Good practise?

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Aerticus, Nov 12, 2004.

  1. Aerticus

    Aerticus Guest

    Hokay! Here goes!

    I post this with the knowledge it will probably appear in magazines in one
    form or another so: if you resource the details from here or use it as a
    basis to disseminate or promote good practise please be kind enough and
    coureous enough to add something along the lines of "original ideas
    attributed to Aerticus on rec.photo.digital news group.

    1 - when you upload image from camera to computer open image editor and add
    keywords, IPTC straight away (don't procrastinate - just do!)

    2 - create a copy folder based on the image name. Copy an image into it (at
    this stage, one folder, one image). This will be your work in progress
    image

    3 - batch resample (resize if you wish) from the ORIGINAL image and store
    these on computer hard drive JPEG level 5 seems q good This will work with
    PSCS or your alternative image editor (huh! is there one?) so to retain
    EXIF, IPTC and keyword identifiers

    4 - copy ORIGINAL images to removable hard drive possibly CD - it's up to
    you and your resources. Verify that the transfer has been good and 1005

    5 - Remove ORIGINAL IMAGES from fixed hard drive and store the saved
    originals in a safe place on safe media

    6 - work top your heart's content on the WIP folders pulling any other image
    you may later require from the copy of original images

    7 - if you need to search on keywords or by visual criteria base that on the
    smaller sized copies retaining EXIF IPTC and keywords

    The idea here is to minimise possible harm to original images, use JPEGed
    level 5 or so as the basis for image directory & EXIF, IPTC, keyword data,
    work in progress folders provide -erm- folders for -innocent whistle- image
    work -shuffle- in progress.

    8 - when WIP no longer is WIP and becomes historic work (work that once was
    work in progress?) save it to safe removable media possibly after taking
    lo-res JPEG 5 copies with EXIF IPTC and keyword (possibly revised) data.

    The idea is to take no longer active images off the fixed hard drive(s)
    after storing smaller files of the same thing while retaining usefulness of
    EXIF IPTC and keywords

    Aerticus

    --
    Yesterday I thought I was indecisive but today I am not so sure
     
    Aerticus, Nov 12, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Aerticus

    Fi Nishing Guest

    "Aerticus" <> wrote in message
    news:dC6ld.888$...
    > Hokay! Here goes!
    >
    > I post this with the knowledge it will probably appear in magazines in one
    > form or another



    So you think you have the monopoly on common sense and good practice?
     
    Fi Nishing, Nov 12, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Aerticus

    Aerticus Guest

    He he he

    Yes - do you have a problem with that?

    Aerticus

    "Fi Nishing" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "Aerticus" <> wrote in message
    > news:dC6ld.888$...
    >> Hokay! Here goes!
    >>
    >> I post this with the knowledge it will probably appear in magazines in
    >> one
    >> form or another

    >
    >
    > So you think you have the monopoly on common sense and good practice?
    >
    >
     
    Aerticus, Nov 12, 2004
    #3
  4. Aerticus

    Fi Nishing Guest

    "Aerticus" <> wrote in message
    news:45ald.1298$...
    >
    > Yes - do you have a problem with that?


    I have a problem with your smug holier than thou attitude - "the knowledge
    it will probably appear in magazines". You must think you are very very
    wonderful and extraordinarily clever and perspicacious.


    > >> I post this with the knowledge it will probably appear in magazines in
    > >> one
    > >> form or another

    > >
    > >
    > > So you think you have the monopoly on common sense and good practice?
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Fi Nishing, Nov 13, 2004
    #4
  5. Aerticus

    Marcel Guest

    In Scott Kelby's books on Photoshop, etc. The first thing he mentions is to
    make a copy of originals on cd ASAP
    It makes sense, although I don't always do so ;-(
    Marcel
    ____________________

    "Aerticus" <> wrote in message
    news:dC6ld.888$...
    > Hokay! Here goes!
    >
    > I post this with the knowledge it will probably appear in magazines in one
    > form or another so: if you resource the details from here or use it as a
    > basis to disseminate or promote good practise please be kind enough and
    > coureous enough to add something along the lines of "original ideas
    > attributed to Aerticus on rec.photo.digital news group.
    >
    > 1 - when you upload image from camera to computer open image editor and

    add
    > keywords, IPTC straight away (don't procrastinate - just do!)
    >
    > 2 - create a copy folder based on the image name. Copy an image into it

    (at
    > this stage, one folder, one image). This will be your work in progress
    > image
    >
    > 3 - batch resample (resize if you wish) from the ORIGINAL image and store
    > these on computer hard drive JPEG level 5 seems q good This will work

    with
    > PSCS or your alternative image editor (huh! is there one?) so to retain
    > EXIF, IPTC and keyword identifiers
    >
    > 4 - copy ORIGINAL images to removable hard drive possibly CD - it's up to
    > you and your resources. Verify that the transfer has been good and 1005
    >
    > 5 - Remove ORIGINAL IMAGES from fixed hard drive and store the saved
    > originals in a safe place on safe media
    >
    > 6 - work top your heart's content on the WIP folders pulling any other

    image
    > you may later require from the copy of original images
    >
    > 7 - if you need to search on keywords or by visual criteria base that on

    the
    > smaller sized copies retaining EXIF IPTC and keywords
    >
    > The idea here is to minimise possible harm to original images, use JPEGed
    > level 5 or so as the basis for image directory & EXIF, IPTC, keyword data,
    > work in progress folders provide -erm- folders for -innocent whistle-

    image
    > work -shuffle- in progress.
    >
    > 8 - when WIP no longer is WIP and becomes historic work (work that once

    was
    > work in progress?) save it to safe removable media possibly after taking
    > lo-res JPEG 5 copies with EXIF IPTC and keyword (possibly revised) data.
    >
    > The idea is to take no longer active images off the fixed hard drive(s)
    > after storing smaller files of the same thing while retaining usefulness

    of
    > EXIF IPTC and keywords
    >
    > Aerticus
    >
    > --
    > Yesterday I thought I was indecisive but today I am not so sure
    >
    >
     
    Marcel, Nov 13, 2004
    #5
  6. Aerticus wrote:

    > 5 - Remove ORIGINAL IMAGES from fixed hard drive and store the
    > saved originals in a safe place on safe media


    > 8 - when WIP no longer is WIP and becomes historic work (work that
    > once was work in progress?) save it to safe removable media
    > possibly after taking lo-res JPEG 5 copies with EXIF IPTC and
    > keyword (possibly revised) data.


    > The idea is to take no longer active images off the fixed hard
    > drive(s) after storing smaller files of the same thing while
    > retaining usefulness of EXIF IPTC and keywords


    I have a simple question for all of the above: Why? What is the point
    of deleting the original images from the fixed harddisk(s)?
     
    Toke Eskildsen, Nov 13, 2004
    #6
  7. Aerticus wrote:

    > Well, on a standalone computer or laptop or tablet for that
    > matter, historical images take up a lot of hard disk space.


    Correct.

    > This ultimately slows the computer down and in a sense has no
    > positive contribution to workflow.


    Why would it? Unless you're reaching the limit of your harddisk and it
    begins to fragment files too much, more files won't make any difference
    in computing speed, nor will it make any difference in the speed with
    which files are accessed.

    As for contribution to workflow, then it's obviout that readily
    available files are easier to access than files that are stored on CDs
    or other external storage.

    > It (the method of operation I described above) arose as I hit a
    > 30GB on a 40 GB hard disk in the laptop.


    On laptops, I can understand the need to free space. For standalones,
    harddiskspace is cheap.

    You say you freed 10GB with your method. For a laptop that counts. For
    a standalone, 10GB of harddisk space costs below $10 in Denmark (of
    course you have to buy a bigger harddisk ond hope that you'll
    eventually use the rest of the space). Hardly a reason to go through
    the hassle.
     
    Toke Eskildsen, Nov 13, 2004
    #7
  8. Aerticus

    Aerticus Guest

    I think this is one of those options in which everyone has their own
    preference and as a result everyone is totally correct within their own
    frame of reference.

    The idea of seeking a one-stop solution really doesn't fit the scenarios
    described.

    Personally I'd rather download full images to external media and am mindful
    of non-pro photographers that may be downloading the odd RAW or TIFF file
    converting it to DNG for whatever reason thus possibly doubling or tripling
    large file sizes.

    Heck - if it aint a solution to someone it cannot possibly be a problem
    (else same eventualities may have been solved in a different way)

    I know how much disk space has been used in -say- 6 months of using a
    digital camera. I anticipate people hitting similar buffers after some time
    of using digitl cameras. As MPs continue to increase disk space will
    continue to be in even shorter supply.

    Now I really wonder if memory cards are the way to go. I wishe SPARQ
    removable cartridges were still running - I am looking at my desktop with
    its 1 Gig cartridge slots and regret not having more that the 2 cartridges I
    bought at the time (2 Gig then seemed a whole lorra room)

    Aerticus

    "Toke Eskildsen" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns95A0DB61110Atokeeskildsen@130.133.1.4...
    > Aerticus wrote:
    >
    >> Well, on a standalone computer or laptop or tablet for that
    >> matter, historical images take up a lot of hard disk space.

    >
    > Correct.
    >
    >> This ultimately slows the computer down and in a sense has no
    >> positive contribution to workflow.

    >
    > Why would it? Unless you're reaching the limit of your harddisk and it
    > begins to fragment files too much, more files won't make any difference
    > in computing speed, nor will it make any difference in the speed with
    > which files are accessed.
    >
    > As for contribution to workflow, then it's obviout that readily
    > available files are easier to access than files that are stored on CDs
    > or other external storage.
    >
    >> It (the method of operation I described above) arose as I hit a
    >> 30GB on a 40 GB hard disk in the laptop.

    >
    > On laptops, I can understand the need to free space. For standalones,
    > harddiskspace is cheap.
    >
    > You say you freed 10GB with your method. For a laptop that counts. For
    > a standalone, 10GB of harddisk space costs below $10 in Denmark (of
    > course you have to buy a bigger harddisk ond hope that you'll
    > eventually use the rest of the space). Hardly a reason to go through
    > the hassle.
     
    Aerticus, Nov 13, 2004
    #8
  9. Aerticus wrote:

    > Heck - if it aint a solution to someone it cannot possibly be a
    > problem (else same eventualities may have been solved in a
    > different way)


    Some people can probably use it.

    > I know how much disk space has been used in -say- 6 months of
    > using a digital camera. I anticipate people hitting similar
    > buffers after some time of using digitl cameras. As MPs continue
    > to increase disk space will continue to be in even shorter supply.


    As MPs continue to increase, disk space will continue to increase.
    There's no reason to assume that internal storage technology should
    stagnate.
     
    Toke Eskildsen, Nov 13, 2004
    #9
  10. Aerticus

    Fi Nishing Guest

    "Aerticus" <> wrote in message
    news:pbtld.2442$...
    > Does it matter to you what I think?
    >

    Since you saw fit to foist your unasked-for expertise upon us, yes, of
    course it matters.


    > Is it in your job description or are you officially Thought-Police?
    >

    I'm a professional photographer. As such I know how to guard against loss of
    even a single byte. If I wanted your excellent advice I, and others here,
    would have requested it. Or perhaps everybody else is just waiting until
    all the magazines publish you?
     
    Fi Nishing, Nov 13, 2004
    #10
  11. Aerticus

    Aerticus Guest

    Have you thought about not visting a news group?

    It really is good.

    You won't find alternative or differing views quite so easily.

    Life, understanding and wit will probably be at least a trifle less
    demanding.

    Please don't worry about it. Don't be anxious. It really is OK - and there
    is no need to fret.

    Of course you know that different views are not a threat. In fact they
    really do brighten the day.

    You know this makes sense - would you like to rest now? Maybe a little
    later?

    Aerticus

    (this is an automated reply)
    "Fi Nishing" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "Aerticus" <> wrote in message
    > news:pbtld.2442$...
    >> Does it matter to you what I think?
    >>

    > Since you saw fit to foist your unasked-for expertise upon us, yes, of
    > course it matters.
    >
    >
    >> Is it in your job description or are you officially Thought-Police?
    >>

    > I'm a professional photographer. As such I know how to guard against loss
    > of
    > even a single byte. If I wanted your excellent advice I, and others here,
    > would have requested it. Or perhaps everybody else is just waiting until
    > all the magazines publish you?
    >
    >
    >
     
    Aerticus, Nov 14, 2004
    #11
  12. Aerticus

    Aerticus Guest

    Agreed - this really is a mid-range woraround

    But there again, most digital photography mags are aimed at exactly the same
    users that would benefit from the above :)

    Aerticus

    "Toke Eskildsen" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns95A0F0FAF9A18tokeeskildsen@130.133.1.4...
    > Aerticus wrote:
    >
    >> Heck - if it aint a solution to someone it cannot possibly be a
    >> problem (else same eventualities may have been solved in a
    >> different way)

    >
    > Some people can probably use it.
    >
    >> I know how much disk space has been used in -say- 6 months of
    >> using a digital camera. I anticipate people hitting similar
    >> buffers after some time of using digitl cameras. As MPs continue
    >> to increase disk space will continue to be in even shorter supply.

    >
    > As MPs continue to increase, disk space will continue to increase.
    > There's no reason to assume that internal storage technology should
    > stagnate.
     
    Aerticus, Nov 14, 2004
    #12
  13. Aerticus wrote:

    > Agreed - this really is a mid-range woraround


    Depends on your definition of mid-range. The casual user shoots in
    JPEG, so let's say 2MB/photo, and probably doesn't have more than
    10,000 photos at this time. That's 20GB, whish shouldn't be a problem
    for the average computer harddisc.

    The problem that fits to your solition is a computer with a small
    harddisk, that is hard to upgrade. That's a portable. I fint it a fair
    workflow for that, but more a problem in inself than a solition for at
    stationary computer.

    > But there again, most digital photography mags are aimed at
    > exactly the same users that would benefit from the above :)


    If you're shooting for the not-so-educated users, you're missing your
    target. They don't use EXIF and IPTC data and they certainly won't
    participate in a elaborate scheme with creation of a folder for each
    image.
     
    Toke Eskildsen, Nov 14, 2004
    #13
  14. > Aerticus wrote:
    []
    >> It (the method of operation I described above) arose as I hit a
    >> 30GB on a 40 GB hard disk in the laptop.


    Best practice is:

    - to keep disks less than 75% full

    - to defrag disks regularly
    (how often depends on how often the contents change)

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 14, 2004
    #14
  15. Aerticus

    Aerticus Guest

    Yeh - troo

    Now then, I wonder if there is a memory card that would store stuff safely
    for a long time?

    Maybe capacity for, say, 10 cards in one unit, possibly USB (2 of course) or
    better still firewired that would display the unit as an external disk and
    each card as a folder within that Window?

    Could it be done? Should it be done?

    Using memory cards would be a quick and easy way to access historical data
    :)

    Aerti

    "Toke Eskildsen" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns95A173EF780Dtokeeskildsen@130.133.1.4...
    > Aerticus wrote:
    >
    >> Agreed - this really is a mid-range woraround

    >
    > Depends on your definition of mid-range. The casual user shoots in
    > JPEG, so let's say 2MB/photo, and probably doesn't have more than
    > 10,000 photos at this time. That's 20GB, whish shouldn't be a problem
    > for the average computer harddisc.
    >
    > The problem that fits to your solition is a computer with a small
    > harddisk, that is hard to upgrade. That's a portable. I fint it a fair
    > workflow for that, but more a problem in inself than a solition for at
    > stationary computer.
    >
    >> But there again, most digital photography mags are aimed at
    >> exactly the same users that would benefit from the above :)

    >
    > If you're shooting for the not-so-educated users, you're missing your
    > target. They don't use EXIF and IPTC data and they certainly won't
    > participate in a elaborate scheme with creation of a folder for each
    > image.
     
    Aerticus, Nov 14, 2004
    #15
  16. Aerticus

    bob Guest

    Toke Eskildsen <> wrote in
    news:Xns95A173EF780Dtokeeskildsen@130.133.1.4:

    > Depends on your definition of mid-range. The casual user shoots in
    > JPEG, so let's say 2MB/photo, and probably doesn't have more than
    > 10,000 photos at this time. That's 20GB, whish shouldn't be a problem
    > for the average computer harddisc.


    I wonder what fraction of users edit their photos, and of those who edit,
    what % of their photos are edited. If you add adjustment layers with masks
    in Photoshop file sizes can grow dramatically (10x).

    Bob
     
    bob, Nov 15, 2004
    #16
  17. Aerticus

    Aerticus Guest

    I think you "hit the nail on the head" as the expression goes.

    As novice users switch into more experienced users probably topped up with
    Photoshop Elements 3 or similar. Add a few more vacation shots and the
    coming festivities along with possibly even more MPs on the go and ... =
    recipe to hardrive slo-mo computing (without all the spollong issues to the
    fandap-dozi printer)

    It will be interesting to see (above is peculation :)

    Aerticus

    "bob" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns95A2805B04E7j123w123x123@216.77.188.18...
    > Toke Eskildsen <> wrote in
    > news:Xns95A173EF780Dtokeeskildsen@130.133.1.4:
    >
    >> Depends on your definition of mid-range. The casual user shoots in
    >> JPEG, so let's say 2MB/photo, and probably doesn't have more than
    >> 10,000 photos at this time. That's 20GB, whish shouldn't be a problem
    >> for the average computer harddisc.

    >
    > I wonder what fraction of users edit their photos, and of those who edit,
    > what % of their photos are edited. If you add adjustment layers with masks
    > in Photoshop file sizes can grow dramatically (10x).
    >
    > Bob
     
    Aerticus, Nov 15, 2004
    #17
  18. Aerticus

    Alex Debris Guest

    "Aerticus" <> wrote in
    news:dC6ld.888$:

    > Hokay! Here goes!
    >
    > I post this with the knowledge it will probably appear in magazines in
    > one form or another so: if you resource the details from here or use
    > it as a basis to disseminate or promote good practise please be kind
    > enough and coureous enough to add something along the lines of
    > "original ideas attributed to Aerticus on rec.photo.digital news
    > group.
    >
    > 1 - when you upload image from camera to computer open image editor
    > and add keywords, IPTC straight away (don't procrastinate - just do!)
    >
    > 2 - create a copy folder based on the image name. Copy an image into
    > it (at this stage, one folder, one image). This will be your work in
    > progress image
    >
    > 3 - batch resample (resize if you wish) from the ORIGINAL image and
    > store these on computer hard drive JPEG level 5 seems q good This
    > will work with PSCS or your alternative image editor (huh! is there
    > one?) so to retain EXIF, IPTC and keyword identifiers
    >
    > 4 - copy ORIGINAL images to removable hard drive possibly CD - it's up
    > to you and your resources. Verify that the transfer has been good and
    > 1005
    >
    > 5 - Remove ORIGINAL IMAGES from fixed hard drive and store the saved
    > originals in a safe place on safe media
    >
    > 6 - work top your heart's content on the WIP folders pulling any other
    > image you may later require from the copy of original images
    >
    > 7 - if you need to search on keywords or by visual criteria base that
    > on the smaller sized copies retaining EXIF IPTC and keywords
    >
    > The idea here is to minimise possible harm to original images, use
    > JPEGed level 5 or so as the basis for image directory & EXIF, IPTC,
    > keyword data, work in progress folders provide -erm- folders for
    > -innocent whistle- image work -shuffle- in progress.
    >
    > 8 - when WIP no longer is WIP and becomes historic work (work that
    > once was work in progress?) save it to safe removable media possibly
    > after taking lo-res JPEG 5 copies with EXIF IPTC and keyword (possibly
    > revised) data.
    >
    > The idea is to take no longer active images off the fixed hard
    > drive(s) after storing smaller files of the same thing while retaining
    > usefulness of EXIF IPTC and keywords
    >
    > Aerticus
    >


    FWIW

    You left off one of the most important tips....

    When editing photos in your working folder.
    Use tif or bmp or the native format of your editor.

    Do not work and re-save jpeg

    Better final pic that way, but may destroy your EXIF, IPTC and keyword
    identifiers.YMMV

    AD
     
    Alex Debris, Nov 18, 2004
    #18
    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. Tom
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    334
    Pat Chaney
    Sep 27, 2003
  2. supertronik

    Any suggestions for a good solution at a good price?

    supertronik, Dec 19, 2005, in forum: Professional Video Production
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    266
    Rick Merrill
    Dec 28, 2005
  3. Smed
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    353
    David H. Lipman
    Sep 13, 2006
  4. dechucka
    Replies:
    30
    Views:
    671
    Michael C
    Apr 23, 2007
  5. dechucka
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    865
    Michael C
    Apr 23, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page