@noname they and you are free to have that opinion but it is not one that I personally share, I prefer both plus I believe that DxPL (and DxO OpticsPro before it) are built around the database with the added facility/freedom of the DOP, effectively a database and a “partial” audit trail, arguably a full audit trail if you don’t need ‘Projects’ etc…
While I love your wonderful script how often is that actually executed? While I was sweltering at a garden in the U.K. yesterday I took 262 photos and typically I would look to use an original preset or two and add a couple of new ones and that would be done in DxPL.
I have FRV and could pass the image from that “browser” but tend to use FSIV which can only pass a single image and then load the directory.
But the “only” issue that poses any real problem is if images move from one system to another and back again when “Unwanted VCs” can result in certain (not all) circumstances.
I do “destroy” the database frequently when testing since the database is one of the most powerful tools with respect to the functioning of DxPL but only if I can see the “wood for the trees”. i.e. the test images from the rest.
However, I destroy the database by switching to an empty database, taking a backup copy before the switch if I want to retain the previous database. It needs a DxPL restart but your script requires DxPL to be down at the time of the database destruction anyway!
However, the good news is that you can freely practise your ritual and I mine!
@mwsilvers I would have agreed but if you look at my latest post DxPL 6.9 has lost database entries in my latest tests!?
@convergent it is round tripping that poses the biggest risk, i.e. process on A, then from A to B, more editing on B and then transferring back to A that poses the biggest risk, although some tests that I did worked just fine!?
@convergent If DxO got their act together the DAM features in DxPL could have been good enough for many, not as heavyweight as IMatch, a copy of which I own but rarely use.
PhotoMechanic has the advantage of metadata presets and although XnView does a reasonable the presets do not contain “dynamic” data, e.g. the file name, dates etc. as Photo Mechanic does.
DxPL has not such presets at all!
As do I but both for our digital images and the photos I am currently scanning we need to be able to catalogue family photos in particular i.e. who, what, when, where, why etc…
It was followed by “…” i.e. “but …” so the sentence trailed off, principally because I don’t actually have all the information necessary to inform your opinion further but I am concerned about how straightforward it actually will be and what pitfalls (if any) might lurk there now or in the future, you could try asking DxO whether your proposed strategy will work!?
I have run tests where the images and the associated DOPs made the round trip successfully (between two windows systems in my case) but it is a real pain if/when any don’t! Indeed I have processed on A and shipped to B, undertaken more processing on B and then shipped back to A with no problem and repeated the exercise again!
However, that was between machines of the same “persuasion” (operating system) I have never transferred between a PC and a Mac and then tried to come back to the PC.
If we could persuade a Mac user (@platypus) to supply two images and the DOPs I could try to see what happens when I add them to my system and whether the UUid changes before returning them to @platypus to see if they make it back into the Mac successfully?
