Photo Mechanic has won :-(

[myotis]

This is aimed at existing Photo Mechanic users who, like me, may have questioned their need for PM since its change to a subscription pricing model.

If I were a professional sports, wildlife, or events photographer, I wouldn't think twice about the cost: PM should easily pay for itself on the first job of the year. But, as a retired amateur photographer, I baulked at the cost, even though PM had been at the centre of my workflow since 2011.

For the last year, I have tried to work without PM. I don't take large numbers of pictures, but I add location metadata to every image, along with some keywords, and, for my wildlife pictures, species names. PM made this a fast and relatively painless process for me.

My basic setup was PM, plus Lightroom and Neofinder for cataloguing, and C1 sessions for processing. Since establishing that workflow, LR has improved as a raw processor and C1 has improved as a catalogue (i.e. it was no longer unusable).

I do a lot with PM: ingest files, folder and file renaming, adding and editing metadata, code replacement, autocomplete etc etc. but for the last year I've stopped using PM and spent about 6 months trying to centre my workflow around LR, and six months doing the same with C1.

As part of this, I have tried to fill in the obvious gaps by using Typinator/Text Expander, Hazel and Keyboard Maestro (and Fast Raw Viewer, but I used this anyway). I've also looked into using Bridge and XNView.

After spending hours and hours trying to get a non-PM workflow to work like PM, I am spending much more time at the computer, working far less efficiently and getting inferior outcomes. Even worse is that my clunkier multi-program approach means I am regularly putting off adding some metadata elements, and I am now months behind.

Although the differences between the different options are small, once added together, they end up making Photo Mechanic indispensable for me. Now retired; I want to spend less time at the computer, not more, and I am unwilling to compromise on the efficient, easy to use, and time-saving metadata and file management tools that PM provides.

With some relief, as I have found it hard work living without PM, I signed up for a subscription this morning. Camera Bits says they have released their last update for the old perpetual license version of PM6 and suggest, based on Apple's proposed changes, it won't run on the next version of MacOS.

Of course, the benefits of PM will vary depending on how you use it. If you are simply using it to ingest files and as a fast browser, without using its file and metadata management tools, all the options I have tried worked well enough.

But my experience has shown that if you are baulking over the subscription, it's not that easy to find an alternative to PM.

 

[saltireblue]

I totally agree with you, Graham. Since I found PM a few years ago, after needing to find something to replace what I was using as an Adobe subscriber, I find that my workflow has been a walk in the park; like you, I find it just works for em, doing and providing everything in one place. I would not want to be without it. I run it alongside Affinity.
I am on macOS Tahoe 26.4 and have so far held off 'updating' PM to the newest version, deciding to hold off as long as I can. When the day comes that it stops working with whatever version of mac OS I am running on that day, then I will, like you, bite the bullet and pay the subscription. I am at an age when having to learn a new programme from scratch just doesn't appeal.

 

[myotis]

I totally agree with you, Graham. Since I found PM a few years ago, after needing to find something to replace what I was using as an Adobe subscriber, I find that my workflow has been a walk in the park; like you, I find it just works for em, doing and providing everything in one place. I would not want to be without it. I run it alongside Affinity.
I am on macOS Tahoe 26.4 and have so far held off 'updating' PM to the newest version, deciding to hold off as long as I can. When the day comes that it stops working with whatever version of mac OS I am running on that day, then I will, like you, bite the bullet and pay the subscription. I am at an age when having to learn a new programme from scratch just doesn't appeal.

It's difficult to appreciate PM until you use it and realise how good it is, within its narrow remit.

I should really have done what you are doing, and wait for my current version to stop working, but they have been steadily making slight (tiny) improvements on the new "unversal" version compared with the older "intel only" version, e.g. it's meant to be a bit faster, and having decided to go back to PM, I decided to just go for it.

 

[saltireblue]

I saw no 'improvements' between the 'old' and the 'new' versions so decided to keep my money in my wallet until I had no choice. (I am a canny scot). Tgere is no way I am going to try to find an alternative, so will, as you had to, let the moths in my wallet see the light one day...and you really have to discover the delights of using the software to really appreciate how good it is.

 

[sk66]

I guess I'm just not that organized, and I don't do much other than keywording...

 

[myotis]

I saw no 'improvements' between the 'old' and the 'new' versions so decided to keep my money in my wallet until I had no choice. (I am a canny scot). Tgere is no way I am going to try to find an alternative, so will, as you had to, let the moths in my wallet see the light one day...and you really have to discover the delights of using the software to really appreciate how good it is.

I did say "tiny" improvements

Some, I suspect, might be more than minor for some users, but overall I think this must be a big problem for Camera Bits who aren't managing to add much too encourage people to splash out and update.

I was keen to see if I noticed the speed increases, from running native on Silicon rather than relying on Rosetta for intel emulation.

I can't say I've noticed any difference.

And, I guess I'm not as canny a Scot as you are.

 

[myotis]

I guess I'm just not that organized, and I don't do much other than keywording...

Keywording is still a more pleasant experience on PM than LR or C1.

After my year of experience managing metadata on LR and C1, I'm fairly confident that without PM I would not be adding the metadata that I do. PM makes something really tedious, just that bit easier to do.

My experience with PM helped me know what I was looking to achieve while setting up LR and C1 for metadata management, which are still pretty good at it.

 

[sk66]

Keywording is still a more pleasant experience on PM than LR or C1.

LOL! I didn't mean to give the impression I do a lot of keywording... I only "manage" images I consider to be 4 or 5 star; and there aren't many of those!

 

[Hanley]

I agree completely, I'm still on the perpetual version but won't hesitate in switching when I have to.
I remember being tempted to buy it for years, always put off as I didn't really think I needed it, when I finally took the plunge I wish I'd done it years ago.

It even helps me with all my free parkrun photography and other local events I do, culling thousands of images literally takes no time at all, I still don't know how it can render full screen previews so quickly

 

[myotis]

I agree completely, I'm still on the perpetual version but won't hesitate in switching when I have to.
I remember being tempted to buy it for years, always put off as I didn't really think I needed it, when I finally took the plunge I wish I'd done it years ago.

It even helps me with all my free parkrun photography and other local events I do, culling thousands of images literally takes no time at all, I still don't know how it can render full screen previews so quickly

It's a program that is really difficult to understand how good it is, until you use it.

It "renders" full-screen previews by using the embedded JPEGs from the raw file, so it doesn't really have anything to render.

The Capture One import also uses the same approach (uses embedded jpegs), as well as some neat tricks like grouping similar images, and it's very close to the speed of PM, but after that it's really clunky compared to PM.

Lightroom also has an option to use embedded JPEGs at ingest (but it's not the default as it is with C1), and it's not as fast.

However, with C1 and LR, once ingested, they both use their own rendered previews and become noticeably slower than PM when scrolling through images. LR more so than C1.

Overall, improvements in C1 and LR means that for the things that PM does, it isn't as far ahead of LR and C1 as it once was. But as my OP says, it's still ahead enough to make it worth the money for a proportion of users.

 

[A_S]

I have managed to get my hands on an old copy and really couldnt do with out it for going through motorsport stuff quickly now. It still takes time though but much much quicker than lightroom at checking critical sharpness on 1000s of photos.

RE the meta data thing though - one question - it maybe wonderfully easy but actually what do you use the meta data for, do you ever actually use it or is it something that you just do "by default"? because sometimes rather than biting the bullet and paying for something because you can't get other software to do what you previously did - is it worth asking the question - is what I previously did actually worthwhile for the time and effort required (outside PM) or the money (in subscribing).

 

[myotis]

I have managed to get my hands on an old copy and really couldnt do with out it for going through motorsport stuff quickly now. It still takes time though but much much quicker than lightroom at checking critical sharpness on 1000s of photos.

RE the meta data thing though - one question - it maybe wonderfully easy but actually what do you use the meta data for, do you ever actually use it or is it something that you just do "by default"? because sometimes rather than biting the bullet and paying for something because you can't get other software to do what you previously did - is it worth asking the question - is what I previously did actually worthwhile for the time and effort required (outside PM) or the money (in subscribing).

If you aren't interested in adding/managing metadata, Fast Raw Viewer is faster to use for culling than Photo Mechanic. As I maybe said in my earlier post, I have FRV set up on the PM hotkey to launch an editor, to launch FRV. In FRV you can compare 4 files at a time, and you can adjust exposure allowing you to check underexposed or overexposed pictures. It also shows a raw histogram allowing you to check "actual" exposure and has various options for checking sharpness.

To your other point. I've been asking that question, along with others, for the 12 months+ that I have resisted taking out the PM subscription, and it's a good question to ask.

Most of metadata is added on ingest, and now requires no real effort from me as I have templates set up to add the metadata with little effort from me, PM also auto names the folders the files are ingested to with not only the date, but also the location where the photographs were taken.

Some basic key-wording is also auto-added, as the different places I photograph are usually related to specific subject matter ie. RSPB Ham Wall is usually associated with bird photographs. So those files are key-worded as part of the template with "Animal".

This level of metadata, once the templates are set up, requires virtually no intervention from me, and it makes a massive difference to how easily I find things. Being able to search on location, basic keyword and date range allows me to massively reduce the time I spend browsing through photographs. I find it useful, even if I only make use of it a few times a month.

Other metadata requires more effort, but with PM, less so than other options. Being able to search for, say, a specific dragonfly species, is something I may only do once a month, but for me the balance between time spent adding metadata, vs time spent browsing for a particular photograph.

The thing that swung me to subscribe to PM, was that I was becoming increasingly aware, whenever I went to make a search that the hassle of adding metadata without PM, meant my metadata wasn't being kept up to date. That didn't happen when I was using PM.

Eventually, I made the decision that the time PM saved me from sitting at the computer was worth the annual subscription.

 

[A_S]

The main thing is that you use the meta data and in that case its worth while

I mentioned it, because I started adding meta data with AI a couple of years ago. Using google gemini, its really cool and potentially very useful.

I used to use it to find car registrations when doing competitor proofs - BUT - the time it takes to run 2-5000 photos through it is prohibitively slow (2+ hours to analyse, and limit of 1000ish photos a day now..) and therefore not practical to do before my final cull/in the time frame i need to sort the photos.

So, it left me asking the question "will i ever actually use this meta data to find photos", and realistically once I've sorted the proofs in the week after an event, the answer is no, and as highlighted, its too slow to do it before.... so I've been wrestling with that very question myself!

 

[A_S]

I'll have to have a look at fast raw viewer. all i am really interested in is picking the sharpest frame but often need to zoom in to a drivers helmet or front of car to do so which is the slow bit

 

[myotis]

I'll have to have a look at fast raw viewer. all i am really interested in is picking the sharpest frame but often need to zoom in to a drivers helmet or front of car to do so which is the slow bit

With FRV, you put the mouse pointer over the point of interest and hit the "Z" key to go to 100% centred on wherever you put the mouse pointer. Hit "Z" again to go back to full view.

 

[myotis]

The main thing is that you use the meta data and in that case its worth while

I mentioned it, because I started adding meta data with AI a couple of years ago. Using google gemini, its really cool and potentially very useful.

I used to use it to find car registrations when doing competitor proofs - BUT - the time it takes to run 2-5000 photos through it is prohibitively slow (2+ hours to analyse, and limit of 1000ish photos a day now..) and therefore not practical to do before my final cull/in the time frame i need to sort the photos.

So, it left me asking the question "will i ever actually use this meta data to find photos", and realistically once I've sorted the proofs in the week after an event, the answer is no, and as highlighted, its too slow to do it before.... so I've been wrestling with that very question myself!

Ah yes, once upon a time (decades ago), i tried to "fully" keyword every file, which even with Photo Mechanic took a tremendous amount of effort. and just never got done. I now just have a dozen or so broad band keywords, like Animal, Landscape, Transport etc and just give each file a single or occasionally two keywords.

It takes very little time, but dramatically reduces search time, when trying to find a specific files.

I also add species names to all wildlife pictures, which is more time consuming, but again I don't find it too odious, with PM.