Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Nikon D800 sequential file numbering

Reply
Thread Tools

Nikon D800 sequential file numbering

 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-16-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Eric Stevens
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >> If you (finally) merge them into one folder per destination then you
> >> are not keeping "the photos from different cameras in separate
> >> folders". That was the part I said "Can't always be done".

> >
> >each camera has its own subfolder.
> >
> >lightroom or aperture will sort them by content, not by folder.

>
> Then how the ##### do you keep them separate while merging them?


lightroom 'merges' the photos internally. it does not care that they're
in different folders. you can combine the photos in any way you want,
in any order you want, cropped and retouched if you want. if the photos
are geotagged, it's even easier.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-16-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Eric Stevens
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >> I've just completed an exercise wherein my
> >> travel shots and my wife's were merged into a circa 120 x A3 page
> >> printout of some 1500 photographs. The photographs were organised on
> >> the basis of one folder per destination. I had to renumber all my
> >> wife's photographs to ensure they stayed clear of mine.

> >
> >one destination, with one subfolder per camera.

>
> I was wanting to tell a story about each destination. I absolutely did
> not want to tell two separate stories - by camera - about each
> destination. The folders had to be merged.


the folders do not have to be merged. lightroom (or other asset
management software) manages which photos go in what story. you can
easily have the photos all in one folder on disk, but separated (or
not) in lightroom.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-16-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Eric Stevens
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Let me explain further. When you visit a location you first see A then
> B and on to C etc. When I assemble the photographs for the album I
> collect all the photographs of A and select the best, no matter who
> took them. Then I go on to do the same thing for B, and then C. The
> result is that I have an ad hoc mix of photographs from different
> cameras.
>
> I'm not saying they can't be renumbered to avoid a clash. All I am
> saying is that the nature of the task is such that the folders have to
> be merged. That's why the earlier suggestion that the photographs be
> kept in separate folders 'Can't always be done'.


as i said, they don't need to be merged. put them in subfolders and
import all of them into lightroom, which takes care of the rest.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-16-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, tony cooper
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >lightroom or aperture will sort them by content, not by folder.

>
> I didn't know Lightroom sorts by content.


it does, although sorting isn't exactly the right term. filtering is
more accurate.

> I can't seem to train my
> version to do that. It will sort by file name, capture time, added
> sequence or some other ways in Grid view, but it doesn't know the
> content of the image.


it can display images taken in a specific location (assuming they're
geotagged which is very easy with version 4).

aperture can do face recognition and identify who is in the photos,
without needing to tag each one individually. you train it on a bunch
of photos initially and then let it loose on your entire library.
future imports are automatically processed.

> It will sort out by keyword if I give images
> keywords, but I have to tell it the keyword.


keywords is the main method and yes you do have to tell it. enter one
or more keywords when importing and they're applied to all of the
photos at once. you can always add additional keywords later or change
existing ones. it seems like a lot of work but it really isn't.

with face recognition, geotagging, keywords and the calendar, you can
do complex queries, such as all photos with tony but not bob, taken in
2009, and at the zoo. those types of queries are not possible using
files and folders, no matter how precisely you name the files.

> I can make "Collections" as a substitute for a folder, but I have to
> determine what goes in a Collection.


that's yet another way. there are also smart collections based on
parameters you specify that automatically update themselves as new
photos are added to the library.

> Tell me how Lightroom can sort by content.


see above.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Eric Stevens
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >> Then how the ##### do you keep them separate while merging them?

> >
> >lightroom 'merges' the photos internally. it does not care that they're
> >in different folders. you can combine the photos in any way you want,
> >in any order you want, cropped and retouched if you want. if the photos
> >are geotagged, it's even easier.

>
> So, for the final product, Lightroom still merges them.


it's not a true 'merge' which is why i quoted it. it's database driven
and managed internally to lightroom. nothing is done on disk, so the
photos can be in separate folders, or on even separate hard drives if
you wanted, or all in the same folder. it makes no difference where the
photos are, only that lightroom knows how to find them.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Eric Stevens
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >as i said, they don't need to be merged. put them in subfolders and
> >import all of them into lightroom, which takes care of the rest.

>
> A. I don't have Lightroom.


easily fixed.

> B. You (or someone) have separately described how Lightroom merges
> the separate folders.


it's done within its own database. the files and folders on disk remain
as they are, wherever they are.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Eric Stevens
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >> I was wanting to tell a story about each destination. I absolutely did
> >> not want to tell two separate stories - by camera - about each
> >> destination. The folders had to be merged.

> >
> >the folders do not have to be merged. lightroom (or other asset
> >management software) manages which photos go in what story. you can
> >easily have the photos all in one folder on disk, but separated (or
> >not) in lightroom.

>
> All you describing how " lightroom (or other asset management
> software)" merges the photographs. This is what I said 'has to be
> done'. All you are doing now is describing another way of doing it.


yes, but the point is you don't have to rename anything for the 'merge'
which i put in quotes deliberately since it's not really a merge, it's
all database driven. just copy the photos to your hard drive and keep
them separate if you want (or not) and let lightroom manage the rest.
it's much easier and a lot more flexible.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Eric Stevens
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I presume the data base contains descriptors of each of the individual
> images and. In effect the descriptors are a different set of names.


it maintains iptc metadata, exif data, the location of the photo in
your file system, etc. it also caches previews for speed (which you can
configure for space considerations).
 
Reply With Quote
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2012
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:58:46 -0400, tony cooper <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
: On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:06:39 -0400, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
:
: >On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 21:40:50 -0400, tony cooper <(E-Mail Removed)>
: >wrote:
: >: The numbering system evidently is meaningful to the OP, but
: >: camera-produced numbers are not necessarily the best way to identify
: >: images.
: >:
: >: Immediately after downloading, I rename all of my images with the
: >: date. Today's images would be 2012-07-15-001 and up.
: >:
: >: I wouldn't even notice the camera's system.
: >
: >You would if you were shooting with two cameras.
:
: I'm sure you have your reasons for wanting to change things, and I
: hope you find a solution.
:
: However, two cameras or six cameras doesn't make any difference. I
: often upload my SD cards from two cameras. I send each card's files
: to a folder, and number within the folder. The second folder, if
: there is one, starts at the next number after the first folder's
: number left off.
:
: >You have to worry about
: >whether the cameras' internal numbering will result in a naming conflict when
: >you copy the images to the computer.
:
: Only if you upload to the same folder or directly to the same drive.
:
:
: >In some photo shoots I have to juggle the
: >numbers from three cameras: two of mine and one of my wife's. My two main
: >cameras are 7Ds, and Canon is planning a firmware upgrade that's supposed to
: >give a 7D user some control over the file names, not just the sequence number.
: >Can't happen too soon for me.
: >
: I used Adobe's Bridge in the uploading process. Bridge allows a
: number of different naming systems.

Look, Tony, I freely acknowledge that there are numerous ways to avoid the
issue. All are considerably less convenient than simply pouring the input from
all the cards into the same folder and sorting by shooting date and time.

And I don't have to find a solution; Canon has promised to send me one next
month in the form of a firmware upgrade that will let me specify the naming
convention of the files from my two 7Ds (something I understand Nikon has
allowed for some time). My wife's T2i can keep using the current scheme, and
the problem goes away. No extra folders, no software I don't currently use,
etc., etc.

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2012
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 12:06:30 +1200, Eric Stevens
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:16:48 -0700, nospam <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote:
>
>>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Eric Stevens
>><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> >> I've just completed an exercise wherein my
>>> >> travel shots and my wife's were merged into a circa 120 x A3 page
>>> >> printout of some 1500 photographs. The photographs were organised on
>>> >> the basis of one folder per destination. I had to renumber all my
>>> >> wife's photographs to ensure they stayed clear of mine.
>>> >
>>> >one destination, with one subfolder per camera.
>>>
>>> I was wanting to tell a story about each destination. I absolutely did
>>> not want to tell two separate stories - by camera - about each
>>> destination. The folders had to be merged.

>>
>>the folders do not have to be merged. lightroom (or other asset
>>management software) manages which photos go in what story. you can
>>easily have the photos all in one folder on disk, but separated (or
>>not) in lightroom.

>
>All you describing how " lightroom (or other asset management
>software)" merges the photographs. This is what I said 'has to be
>done'. All you are doing now is describing another way of doing it.


Personally, then, I'm at a loss as to what you want
advice/suggestions/commiseration/agreement/? about. As best I can
figure, all you want is to vent about the problem that the in-camera
numbering causes you. If that's it, that's OK. It's good to get our
gripes out.

I wouldn't think you'd want to get shirty about suggestions, though,
even if you don't feel they'd work for you. They are just thoughts
passed on under the assumption that you might want to try something
different or at least know about some different systems.

As far as Lightroom, readers of your post don't know what software you
have or use. It's unfortunate the comments brought up Lightroom
because - if I understand what you're doing - Lightroom is not a
program that is designed to "tell a story" about each destination.

If you are going to "tell a story", it would seem to me that your
intent is to share that story. Lightroom's role is just to organize
the photos and aid you in retrieving certain images. It doesn't allow
you to "tell a story" to others unless you export the images to
something else. Since you mention a "printout", that must be the way
you intend to share.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Nikon D800; it's going to be fascinating Tim Conway Digital Photography 2 12-26-2011 03:30 PM
Nikon D800 24 MP DSLR due by February 2011? - Amateur Photographer Bruce Digital Photography 67 10-11-2010 07:43 PM
Rumours of Nikon D800 at Photokina - 24 MP and 1080P video Bruce Digital Photography 11 08-28-2010 06:59 AM
Nikon D700x may see the light of day as D900 (D800??) Tony the insider Digital Photography 5 11-28-2008 06:27 PM
XSLT Sequential Numbering Liam XML 1 07-17-2007 12:30 PM



Advertisments