«

Sometimes or always or what "should" be the method?

I do both. Both work fine.

Tom
"Toomanyputters" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:cxX3e.16783$(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Sometimes or always or what "should" be the method?
>

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:32:24 GMT, Toomanyputters <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Sometimes or always or what "should" be the method?

It doesn't matter much on any camera I've used. The Canon 20D tends
to litter a card with empty directories, so every once in a while, I
format the card to get rid of them.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall

From: "Toomanyputters" <(E-Mail Removed)>

| Sometimes or always or what "should" be the method?
|

It doesn't matter. Both the PC and the camera use the same functions to perform the same
thing. They just go about it deifferently.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm

"Toomanyputters" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
> Sometimes or always or what "should" be the method?

Using the camera to delete or format is my practice. This way I am 100%
assured of compatibility. A PC delete or format, especially with third
party software, may leave the CF card in a state which the camera does not
expect. Admittedly, this is a "belt and suspenders" approach. On the other
hand, I haven't had the need for software to restore lost images from a
trashed CF card. I do have such a program however, undershorts in case the
belt and suspenders fail. Your comfort level may vary.

On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 20:21:15 -0400, jfitz <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> On the other hand, I haven't had the need for software to restore
> lost images from a trashed CF card.

Can I sell you a jar of amazing tiger repellent cream? In 20 years
of using it I haven't once been mauled by a tiger.

:-)

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall

Ben Rosengart wrote:
>
> On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 20:21:15 -0400, jfitz <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> > On the other hand, I haven't had the need for software to restore
> > lost images from a trashed CF card.
>
> Can I sell you a jar of amazing tiger repellent cream? In 20 years
> of using it I haven't once been mauled by a tiger.

and just because I shave, I have never been mauled by a tiger.
I even hand fed them.

there were two siberians
who were ready to try in spite of my shaving.

>
> :-)
>
> --
> Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
> Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
> questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
> --Josh Micah Marshall

"Toomanyputters" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:cxX3e.16783$(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Sometimes or always or what "should" be the method?
If you're going to clear all the photos on the card use the camera and
format. It's kinda like a reset and you're assured of compatibility. That
said, it should work either way, although the PC may leave a few things
behind.

In article <cxX3e.16783$(E-Mail Removed) >,
Toomanyputters <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

("Subject: " header reinserted in the body for those whose newsreader
may make it difficult to read the "Subject: " header while also reading
the article.) Please -- always duplicate what is in the "Subject:"
header, as otherwise, some people will only see the disconnected line in
the body, as in this case. :-)

> Subject: Delete files on CF card from computer on format on camera?"

>Sometimes or always or what "should" be the method?

There may be reasons which vary from camera to camera to favor
one over the other. The things which I consider to have an impact with
my Nikon D70 are:

1) Since the format of the cards is the MS-DOS "FAT" filesystem,
there is a problem of filespace fragmentation when files are
simply deleted as a matter of course. This will result in a
loss of speed as files have to be broken up into multiple parts.
This probably applies to all cameras which use a CF card or
similar, so individually deleting files should be reserved for
culling shots while in the field for whatever reason. A mass
delete (e.g. "DEL *.*" in MS-DOS or the GUI equivalent in
Windows), or "rm *" in unix is generally undesirable in the long
term -- and may be slower than reformatting the whole drive.

From this point of view, formatting, either in the camera or in
the computer should be equivalent, as long as the computer can
handle a FAT-64 filesystem (necessary for some of the larger CF
cards.)

2) Some cameras (e.g. the Nikon D70 and the CoolPix 950 -- the only
two all Nikon digital cameras with which I have experience),
both place a file at the root directory level, and create a
fixed (or alterable) subdirectory into which the images are
normally placed.

From this point of view, if the CF card is formatted, it should
be formatted in the camera, which knows what the camera expects,
and supplies it. (It may be that some computer programs
supplied with the cameras will supply this as well, but the
native format utility probably will not.

3) Probably not a problem with CF cards, but a possible problem
with micro-drives, which fit in the same place. That is the
problem of sectors going bad. Formatting on the computer should
detect these bad sectors, and map them out of service, so they
won't result in a damaged image. I don't know how smart the
camera format programs are about this, and at least with
Windows, apparently a surface analysis during formatting is not
turned on by default -- you have to click an option box to
select it, and this will take longer.

This is an argument for formatting it in the computer, not in
the camera -- at least occasionally.

My own feeling is that, with micro-drives, you should
occasionally do the full format on the computer, with testing for bad
sectors enabled, and subsequently re-format it in the camera to
re-install the desired files and subdirectories.

My other digital was a Nikon N90s film camera converted by Kodak
for the AP and re-labeled the "NC2000e". On that one, while it could
format in the camera, if so commanded from the computer, you got better
information from the computer's own format program if anything was
wrong. If the drive was in the camera, you simply had a very long
format time, with little clue what was wrong. This camera only used
PCMCIA hard disk drives, and PCMCIA format Flash cards -- and it would
not deal properly with a CF card in a PCMICA adaptor. But those hard
disks were easy to damage with physical shocks, and I made it a practice
to always format it the slow but complete way in the computer. but that
did not use any special files or subdirectories, so that was a
reasonable way to go -- and it sure beat having to connect the camera to
the computer via a SCSI bus.

If anyone else has knowledge about other cameras which suggest
one way or the other would be preferred, please add in your information.

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: <(E-Mail Removed)> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

Toomanyputters <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Sometimes or always or what "should" be the method?

I use a Mac, and Macs have this nifty piece of software called Image
Capture. Image Capture takes the images from media cards and copies them
to your hard drive, optionally doing things like embedding ICC profiles
and so forth.

I have it set to not delete the files from the card after downloading,
because I *know* that at some time in the future I'll end up forgetting
to tell it *not* to delete files I want to stay on the card. Formatting
the card or deleting all the images is a task I've decided always
happens in-camera, as a personal strategy. I know my limitations. :-)