Nikon D800 sequential file numbering

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Rob, Jul 15, 2012.

  1. Rob

    Rob Guest

    Anyone with a D800 that has/had a problem with sequential numbering of
    files.

    Although the camera is set on sequential numbering each time the memory
    card is formatted it returns to 001.

    I have been through the instructions several times set and reset the
    item in the shooting menu to no avail.

    Can find only one reference to this problem at DPreview in which
    everyone is an expert, then carry on with a heap of BS.

    thanks
    Rob, Jul 15, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 16:54:10 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2012-07-15 16:50:13 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
    >
    >> On 2012-07-15 15:51:41 -0700, Alan Browne
    >> <> said:
    >>
    >>> On 2012-07-15 18:14 , Rob wrote:
    >>>> Anyone with a D800 that has/had a problem with sequential numbering of
    >>>> files.
    >>>>
    >>>> Although the camera is set on sequential numbering each time the memory
    >>>> card is formatted it returns to 001.
    >>>>
    >>>> I have been through the instructions several times set and reset the
    >>>> item in the shooting menu to no avail.
    >>>
    >>> When you use "On" and "Reset" is the folder empty?
    >>>
    >>> http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/dslr/D800_EN.pdf
    >>>
    >>> On
    >>> When a new folder is created, the memory card formatted, or a
    >>> new memory card inserted in the camera, file numbering
    >>> continues from the last number used or from the largest file
    >>> number in the current folder, whichever is higher. If a
    >>> photograph is taken when the current folder contains a
    >>> photograph numbered 9999, a new folder will be created
    >>> automatically and file numbering will begin again from 0001.
    >>>
    >>> Off
    >>> File numbering is reset to 0001 when a new folder is created,
    >>> the memory card is formatted, or a new memory card is
    >>> inserted in the camera. Note that a new folder is created
    >>> automatically if a photograph is taken when the current folder
    >>> contains 999 photographs.
    >>>
    >>> Reset
    >>> As for On, except that the next photograph taken is assigned a
    >>> file number by adding one to the largest file number in the
    >>> current folder. If the folder is empty, file numbering is reset to
    >>> 0001.

    >>
    >> That is a standard Nikon DSLR convention.
    >> On my D300S go to "Menu"-> "Custom Setting Menu"-> "D-Shooting
    >> Display"-> "d7 File Numbering Sequence". Select "On", Off", or Reset as
    >> above.
    >> You can also get in camera information on the highlighted menu
    >> selection by pushing the info or "?" button.
    >>
    >> I have mine set to "On" and it functions and numbers files as stated in
    >> both my D300S and the D800 manuals.

    >
    >Note: on your D800 that would be "d5 File Numbering Sequence" not
    >"d7"as found on the D300S. Both cameras have the same 12 selections,
    >just reordered.


    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.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Jul 16, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Rob

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 21:40:50 -0400, tony cooper <>
    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. You have to worry about
    whether the cameras' internal numbering will result in a naming conflict when
    you copy the images to the computer. 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.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Jul 16, 2012
    #3
  4. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, tony cooper
    <> wrote:

    > The numbering system evidently is meaningful to the OP, but
    > camera-produced numbers are not necessarily the best way to identify
    > images.


    exactly why there is software designed to manage images based on
    content. the file name is irrelevant.

    > Immediately after downloading, I rename all of my images with the
    > date. Today's images would be 2012-07-15-001 and up.


    that info is already in the file.
    nospam, Jul 16, 2012
    #4
  5. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Robert Coe
    <> 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. You have to worry about
    > whether the cameras' internal numbering will result in a naming conflict when
    > you copy the images to the computer. 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.


    keep the photos from different cameras in separate folders and there
    will never be a name conflict and manage them with an app designed to
    manage photos, such as lightroom, aperture, etc.
    nospam, Jul 16, 2012
    #5
  6. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:06:39 -0400, Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 21:40:50 -0400, tony cooper <>
    >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.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Jul 16, 2012
    #6
  7. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 19:35:47 -0700, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, tony cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> The numbering system evidently is meaningful to the OP, but
    >> camera-produced numbers are not necessarily the best way to identify
    >> images.

    >
    >exactly why there is software designed to manage images based on
    >content. the file name is irrelevant.


    Only if you have go-arounds that make it irrelevant. It can be very
    relevant, and useful, it build your system around it. That's why we
    have software that allows us to re-name image files. FastStone (free)
    does a very good job.
    >
    >> Immediately after downloading, I rename all of my images with the
    >> date. Today's images would be 2012-07-15-001 and up.

    >
    >that info is already in the file.


    Of course it is, Sherlock. However, you don't see it when you're
    looking through folders for a particular image. Most importantly, to
    me, is that using this system sequences the files in Lightroom by date
    in Library and on my hard drives. No search is required to find
    images in a known date range. I add a year keyword, but not a month.
    Besides, my wife can open Lightroom or a back-up on an external drive,
    but she doesn't know how to execute searches. Or need to.

    Also, the file name is the image name in this system. When I post a
    link to an image I've uploaded to SmugMug or Dropbox or whatever, the
    image name provides the date the shot was taken. No need to look in
    EXIF. That's especially useful when emailing shots to relatives that
    think "EXIF" is a shirt size for fat people.

    It's easy to do, it works, it carries over to disks burned and sent to
    others, and I like it.

    Are there other ways? Probably. That doesn't make it irrelevant.

    Once again, you are naysaying without good cause.

    What's your system, by the way? I don't recall ever seeing an image
    of yours. You do take photographs, don't you?





    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Jul 16, 2012
    #7
  8. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 19:54:08 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2012-07-15 19:35:49 -0700, nospam <> said:
    >
    >> In article <>, Robert Coe
    >> <> 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. You have to worry about
    >>> whether the cameras' internal numbering will result in a naming conflict when
    >>> you copy the images to the computer. 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.

    >>
    >> keep the photos from different cameras in separate folders and there
    >> will never be a name conflict and manage them with an app designed to
    >> manage photos, such as lightroom, aperture, etc.

    >
    >With Nikon DSLRs you can change the label prefix for files written in
    >each camera owned.
    >For example; camera #1 might have file labeled DNA_0000.NEF, camera #2
    >DNB_0000NEF, and camera #3 DNC_0000.NEF. That way each camera has a
    >specific tag.
    >
    >Further relabeling can be made in Lightroom, or Bridge, or whatever.


    I suppose everyone's got their little favorites, but I like FastStone
    for this. You can pick a specific format or let FastStone
    automatically set the file name to the date the image was taken using
    $Y-$M-$D-### or any system you want. You can add a character or
    characters to designate the camera: $Y-$M-$D-D40-### (and that can be
    done in any sequence) Not bad for a free download.

    I could set the file names in Bridge, but I generally just let Bridge
    do its thing and re-name in FastStone after I've culled out the really
    bad ones.

    Since I shoot RAW, the .NEF file will have the date file name with a
    suffix number, and I save-as with the same suffix number when creating
    a .jpg from the .NEF so I can know which .NEF was the birth mother.





    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Jul 16, 2012
    #8
  9. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:18:37 +1200, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 19:35:49 -0700, nospam <>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>In article <>, Robert Coe
    >><> 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. You have to worry about
    >>> whether the cameras' internal numbering will result in a naming conflict when
    >>> you copy the images to the computer. 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.

    >>
    >>keep the photos from different cameras in separate folders and there
    >>will never be a name conflict and manage them with an app designed to
    >>manage photos, such as lightroom, aperture, etc.

    >
    >Can't always be done.


    I wouldn't say "can't". Simply downloading into separate folders and
    then assigning an initial or initials in the numbering system and,
    finally, merging into one folder per destination would do it:
    2012-01-01-ES-#### and 2012-01-01-BS-####.

    It may not be to your liking, but it can be done.

    >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.
    >
    >Why my wife's? Thats another story.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Jul 16, 2012
    #9
  10. Rob

    Rob Guest

    On 16/07/2012 8:51 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
    > On 2012-07-15 18:14 , Rob wrote:
    >> Anyone with a D800 that has/had a problem with sequential numbering of
    >> files.
    >>
    >> Although the camera is set on sequential numbering each time the memory
    >> card is formatted it returns to 001.
    >>
    >> I have been through the instructions several times set and reset the
    >> item in the shooting menu to no avail.

    >
    > When you use "On" and "Reset" is the folder empty?
    >
    > http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/dslr/D800_EN.pdf
    >
    > On
    > When a new folder is created, the memory card formatted, or a
    > new memory card inserted in the camera, file numbering
    > continues from the last number used or from the largest file
    > number in the current folder, whichever is higher. If a
    > photograph is taken when the current folder contains a
    > photograph numbered 9999, a new folder will be created
    > automatically and file numbering will begin again from 0001.
    >
    > Off
    > File numbering is reset to 0001 when a new folder is created,
    > the memory card is formatted, or a new memory card is
    > inserted in the camera. Note that a new folder is created
    > automatically if a photograph is taken when the current folder
    > contains 999 photographs.
    >
    > Reset
    > As for On, except that the next photograph taken is assigned a
    > file number by adding one to the largest file number in the
    > current folder. If the folder is empty, file numbering is reset to
    > 0001.
    >
    >
    >


    I did read all that in the manual. Went through it with Nikon support
    again this morning. Looks as if its on the way to repair section.
    Rob, Jul 16, 2012
    #10
  11. Rob

    Rob Guest

    On 16/07/2012 9:50 AM, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2012-07-15 15:51:41 -0700, Alan Browne
    > <> said:
    >
    >> On 2012-07-15 18:14 , Rob wrote:
    >>> Anyone with a D800 that has/had a problem with sequential numbering of
    >>> files.
    >>>
    >>> Although the camera is set on sequential numbering each time the memory
    >>> card is formatted it returns to 001.
    >>>
    >>> I have been through the instructions several times set and reset the
    >>> item in the shooting menu to no avail.

    >>
    >> When you use "On" and "Reset" is the folder empty?
    >>
    >> http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/dslr/D800_EN.pdf
    >>
    >> On
    >> When a new folder is created, the memory card formatted, or a
    >> new memory card inserted in the camera, file numbering
    >> continues from the last number used or from the largest file
    >> number in the current folder, whichever is higher. If a
    >> photograph is taken when the current folder contains a
    >> photograph numbered 9999, a new folder will be created
    >> automatically and file numbering will begin again from 0001.
    >>
    >> Off
    >> File numbering is reset to 0001 when a new folder is created,
    >> the memory card is formatted, or a new memory card is
    >> inserted in the camera. Note that a new folder is created
    >> automatically if a photograph is taken when the current folder
    >> contains 999 photographs.
    >>
    >> Reset
    >> As for On, except that the next photograph taken is assigned a
    >> file number by adding one to the largest file number in the
    >> current folder. If the folder is empty, file numbering is reset to
    >> 0001.

    >
    > That is a standard Nikon DSLR convention.
    > On my D300S go to "Menu"-> "Custom Setting Menu"-> "D-Shooting
    > Display"-> "d7 File Numbering Sequence". Select "On", Off", or Reset as
    > above.
    > You can also get in camera information on the highlighted menu selection
    > by pushing the info or "?" button.
    >
    > I have mine set to "On" and it functions and numbers files as stated in
    > both my D300S and the D800 manuals.
    >


    Thats all set OK.
    Rob, Jul 16, 2012
    #11
  12. Rob

    Rob Guest

    On 16/07/2012 9:54 AM, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2012-07-15 16:50:13 -0700, Savageduck
    > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
    >
    >> On 2012-07-15 15:51:41 -0700, Alan Browne
    >> <> said:
    >>
    >>> On 2012-07-15 18:14 , Rob wrote:
    >>>> Anyone with a D800 that has/had a problem with sequential numbering of
    >>>> files.
    >>>>
    >>>> Although the camera is set on sequential numbering each time the memory
    >>>> card is formatted it returns to 001.
    >>>>
    >>>> I have been through the instructions several times set and reset the
    >>>> item in the shooting menu to no avail.
    >>>
    >>> When you use "On" and "Reset" is the folder empty?
    >>>
    >>> http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/dslr/D800_EN.pdf
    >>>
    >>> On
    >>> When a new folder is created, the memory card formatted, or a
    >>> new memory card inserted in the camera, file numbering
    >>> continues from the last number used or from the largest file
    >>> number in the current folder, whichever is higher. If a
    >>> photograph is taken when the current folder contains a
    >>> photograph numbered 9999, a new folder will be created
    >>> automatically and file numbering will begin again from 0001.
    >>>
    >>> Off
    >>> File numbering is reset to 0001 when a new folder is created,
    >>> the memory card is formatted, or a new memory card is
    >>> inserted in the camera. Note that a new folder is created
    >>> automatically if a photograph is taken when the current folder
    >>> contains 999 photographs.
    >>>
    >>> Reset
    >>> As for On, except that the next photograph taken is assigned a
    >>> file number by adding one to the largest file number in the
    >>> current folder. If the folder is empty, file numbering is reset to
    >>> 0001.

    >>
    >> That is a standard Nikon DSLR convention.
    >> On my D300S go to "Menu"-> "Custom Setting Menu"-> "D-Shooting
    >> Display"-> "d7 File Numbering Sequence". Select "On", Off", or Reset
    >> as above.
    >> You can also get in camera information on the highlighted menu
    >> selection by pushing the info or "?" button.
    >>
    >> I have mine set to "On" and it functions and numbers files as stated
    >> in both my D300S and the D800 manuals.

    >
    > Note: on your D800 that would be "d5 File Numbering Sequence" not "d7"as
    > found on the D300S. Both cameras have the same 12 selections, just
    > reordered.
    >


    Understood that.
    Rob, Jul 16, 2012
    #12
  13. Rob

    Rob Guest

    On 16/07/2012 11:40 AM, tony cooper wrote:
    > On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 16:54:10 -0700, Savageduck
    > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >
    >> On 2012-07-15 16:50:13 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
    >>
    >>> On 2012-07-15 15:51:41 -0700, Alan Browne
    >>> <> said:
    >>>
    >>>> On 2012-07-15 18:14 , Rob wrote:
    >>>>> Anyone with a D800 that has/had a problem with sequential numbering of
    >>>>> files.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Although the camera is set on sequential numbering each time the memory
    >>>>> card is formatted it returns to 001.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I have been through the instructions several times set and reset the
    >>>>> item in the shooting menu to no avail.
    >>>>
    >>>> When you use "On" and "Reset" is the folder empty?
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/dslr/D800_EN.pdf
    >>>>
    >>>> On
    >>>> When a new folder is created, the memory card formatted, or a
    >>>> new memory card inserted in the camera, file numbering
    >>>> continues from the last number used or from the largest file
    >>>> number in the current folder, whichever is higher. If a
    >>>> photograph is taken when the current folder contains a
    >>>> photograph numbered 9999, a new folder will be created
    >>>> automatically and file numbering will begin again from 0001.
    >>>>
    >>>> Off
    >>>> File numbering is reset to 0001 when a new folder is created,
    >>>> the memory card is formatted, or a new memory card is
    >>>> inserted in the camera. Note that a new folder is created
    >>>> automatically if a photograph is taken when the current folder
    >>>> contains 999 photographs.
    >>>>
    >>>> Reset
    >>>> As for On, except that the next photograph taken is assigned a
    >>>> file number by adding one to the largest file number in the
    >>>> current folder. If the folder is empty, file numbering is reset to
    >>>> 0001.
    >>>
    >>> That is a standard Nikon DSLR convention.
    >>> On my D300S go to "Menu"-> "Custom Setting Menu"-> "D-Shooting
    >>> Display"-> "d7 File Numbering Sequence". Select "On", Off", or Reset as
    >>> above.
    >>> You can also get in camera information on the highlighted menu
    >>> selection by pushing the info or "?" button.
    >>>
    >>> I have mine set to "On" and it functions and numbers files as stated in
    >>> both my D300S and the D800 manuals.

    >>
    >> Note: on your D800 that would be "d5 File Numbering Sequence" not
    >> "d7"as found on the D300S. Both cameras have the same 12 selections,
    >> just reordered.

    >
    > 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.
    >
    >



    I would - but if I reformat the card I loose the last number - the
    camera is not storing the highest number.
    Rob, Jul 16, 2012
    #13
  14. Rob

    Rob Guest

    On 16/07/2012 12:42 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2012-07-15 19:06:39 -0700, Robert Coe <> said:
    >
    >> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 21:40:50 -0400, tony cooper
    >> <>
    >> 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. You have to worry about
    >> whether the cameras' internal numbering will result in a naming
    >> conflict when
    >> you copy the images to the computer. 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.
    >>
    >> Bob

    >
    > For in camera labeling, Nikon allows any three letters + four digits
    > along with tagging for Adobe RGB or sRGB colorspace with the use of a
    > leading understroke. So an Adobe RGB might look like this _ABC_0000.NEF
    > and an sRGB file ABC_0000.NEF.
    >
    > Nikon default is DSC_0000
    > My D70 files appear as DSC_0000.NEF.
    > D300 as DSC_0000.NEF
    > and I changed one letter for my D300s to differentiate between the D70
    > and the stolen D300. Those read DNC_0000.NEF.
    >
    > Then for some specific shoots, I might change the batch by substituting
    > the three letters for an obvious identifier. For example DSC_0375.NEF is
    > now TracyArm05_0375.dng.
    >
    >


    I know which camera all my digital shots have been taken with.

    So I have sequential folders which contain sequential images, this is
    what is archived.(148-001 to 999). After that each trip, job what ever
    images are copied to a working titled folder.
    Rob, Jul 16, 2012
    #14
  15. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, tony cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >> The numbering system evidently is meaningful to the OP, but
    > >> camera-produced numbers are not necessarily the best way to identify
    > >> images.

    > >
    > >exactly why there is software designed to manage images based on
    > >content. the file name is irrelevant.

    >
    > Only if you have go-arounds that make it irrelevant. It can be very
    > relevant, and useful, it build your system around it.


    what go arounds are you talking about?

    apps such as lightroom take care of managing photos. it's *so* much
    easier it's not even funny.

    > That's why we
    > have software that allows us to re-name image files. FastStone (free)
    > does a very good job.


    renaming is old school.

    > >> Immediately after downloading, I rename all of my images with the
    > >> date. Today's images would be 2012-07-15-001 and up.

    > >
    > >that info is already in the file.

    >
    > Of course it is, Sherlock.


    so you admit it's redundant.

    > However, you don't see it when you're
    > looking through folders for a particular image.


    nonsense.

    > Most importantly, to
    > me, is that using this system sequences the files in Lightroom by date
    > in Library and on my hard drives.


    they'd already be sequenced by date even without you renaming them, but
    more importantly, who cares? lightroom takes care of managing it.

    > No search is required to find
    > images in a known date range.


    you're searching. you just don't realize it.

    > I add a year keyword, but not a month.
    > Besides, my wife can open Lightroom or a back-up on an external drive,
    > but she doesn't know how to execute searches. Or need to.


    you're making it much harder than it really is. click on the desired
    date.

    <http://www.frankhollis.com/temp/month.jpg>

    > Also, the file name is the image name in this system. When I post a
    > link to an image I've uploaded to SmugMug or Dropbox or whatever, the
    > image name provides the date the shot was taken. No need to look in
    > EXIF. That's especially useful when emailing shots to relatives that
    > think "EXIF" is a shirt size for fat people.


    lightroom can export images in various formats and name them whatever
    you want and even directly upload them for you. it's very, very simple,
    and the name of the original files makes no difference.

    > It's easy to do, it works, it carries over to disks burned and sent to
    > others, and I like it.


    actually it's more work.

    > Are there other ways? Probably. That doesn't make it irrelevant.


    of course there are other ways. the point is that some of those ways
    are more time consuming that others.

    > Once again, you are naysaying without good cause.


    wrong.

    > What's your system, by the way? I don't recall ever seeing an image
    > of yours. You do take photographs, don't you?


    i sure do and i shot 300 yesterday. my photos shared with whom i want
    to share them, but more importantly, my photos have absolutely nothing
    whatsoever to do with the topic.
    nospam, Jul 16, 2012
    #15
  16. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    > >>>keep the photos from different cameras in separate folders and there
    > >>>will never be a name conflict and manage them with an app designed to
    > >>>manage photos, such as lightroom, aperture, etc.
    > >>
    > >>Can't always be done.

    > >
    > >I wouldn't say "can't". Simply downloading into separate folders and
    > >then assigning an initial or initials in the numbering system and,
    > >finally, merging into one folder per destination would do it:
    > >2012-01-01-ES-#### and 2012-01-01-BS-####.

    >
    > 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.
    nospam, Jul 16, 2012
    #16
  17. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    > >keep the photos from different cameras in separate folders and there
    > >will never be a name conflict and manage them with an app designed to
    > >manage photos, such as lightroom, aperture, etc.

    >
    > Can't always be done.


    nonsense. of course it can always be done.

    > 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.
    nospam, Jul 16, 2012
    #17
  18. Rob

    nospam Guest

    In article <ju0foo$qpq$>, Rob <>
    wrote:

    > I would - but if I reformat the card I loose the last number - the
    > camera is not storing the highest number.


    there's no need to reformat each time, but regardless, the camera
    should be storing the last number. i've yet to see a camera not do
    that, including several nikon cameras. if you insert a brand new card,
    the numbering continues from where it left off.
    nospam, Jul 16, 2012
    #18
  19. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 17:04:04 +1200, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    >On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 00:54:27 -0400, tony cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:18:37 +1200, Eric Stevens
    >><> wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 19:35:49 -0700, nospam <>
    >>>wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>In article <>, Robert Coe
    >>>><> 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. You have to worry about
    >>>>> whether the cameras' internal numbering will result in a naming conflict when
    >>>>> you copy the images to the computer. 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.
    >>>>
    >>>>keep the photos from different cameras in separate folders and there
    >>>>will never be a name conflict and manage them with an app designed to
    >>>>manage photos, such as lightroom, aperture, etc.
    >>>
    >>>Can't always be done.

    >>
    >>I wouldn't say "can't". Simply downloading into separate folders and
    >>then assigning an initial or initials in the numbering system and,
    >>finally, merging into one folder per destination would do it:
    >>2012-01-01-ES-#### and 2012-01-01-BS-####.

    >
    >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".
    >>
    >>It may not be to your liking, but it can be done.

    >
    >Now you are giving me recomendations as to how to not do it.
    >>
    >>>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.
    >>>
    >>>Why my wife's? Thats another story.


    I thought you wanted them - both yours and your wife's - in one folder
    per destination. It seems that's what you say above.

    I'm not making recommendations. I'm stating what could be done if you
    want to do it differently from what you are now doing.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Jul 16, 2012
    #19
  20. Rob

    tony cooper Guest

    On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 00:43:01 -0700, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, Eric Stevens
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> >>>keep the photos from different cameras in separate folders and there
    >> >>>will never be a name conflict and manage them with an app designed to
    >> >>>manage photos, such as lightroom, aperture, etc.
    >> >>
    >> >>Can't always be done.
    >> >
    >> >I wouldn't say "can't". Simply downloading into separate folders and
    >> >then assigning an initial or initials in the numbering system and,
    >> >finally, merging into one folder per destination would do it:
    >> >2012-01-01-ES-#### and 2012-01-01-BS-####.

    >>
    >> 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.


    I didn't know Lightroom sorts by content. 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 will sort out by keyword if I give images
    keywords, but I have to tell it the keyword.

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

    Tell me how Lightroom can sort by content.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Jul 16, 2012
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Tony the insider

    Nikon D700x may see the light of day as D900 (D800??)

    Tony the insider, Nov 17, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    4,760
    Paul Furman
    Nov 28, 2008
  2. Bruce
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    2,557
    Chris Malcolm
    Aug 28, 2010
  3. Bruce
    Replies:
    67
    Views:
    5,756
  4. Tim Conway

    Re: Nikon D800; it's going to be fascinating

    Tim Conway, Dec 26, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    489
    Bruce
    Dec 26, 2011
  5. Bruce
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    230
    Bruce
    Feb 3, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page