I will post this in the Prelude forum as well...
for years I have used the following workflow in FCP without issue.
myself (american) and a german videographer would go on a two week trip and use a mixture of 6 cameras, P2/AVCHD/DSLR.
every night I would archive each camera card to 3 separate drives using ShotPut Pro. each camera card is archived into a folder (ie: 2013-01-10_HPX170) which then became the reel name in FCP L&T. I always make sure to maintain the original file structure from each camera.
at the end of our trip, the german and myself would each go home with a copy of all footage shot, and we would each log and do rough edits of our own footage (3 each of the 6 cameras). after that we could simply email each other FCP project files, and I was easily able to add his project to mine and then quickly bring the german's offline edits online by pointing L&T at the corresponding reels. too easy.
for the past few months I've been trying out the prelude to premiere workflow and I must say it certainly isn't that easy. I thought I could stop using ShotPut Pro in favor of the Prelude ingest feature, since it allows you to archive the camera cards to multiple places, but there doesn't seem to be any type of reel info retained. furthermore, if two seperate videographers have identical bodies of footage, and each log the footage on their own, the newly created sidecar xmp's certainly don't match between the two remote people, and everything starts getting messy.
I recently had another editor send me his premiere project. he had logged everything in prelude, sent a rough cut to premiere, finished in premiere and then sent me the final project. I tried to open the premiere project and point it at the requested footage (which I have an identical copy of) and nothing linked up, it was a mess. "where is the file 00025.MTS?". um... which camera premiere? we were using 4 AVCHD cameras and all four of them name the files that way. why wouldn't it ask me where the enclosing folder (reel) is? wouldn't that make more sense?.
so am I doing something wrong? am I overlooking something? or is this just a prime example of the bad media managent that I've been hearing about with adobe? certainly this isn't too much to ask of software.
I realize that project manager can be used to forward a project on to another editor, but the resulting file package is usually rather large and just emailing project files is really much easier.
should I just explain these needs in some type of feature request or do I need to employ a different workflow?
there has to be a better way to manage all of these assets, they only keep growing...