If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing working images, archiving all images, what approach to take?
You own a 5D, so I would presume that you are no newbie to photography.
Maybe I am wrong, but generally I have found that this is the case with 5D users. Of course, this is not always true. You are also a programmer, so I would also presume that you are no newbie to computers. In addition to this, you are using CS2, which comes with Adobe Bridge, which allows you to view thumbnails and organise very easily. You are also using a good filing system, for example "2008-01-18 Death Valley". All in all, a pretty good setup. So when you said that you "may be able to write something that could help with whatever process you end up using over time", my reaction would be "I don't think so". Why does someone need to use additional software, when the OS already does what you want? BTW, the same applies even for someone taking photos with just a mobile phone. I also don't understand why are you using DVD's for backup, when a decent Seagate external harddrive will do everything DVD's will do, plus more, and is so cheap? You don't need additional software to do this, which is why I am so surprised with your post. "nano" wrote in message . net... OK, I'm curious, is there something logically impossible about owning a 5D and as a programmer being able to write something that helps with archiving images? Your posting might seem harsh to someone that has a clue what you're about, but I'm just puzzled. So, you are using a 5D. You are also a programmer who maybe able to write something that could help? I really don't think so. I apologies if I am being harsh. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing working images, archiving all images, what approach to take?
nano wrote in
.net: One aspect of the various DAMs that I'm not sure of (I've looked at lightroom and iMatch now) that is at the core of what might be shaping up into a 'plan', is can they create thumbnail galleries, or catalogs of any type, for storage that is off line? If you're on a PC, ThumbsPlus (http://www.cerious.com/) can do this. It's shareware, so you can try it out first. Mark. -- While I'll admit that anyone can make a mistake once, to go on making the same lethal errors century after century seems to me nothing short of deliberate.--V. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing working images, archiving all images, what approach to take?
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 10:20:43 -0800, nano wrote: I'll check out iMatch, thanks. Just be aware that the learning curve for iMatch is not trivial. It's taken me literally years to get to a point where I feel like I know all the in's and out's. ================================================== ========================= Chris -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing working images, archiving all images, what approachto take?
nano wrote:
But it'd be ideal to have the cataloge or thumgnail gallery available on the main workstation, for all archived images, even if the disk is not connected. Can they do that? Most of the stuff I've read deals with organizing images, even processing them, and that's fine, but my #1 issue is archiving, being able to reference those archives in a transparent manner. With Lightroom, when I do this, I simply delete the actual images. Then I have access to HQ previews, keywording, IPTC data, and EXIF. This provides great reference, but not access for editing in the easiest manner. -- John McWilliams |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing working images, archiving all images, what approach to take?
Exactly. Store your photos on either the C drive or a second internal hard
drive if you can. Then periodically back up to an external hard drive and keep it off site. "TH O" wrote in message ... In article , External HD can be part of a backup plan but they aren't a complete plan. External drives can fail, be dropped, be stolen, and be damaged by water. DVDs are less susceptible to the above. For live storage of my existing photography, I would definitely keep the main copies on a hard drive and also have a backup set kept on a hard drive. But there will also be DVD backups. For a complete backup, a complete backup should also be stored offsite for protection from theft, fires, and natural disasters. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing working images, archiving all images, what approach to take?
Ok, let's break it down:
There are a lot of large files to grapple with. I want to keep all images 'forever'. I need to find archived images. I would like to view thumbnails of archived images. There are many images that are very similiar. Some of the images are chosen to process further. The images that get attention end up as jpg or tiff. Use a second internal hard drive to store all your photos on, not the C drive. As you are using a Workstation, I am pretty sure that you will have spare slots. With Adobe Bridge in CS2, you can view thumbnails of all the photos very easily and scroll between them. You can also associate keywords to them if you want, but I don't personally, as I know where all my photos are. You can also make easy selections on what photos you want to compare. All your RAW images should end up saved as either 16-bit TIFF's or PSD's. You can also convert to JPEG aswell, but not instead of the TIFF or PSD. And never delete the *.CR2 RAW image. My current system is approx like so: Return from a shooting session with 2 4gb chips of images. Copy each chip to separate folder on workstation's hdd. Folder names reflect date and subject/location (2008-01-18 Death Valley) Good, but why copy each chip to a separate folder? Stick them all in the same folder, unless there are file name conflicts. Starting with reverse date for the name of the folder is perfect and something I have used for many years without any problems. What you put after the date is up to you and what works for you to identify the photos. Occasionally, there is no need to use a date prefix at all though, for example, you can just call a folder 'sky photos', because the date isn't really important. Create dvd of each folder, label by date and subject/location. Ignore DVD's. IMO, unnecessary. Get a USB external hard drive and back up all your photos from your second internal drive to this periodically. Keep the external drive off site. Keep it on-site as short a time as possible. If you want to get really serious, then back up to DAT's every day and keep them off site. For most consumers, using DAT's are an overkill and expensive. Depends on your personal situation though, if you make money from your photos, then carry out a risk assessment. Select some raw images to work on, move them to working dir. Why? Keep them in the same folder. I usually retain the numeric tag that the camera assigns to an image through the processing stage of an image, until it gets published. This helps me keep track of which raw image was the source. Sounds good. Eventually when workstation hdd are crammed, have to delete older folders containing raw images. Hard drive space is cheap. There is no harm in selectively deleting though because there is no need to store crap. To be honest, I didn't really agree with your comment above about keeping ALL images for life, but I didn't say anything because this is a personal choice and up to you. For me, I delete anything that I consider a poor shot. If there are similar shots of the same subject, pick the best ones and delete the rest. There's no need to store crap for the sake of it. A crap photo will always be a crap photo, unless there is sentimental value to it and there are no better photos to take it's place. DVD media has limited lifespan so eventually all will turn to dust. DVD software/hardware still seem very flakey to me; I'm never sure a copy won't be corrupted or somehow unreadable. Even if I make 2 copies of images, if one fails other might fail for the same reason. Once on dvd it's hard to view thumbnails, and thumbnails are important when sifting older images for variations on a theme. It'd be ideal if thumbnails were available on my workstation for all archived images. Tried using external hdds for storage but still questions re durability etc, aside from cost. Same as my above comment. You will also find that you will replace hard drives as you take more and more images and fill it up. So, they will normally get replaced at periodic intervals. Your images are never stored for life on them. Look at hard drives as disposable commodities. Also, don't just buy the biggest one available at the time, buy one that suits your needs for the next couple of years and then replace it with a bigger one when it becomes full. I'm a programmer so I may be able to write something that could help with whatever process I end up using over time, if there isn't already such software. I don't think so. Why use more additional software when you can already do everything you need to so easily? Of course, maybe you are not using Windows? "nano" wrote in message .net... Ali I'm sure you're way ahead of me in every regard. Strangely, from every single one of the responses I learned some good stuff (other than from yours). I guess you can mark this up as some kind of twilight zone experience. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing working images, archiving all images, what approach to take?
Ok, let's break it down:
There are a lot of large files to grapple with. I want to keep all images 'forever'. I need to find archived images. I would like to view thumbnails of archived images. There are many images that are very similiar. Some of the images are chosen to process further. The images that get attention end up as jpg or tiff. Use a second internal hard drive to store all your photos on, not the C drive. As you are using a Workstation, I am pretty sure that you will have spare slots. With Adobe Bridge in CS2, you can view thumbnails of all the photos very easily and scroll between them. You can also associate keywords to them if you want, but I don't personally, as I know where all my photos are. You can also make easy selections on what photos you want to compare. All your RAW images should end up saved as either 16-bit TIFF's or PSD's. You can also convert to JPEG aswell, but not instead of the TIFF or PSD. And never delete the *.CR2 RAW image. My current system is approx like so: Return from a shooting session with 2 4gb chips of images. Copy each chip to separate folder on workstation's hdd. Folder names reflect date and subject/location (2008-01-18 Death Valley) Good, but why copy each chip to a separate folder? Stick them all in the same folder, unless there are file name conflicts. Starting with reverse date for the name of the folder is perfect and something I have used for many years without any problems. What you put after the date is up to you and what works for you to identify the photos. Occasionally, there is no need to use a date prefix at all though, for example, you can just call a folder 'sky photos', because the date isn't really important. Create dvd of each folder, label by date and subject/location. Ignore DVD's. IMO, unnecessary. Get a USB external hard drive and back up all your photos from your second internal drive to this periodically. Keep the external drive off site. Keep it on-site as short a time as possible. If you want to get really serious, then back up to DAT's every day and keep them off site. For most consumers, using DAT's are an overkill and expensive. Depends on your personal situation though, if you make money from your photos, then carry out a risk assessment. Select some raw images to work on, move them to working dir. Why? Keep them in the same folder. I usually retain the numeric tag that the camera assigns to an image through the processing stage of an image, until it gets published. This helps me keep track of which raw image was the source. Sounds good. Eventually when workstation hdd are crammed, have to delete older folders containing raw images. Hard drive space is cheap. There is no harm in selectively deleting though because there is no need to store crap. To be honest, I didn't really agree with your comment above about keeping ALL images for life, but I didn't say anything because this is a personal choice and up to you. For me, I delete anything that I consider a poor shot. If there are similar shots of the same subject, pick the best ones and delete the rest. There's no need to store crap for the sake of it. A crap photo will always be a crap photo, unless there is sentimental value to it and there are no better photos to take it's place. DVD media has limited lifespan so eventually all will turn to dust. DVD software/hardware still seem very flakey to me; I'm never sure a copy won't be corrupted or somehow unreadable. Even if I make 2 copies of images, if one fails other might fail for the same reason. Once on dvd it's hard to view thumbnails, and thumbnails are important when sifting older images for variations on a theme. It'd be ideal if thumbnails were available on my workstation for all archived images. Tried using external hdds for storage but still questions re durability etc, aside from cost. Same as my above comment. You will also find that you will replace hard drives as you take more and more images and fill it up. So, they will normally get replaced at periodic intervals. Your images are never stored for life on them. Look at hard drives as disposable commodities. Also, don't just buy the biggest one available at the time, buy one that suits your needs for the next couple of years and then replace it with a bigger one when it becomes full. I'm a programmer so I may be able to write something that could help with whatever process I end up using over time, if there isn't already such software. I don't think so. Why use more additional software when you can already do everything you need to so easily? Of course, maybe you are not using Windows? "nano" wrote in message .net... Ali I'm sure you're way ahead of me in every regard. Strangely, from every single one of the responses I learned some good stuff (other than from yours). I guess you can mark this up as some kind of twilight zone experience. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing working images, archiving all images, what approach to take?
Each to their own. If people want to backup to DVD's, then that's their
choice. It's not a wrong decision. To be honest, I don't really care what other people do, it's up to them. "TH O" wrote in message ... Ignore DVD's. IMO, unnecessary. Get a USB external hard drive and back up all your photos from your second internal drive to this periodically. Keep the external drive off site. Keep it on-site as short a time as possible. If you want to get really serious, then back up to DAT's every day and keep them off site. For most consumers, using DAT's are an overkill and expensive. Depends on your personal situation though, if you make money from your photos, then carry out a risk assessment. A single backup is insufficient. That's why people suggest cheap DVDs. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Organizing working images, archiving all images, what approach to take?
In article ,
John McWilliams wrote: nano wrote: But it'd be ideal to have the cataloge or thumgnail gallery available on the main workstation, for all archived images, even if the disk is not connected. Can they do that? Most of the stuff I've read deals with organizing images, even processing them, and that's fine, but my #1 issue is archiving, being able to reference those archives in a transparent manner. With Lightroom, when I do this, I simply delete the actual images. Then I have access to HQ previews, keywording, IPTC data, and EXIF. This provides great reference, but not access for editing in the easiest manner. I have PS CS3 which interfaces that you can open and save edits back into Light room. I bought them both at the same time. I like LR better than bridge. -- Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
clear images on auto, noisy images on manual | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 4 | June 19th 07 03:27 PM |
Archiving images | David Azose | Digital SLR Cameras | 91 | December 21st 06 11:44 AM |
Organizing 10,000's of images? | Richard H. | Digital Photography | 35 | December 7th 06 08:52 PM |
[ANN] Kalimages: working with IPTC/IIM informations embedded in images files | Patrick Peccatte | Digital Photography | 0 | September 17th 04 08:40 AM |