I wonder what this user expects. If he does not need filtering, why does he not use the search bar plainly visible above the file window. It even displays "Search the file window".
QuoteAll my photos are GEO tagged and I read that there's a Map feature. I did look for it for at least 5 minutes but couldn't find it anywhere. Do I really need a manual to find such elementary stuff? I think not and so that was my third deception.
I'm sure this user has not even bothered to open the help once, or to open all menus instead. If I search something in a software I at least try the menus. Or how hard can it be to type the word
map into the search index?
The problem with this thread is that it spreads many false facts, unfortunately. Some things could be solved by Open the
"Map panel from the View menu, like all other Panels" I have nothing against a user who does not like IMatch. But spreading false facts which I cannot correct because I'm banned hurts my heart.
I wonder how you can use (effectively) any decently functional software without bothering to learn it. How much do you understand about PS, or Lr, or even Word by looking at it for 5 minutes. Quite ridiculous statements really.
I already try to discuss on dpreviews (as Tegenarian),but I fear, my english is to bad and I'm not the power user, who should response.
Also seems it for me, that the tester fuego and Hans are PhotoSupreme User.
@ Mario: Wollte Dich das eigentlich via PN fragen, geht aber gar nicht. ;D
Soll ich folgendes antworten (wäre das in Deinem Sinne):
The producer (?; btw, sorry for my english) would like to respond, but he was banned, because for answering questions about IMatch. Maybe the Forum of the software (I don't want to post the link, because I get banned, too ^^ ) would be the right place to answer this questions.
Sounds good to me!
Like this community, dpreview has users from all over the world. And we all have different levels of English. The key is to somehow get the message over, and that you do.
I'm still banned (without further explanation) till 17th.
I am trying to discuss with them (as gimbo) - I just can't understand how somebody can say that search is better in Photo Supreme than in IMatch. Poor search options were the main reason why I stopped using Photo Supreme (even though I have a license for the current version).
Not a very smart response or move by DPR. It demonstrates that their motives are $$$ based, and that for me, I automatically place great suspicion from now on on things they say or push ... have suspected for a while there was bias there, its now confirmed.
I, like many others using Imatch , I am sure spread the word to every one they know/meet in the photo world regarding Imatch. DPreview should be open and free to access news about new products .. this behaviour is quite frankly disgusting. The least they can do is apologise and do a genuine article regarding a new product.
I have a paid version of Photo Supreme and it NEVER gets used, same as the previous version of the program that suddenly was ended without any further support.
I also purchased previously Media pro ... none of these programs come even vaguely close to Imatch 5.
I've just read someone over on DPReview has tried to post over here but were unable too as they are not a software owner.
Mario posted this earlier
https://www.photools.com/community/index.php?topic=2520.0
Is this not up and running?
If it is can I post a link to the above page on DPReview?
It's sufficient to post that everybody can join the community now. I've already announced it on the photools.com web site, Facebook and Twitter.
I'm rolling out changes in order. There is only one Mario and a lot of things are going on right now. Important to keep ahead and not to mess up something.
I wanted a one week head start for extra testing and for setting up the moderation to prevent SPAM. IMatch 5 is only available for a week and this was a busy week for me.
I used the last week to test the new customerWeb, the share-it order page and all the plumbing behind the curtain that makes things work. The new shop system and connection to my customer database work great. Check.
This morning I updated the version counter so all users with an IMatch 3 installation get news about the new version the next time they check for updates. I've also updated the old downloads center to show information about IMatch 5. And I've added some new things to the landing pages at my web site.
Currently I'm sending out an email to all IMatch 3.5 and 3.6 users to inform them about the IMatch 5 release. Most users don't even know yet that IMatch 5 is out.
OK, today my ban was lifted, after seven days.
To all of you who joined the discussion in the long thread:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53849860
Thanks.
I today replied, after removing my email and web site link from my signature. Apparently having a link to the web site is already a reason to get banned. Since I created my signature in 2001 ans never changed it, I did not thing about studying the now current rules before posting.
Just in case I get banned again (which also deletes your post without a way to get it back), I secure a copy of my reply in this thread:
What a were long thread about IMatch. Amazing. Sorry that I join the party so late but I have been banned for a week because I tried to help a IMatch 5 evaluator wondering about regular expressions in IMatch.
Since 2001 I had my web site address and support email in my signature. Apparently this is no longer allowed at dpreview.com and so I got banned. At least that's my assumption.
I cannot explain too much about IMatch here because I fear I will get banned again. I will retain and post a copy of this reply in the photools.communty because if you get banned here, your text is also gone.
Some corrections and amendments of what has been posted in the original IMatch review at the top of the thread. I did not find a quote tag so I use bold for the original text.
"I feel it is geared to a very specific audience - and with a price tag above even Lightroom"
The price tag for Lightroom is 149 US$ at the Adobe web site today (perpetual license). IMatch costs 109.99US$ and users who bought IMatch after June 2006 get a 40% discount. 2006 was also the last time I charged for an update.
"Finding images is a bit convoluted with the "Filter Panel" - not sure why a simple google style search box wasn't used instead ("
A simple Google-style Filter box is available right above the file window. This search box supports simple and complex search terms (A OR B NOT C), can search in files names, metadata, Attributes or a combination thereof. Click in the box and press <F1> to get detailed help.
The Filter Panel you mention gives you many features, e.g. to filter out files with specific keywords, versions, metadata values, geo locations and much more. If you only want to find all files with the name "Susan" OR "Mike", the file window search bar is what you'll use.
"(Ctrl-Drag @Builder to create a new category for example - why no easy right click option?)"
To copy/move a category in IMatch, you use drag and drop or Copy and Paste. There is no exception for @Builder because it works there as well. Click @Builder, <Ctrl>+<C>, click the category to insert the copy under, <Ctrl>+<V>. Done.
"There are a few bugs that I did find while testing... GPS reverse location doesn't seem to work"
Please be so kind as to file a bug report in the photools.community. So far the only situations where the reverse geo-coding did not work were a) the free GeoNames.org service was used but the daily quota was used up, or a network/fire-wall setting prevented IMatch from accessing the geo-coding server. The IMatch log file will tell us exactly what the problem was, please attach to your problem report. Thanks.
"The scripter is a powerful option that will let advanced users augment the program with their own scripts using the obscure "WinWrap Basic". Like Idimager however, I doubt very many users will be able to take advantage of it... documentation is needed that highlights all the methods and objects available and when to use them"
The IMatch object model, with all available classes and methods, is fully documented in the IMatch help. About 25 help topics with maybe a 100 screen pages only for this. In the IMatch help Table of Contents click on Scripting and then on Object Model. Many examples can be found there too.
"Strange about the marketing angle and the fact you didn't get any info on the new release..."
IMatch 5 has been released on June 6. It is really a lot of work to roll out such an update. I don't have the vast personnel and monetary resources the big vendors have. So I rolled out the new update first to a few hundred Beta testers. Taking an extra week to test the new infrastructure, download server farm, payment processing etc. Making sure everything works smoothly.
On June 14th I sent out emails to all licensed users. In small batches, because today if you are not one of the big companies and you start sending out thousands of emails, you will be flagged as a spammer and all major mail relays will just delete your emails. They have exceptions for big and well-known companies, but not for small ISV's like me. Basically a good thing, just bad when you want to reach your user base.
There are apparently more questions / slightly wrong statements about IMatch 5 here in this long thread than I can find now and answer. I cannot comment on any comparison to ID Imager or Photo Supreme or the arguments resulting from that because I have not used these applications myself.
IMatch is not aimed at casual users, which has been mentioned in this thread by several posters. And there are several usable alternatives to it, each with different levels of functionality and target audience. The typical user groups for IMatch are explained on my web site, and also how these use IMatch. As I always say: "Whatever works for you, is good". Like with cameras, there is one for everyone.
Everybody wanting to share insights or comments (or bug reports) about IMatch can do so in the photools.community. dpreview.com is not a support forum for IMatch.
--
Mario M. Westphal - Author of IMatch
Mario, I think this was a calm, reasoned response to this situation. I think the price, upgrade policy and opportunity to trial IMatch are all very fair, and I hope the dpreview posters in that thread take the time to download the software and check it out.
Unfortunately the first "review"-Post can't be changed again. So -if someone just read the first posting- he get the wrong impression.
I think that's good. Better than I could have done if I had the time.
I read that thread over there and Mario's response. I think it's good.
Overall, it just proves that people will be people. In someways, I think Mario should look at some of that criticism as a complement. People only tend to show such dislike for things they are threatened by (a defense mechanism). I find it quite odd that most of the hating on IMatch is related to how it looks or lack of Social Networking capabilities. For people who really want a program to do something well, looks should not be a first criteria as to how a program functions.
It does look like the audience there is not your typical target audience. It is a bit of a niche audience. No one was touting other options besides IDImager and its successor. Heck a follow-up poster was picking on Mario's comparison with Lightroom. If one steps back, I'm guessing that Lightroom is probably the most common used DAM because I'm guessing it reaches more professional photographers, it's Adobe, and it's RAW processing (which is really the add-on) is decent enough to grab people like me. You can only do so much, and a comparison to Lightroom means you're aiming high.
I'm not sure where I should have compared IMatch with LR?
Or do you mean my last post, in response to the "IMatch is too expensive because it does not develop RAW files"?
I use LR myself, but I would not use it as a DAM. And I would not use IMatch as a RAW developer. No comparison. You combine IMatch with a RAW processor, image editor, audio editor, video editor of your choice.
To compare LR as a DAM-Product is funny. LR takes me always mad, when I try something like that.
I find the thread over at dpreview.com much more interesting since I can post myself.
Especially the post where the thread starter explained that he would like to go back and update his review, and Hans de Zomers replied:
- - - - - - - -
fuego6 wrote:
Unfortunately - DPReview doesn't allow for edits beyond a few moments so I cannot edit the original to make amends.
Fortunately. Your review is your review and is how you experienced the software in the time spent on it. Correcting it would give a wrong impression of the time that you spent on it.
When you've drawn some wrong conclusions during that time that too says something about the software and more people will do the same.
- - - - - - - -
I'm so happy that the old IMatch user forum and this new community are such a friendly and constructive places.
No flame wars. No "my gear is better than yours!" discussions. No militant fan boys. No trolls. Just users helping other users, asking questions, getting useful responses.
Bliss :)
Yes, sorry, I can't stay calm on dpreview. :-\
Reading that thread, there is a lot of "I have invested a lot of time/effort/emotion" in application X. It is human nature not to want to change. But, if a non-techie guy like me can use it, and also prefer it to LR, I am believe that others will come round, despite their prejudices.
Quote from: Mario on June 18, 2014, 07:47:58 PM
I'm not sure where I should have compared IMatch with LR?
Or do you mean my last post, in response to the "IMatch is too expensive because it does not develop RAW files"?
I use LR myself, but I would not use it as a DAM. And I would not use IMatch as a RAW developer. No comparison. You combine IMatch with a RAW processor, image editor, audio editor, video editor of your choice.
I didn't say you should have. I just was noting you had compared the cost of IMatch to the cost of LR. A response criticized that comparison since both are not the same software. Of course, many LR fan-people do think of LR as a DAM, and it probably has more users for that purpose than what they are talking about.
I actually hadn't referred to your last post (hadn't seen it yet), but I think the overall gist is that the dpreview forum does not contain your target audience. I think your target user skews towards the professional end, which needs more of the features IM has and less of the bling and social networking features some of those posters over there want.
My own point is that the typical LR user who may also be a pro, could be a perspective IMatch user because they will potentially find the limitations in LR as a DAM, the limitations of not being able to step out of Adobe products easily, or the cost limitations of buying one of the more expensive DAM alternatives out there. I personally hate LR as a DAM and avoided it for a long time because I liked IM and was uncertain of how I might interact with it while maintaining IM as my DAM. It hasn't been easy, but you've made it a piece of cake now. I'm happy that you programmed IMatch such that it can interact with LR quite well. The hierarchical keywords in IMatch make it easy to get in and out of LR without having to stay around for long. I can pretty much ignore LR's library features thanks to IM5.
Quote from: Mario on June 18, 2014, 07:47:58 PM
I use LR myself, but I would not use it as a DAM. And I would not use IMatch as a RAW developer. No comparison. You combine IMatch with a RAW processor, image editor, audio editor, video editor of your choice.
Without getting too off-topic... I am curious if you can explain how you use LR and IMatch together? As a LR user myself, I'm kinda tied into the "catalog" so it were of LR and though I find the editor very nice and perfect for my workflow... the DAM aspect of it is lacking... which brought me to IMatch. However, I guess I'm not keen on exporting all my LR edits to TIFF/JPG's just so they can be seen correctly in IMatch (ARW RAW files for example). I like using my DAM to find images based on how they REALLY look... not without all my RAW edits. Do you just export your files and version them with Proxy views and to heck with the disk space and extra work whenever a tweak is needed to the RAW file? I tried the DNG approach for a few months... but that had its own drawbacks as well..
Thx!
Quote from: Mario on June 18, 2014, 07:47:58 PM
I'm not sure where I should have compared IMatch with LR?
Or do you mean my last post, in response to the "IMatch is too expensive because it does not develop RAW files"?
I use LR myself, but I would not use it as a DAM. And I would not use IMatch as a RAW developer. No comparison. You combine IMatch with a RAW processor, image editor, audio editor, video editor of your choice.
I think you just responded to one poster stating that IM cost more than LR, which doesn't really mean anything. Your response was totally reasonable, only for another poster than accusing you for comparing IM with LR. I think this thread on the DPReview board is dominated by just 2 or 3 individuals who have made up their minds. I don't think it is worth anyone's time here. Rather spend the time enjoying IMatch. :)
Quote from: hro on June 18, 2014, 11:52:32 PM
I think you just responded to one poster stating that IM cost more than LR, which doesn't really mean anything. Your response was totally reasonable, only for another poster than accusing you for comparing IM with LR. I think this thread on the DPReview board is dominated by just 2 or 3 individuals who have made up their minds. I don't think it is worth anyone's time here. Rather spend the time enjoying IMatch. :)
I agree. I have said what needs to be said. Done.
I must say that I don't like that de Zonkers calls IMatch users who dare to have a opinion different from his
fanboys. To me that's a swear word. Maybe not in the Apple community ::)
And just look at the long post from Hans de Zonkers from today:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53878406
He seems to be very averse to the fact that the original poster wants to edit his review, after learning some more about IMatch.
I mean, what has Hans to do with that? If a reviewer learns more about IMatch, re-adjusts his initial impression
to the better (I assume) because he now understands IMatch more and probably likes it more, why would Hans de Zonkers not like this? It should be the decision of the original poster, and not Hans de Zonkers taking an entire screen page (!) trying to talk him out of it.
This is all very strange. I'm not looking at dpreview.com very often, and looking at this thread, I don't miss much.
Quote from: Jingo on June 18, 2014, 11:19:29 PM
Without getting too off-topic... I am curious if you can explain how you use LR and IMatch together? As a LR user myself, I'm kinda tied into the "catalog" so it were of LR and though I find the editor very nice and perfect for my workflow... the DAM aspect of it is lacking... which brought me to IMatch. However, I guess I'm not keen on exporting all my LR edits to TIFF/JPG's just so they can be seen correctly in IMatch (ARW RAW files for example). I like using my DAM to find images based on how they REALLY look... not without all my RAW edits. Do you just export your files and version them with Proxy views and to heck with the disk space and extra work whenever a tweak is needed to the RAW file? I tried the DNG approach for a few months... but that had its own drawbacks as well..
Thx!
That's the risk with using LR (or most other RAW processor). All the changes you make a
virtual until you persist them by exporting your files. Every edit you make in LR is written as a instruction for the proprietary LR render engine into the LR database - and eventually into the XMP record for the image. But these instructions can only be interpreted by the LR version you have used to create them, or newer versions. Non-Adobe applications cannot see these changes, or apply them to image files.
When you use a DNG workflow, LR can update the embedded preview in DNG to look like the final image, after applying the virtual edits. This is actually one of the key benefits of DNG, but unfortunately, the format never really made it.
IMatch allows you to use visual proxies for your files, but this requires you to export JPEG files from LR so IMatch can use them to make your RAW files look like you see them in LR.
There is no other way. By using LR or another RAW processor you kinda lock yourself into the product.
Quote from: Mario on June 19, 2014, 09:17:24 AM
By using LR or another RAW processor you kinda lock yourself into the product.
This is how it has always been with RAW, and probably always will be. What's the alternative? If you shoot only JPG then you've lost a lot of information already. Some cameras let you shoot TIFF, but not many and it consumes a lot of space. You could shoot RAW and convert to 16 bit TIFF and do all your edits in a layered TIFF. I used to use this workflow, but I found it too inefficient and it consumed way too much disk space.
I know that you're negative about RAW lock-in, but in my view it is the least worst solution if you want to edit your images.
As I said, there is not other way if you want to work with non-destructive edits. It's system immanent. It's not something you can be against, it's just how RAW processors work. The lock-in is just a side-effect in favor of the vendor.
By using DNG as your work format you overcome the limitation that other software cannot show your files in the same way you see them in your RAW processor. If your RAW processor is able to update the embedded preview in the DNG file. But this still covers only one "final/external" version, not the virtual copies with different settings you can create in LR or other RAW processors.
I just reiterate that because I get quite a number of emails from LR users complaining that their RAW files do not look in IMatch as they look in LR. They are just not aware of the way a RAW processor works, or how RAW formats work. Having it spelled out here in the community a number of times is just in favor of the search engine.
Quote from: Mario on June 19, 2014, 11:44:24 AMI just reiterate that because I get quite a number of emails from LR users complaining that their RAW files do not look in IMatch as they look in LR. They are just not aware of the way a RAW processor works, or how RAW formats work. Having it spelled out here in the community a number of times is just in favor of the search engine.
Perhaps another FAQ?
Quote from: Mario on June 19, 2014, 09:17:24 AM
IMatch allows you to use visual proxies for your files, but this requires you to export JPEG files from LR so IMatch can use them to make your RAW files look like you see them in LR.
Is this not the "normal" case?
That IF I does edit my RAWs, that I then export these edited RAWs as jpg?
So we could use visual proxies.
MAYBE we could also export a very small jpg from the RAW, with only some KB, but having then a edited jpg, means finally a proxy.
Since LR is one of the biggest player in RAW-editing, I thought once, IM5 could use the most important things of editing, like exposure, colour, gamma and so on, like IM5 does it now with the (also very important) cutting (Ausschnitt).
This means not the maybe heavy stuff like partial editing, but only the most important stuff.
But, ok, :-[ , I guess, this is not a clever idea.
Over all, I think, the visual proxy - system could be a clever thing.
Quote from: Ferdinand on June 19, 2014, 04:25:46 PM
Perhaps another FAQ?
Are you planning to write one or are you suggestion I shall write one?
Quote from: sinus on June 19, 2014, 04:50:17 PM
Since LR is one of the biggest player in RAW-editing, I thought once, IM5 could use the most important things of editing, like exposure, colour, gamma and so on, like IM5 does it now with the (also very important) cutting (Ausschnitt).
Please keep in mind that these Adobe parameters in XMP are not documented and also change often. And they are instructions for the algorithms Adobe has developed, and thus will work very differently when I try to use them for a exposure correction algorithm I have developed or which is implemented in a third party imaging library.
It's like when Adobe stopped documenting the PSD format with version 6. Several companies tried to keep up with all the new layer types and parameter sets Adobe added after closing the PSD format. It was futile. Thanks to public pressure Adobe had to add the composite image (maximize compatibility) to PSD files so other applications could still at least show previews for PSD files.
Quote from: Mario on June 19, 2014, 06:25:41 PM
Quote from: sinus on June 19, 2014, 04:50:17 PM
Since LR is one of the biggest player in RAW-editing, I thought once, IM5 could use the most important things of editing, like exposure, colour, gamma and so on, like IM5 does it now with the (also very important) cutting (Ausschnitt).
Please keep in mind that these Adobe parameters in XMP are not documented and also change often. And they are instructions for the algorithms Adobe has developed, and thus will work very differently when I try to use them for a exposure correction algorithm I have developed or which is implemented in a third party imaging library.
It's like when Adobe stopped documenting the PSD format with version 6. Several companies tried to keep up with all the new layer types and parameter sets Adobe added after closing the PSD format. It was futile. Thanks to public pressure Adobe had to add the composite image (maximize compatibility) to PSD files so other applications could still at least show previews for PSD files.
Yes, Mario, I understand.
I guess, going the visual proxy - line could be a quite good alternative.
I think it might be worth putting some info together about use of different RAW processors and photo editors in conjunction with LR in the Workflow section.
Ferdinand makes a lot of points some of us but not necessarily everyone knows. From what I can see all the RAW processors are going this way of having a library that holds all your edits internally and attempt to lock users in to their software. It does seem to make it a challenge for anyone to use a workflow where you are essentially using multiple libraries: one for your DAM and one in your RAW processor. It's not easy to figure out, and once you do, it isn't something a user should want to change.
Databases shouldn't evolve that much, it's a lot of work if they do. I'm glad that for the HUGE progress Mario put into IM5 that the overall concept hasn't really changed. The large companies tend to herd their users rather than satisfy them. From what I've seen IDImager (or Photo Supreme) has shifted to that path as well. IM hasn't.
Quote from: Mario on June 19, 2014, 06:21:44 PM
Quote from: Ferdinand on June 19, 2014, 04:25:46 PM
Perhaps another FAQ?
Are you planning to write one or are you suggestion I shall write one?
There are a couple I would like to write, but it's hard to type on a smartphone when you're driving. If it can wait for a few weeks, then ok.
Don't type and drive ;)
The idea of lock in to a particular raw conversion software is not so awful. Raw conversion technology has come on leaps and bounds in the last ten years or so. I find that very often I choose to "try again" when a new version of software is released rather than trying to improve what I have already achieved. Indeed I have even jumped ship (from Bibble/ASP to Photo Ninja) for portfolio quality conversions. I am sure I will do it again.
IMatch should be able to maintain the appropriate buddy files (Usually just XMP but Bibble had its own xmp's as well as standard ones) so that the information, even if not usable in IMatch, is attached like a limpet to the raw file. This is done superbly and I do not believe we should ask for more. The idea of a Jpeg preview file is nice but not of huge importance - I am not sure I would bother.
Andrew from Belgium
Quote from: andrewh on June 20, 2014, 03:21:54 PM
The idea of a Jpeg preview file is nice but not of huge importance - I am not sure I would bother.
Andrew from Belgium
I think it really depends on your workflow and how your images are used within the catalog. For me, 90% of my images are personal and I use my DAM as the main way to access these files. It is important that my DAM show and reflect the images as I will use them and that would include an updated RAW preview. With technology allowing use to take a pretty bad photo out of camera and turning it into a very nice rendition - my DAM needs to reflect these chances so I can visually see these changes. In this way, the proxy technology along with versioning is a pretty important feature for my workflow.
I think I'm going to need to look at DNG again as this seems to be the best method to ensure all edits are maintained within a single file - the ability to update the preview from within LR is pretty important and would reduce the need for extra files and the steps to export each time an edit to the RAW is made.
I have today written a FAQ for this: https://www.photools.com/community/index.php?topic=2623.0
Thank you