D50 File Numbering

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Joan, Jun 1, 2006.

  1. Joan

    Joan Guest

    Up until now I haven't had enough files on a card to cause the camera
    to create a second folder. Today I didn't clear the card after
    downloading a bunch of shots and went out to take a few shots of
    tonight's sunset.

    Looking at the card I have a second folder - no surprise there.

    But while copying the photos from the second folder I get asked if I
    want to overwrite a file.

    Looking at the first folder, I had 230 files ending with file number
    5308. In a second folder there were 4 files for 2 photos numbered
    5251 and 5252. These numbers were of course in the first folder as
    well.

    I popped the card back in the camera and formatted it to see what
    would be the next number and it's 5253.

    The only thing that I did during the shoot was change the battery, but
    it was long after the original 5251 and 5252 were taken.
     
    Joan, Jun 1, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements


  2. And your point or question is?

    Ok a stab, why/how did this happen? One thing you need to be aware of is
    that it is possible to get the camera to change the sequence by putting the
    card back in with a different image number on it. The camera checks the
    card for the highest number on it and can rest it's numbering starting off
    from than number. An issue to be aware of if you routinely don't clean
    cards or if you swap cards between cameras with cleaning them out.

    For instance, delete all the files on the card then transfer #500.jpg back
    and you could find the next number in sequence will be reset to 501.
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Jun 1, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Joan

    Joan Guest

    That doesn't explain it. The duplicate number happened within 15
    minutes and the card didn't come out of the camera and the camera
    wasn't connected to a computer. My D50 is the only camera I have that
    uses SD cards.

    --
    Joan
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly

    message : On Thu, 1 Jun 2006 17:53:53 +1000, in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
    "Joan"
    :
    : >Up until now I haven't had enough files on a card to cause the
    camera
    : >to create a second folder. Today I didn't clear the card after
    : >downloading a bunch of shots and went out to take a few shots of
    : >tonight's sunset.
    : >
    : >Looking at the card I have a second folder - no surprise there.
    : >
    : >But while copying the photos from the second folder I get asked if
    I
    : >want to overwrite a file.
    : >
    : >Looking at the first folder, I had 230 files ending with file
    number
    : >5308. In a second folder there were 4 files for 2 photos numbered
    : >5251 and 5252. These numbers were of course in the first folder as
    : >well.
    : >
    : >I popped the card back in the camera and formatted it to see what
    : >would be the next number and it's 5253.
    : >
    : >The only thing that I did during the shoot was change the battery,
    but
    : >it was long after the original 5251 and 5252 were taken.
    :
    :
    : And your point or question is?
    :
    : Ok a stab, why/how did this happen? One thing you need to be aware
    of is
    : that it is possible to get the camera to change the sequence by
    putting the
    : card back in with a different image number on it. The camera checks
    the
    : card for the highest number on it and can rest it's numbering
    starting off
    : from than number. An issue to be aware of if you routinely don't
    clean
    : cards or if you swap cards between cameras with cleaning them out.
    :
    : For instance, delete all the files on the card then transfer
    #500.jpg back
    : and you could find the next number in sequence will be reset to 501.
    : --
    : Ed Ruf ()
     
    Joan, Jun 1, 2006
    #3
  4. Joan

    Pat Guest

    I don't know why you would have dup numbers on the same card, but if
    you use the camera to delete pictures as you are taking them, it
    sometimes makes the numbering go funny, especially if you take some
    pictures, sit down and delete what you don't want, then take more pix,
    etc.
     
    Pat, Jun 1, 2006
    #4
  5. Joan

    Peter A Guest

    You just described *exactly* how I use my D70s. Is this not good
    practice, then?

    I do recall having an issue, once only, but I never connected it with
    this habit. I do it if I'm shooting horses, particularly,to dump the
    eye shut/tongue hanging out inevitables - It just seems logical to dump
    the dross in favour of memory space.

    At least it explains that little glitch that day (similar to the one
    discussed here, but I don't recall the details)
     
    Peter A, Jun 1, 2006
    #5
  6. Joan

    Pat Guest

    It's a glitch on my camera and I have no idea why. So I stopped
    deleting bad ones to avoid it.

    Anothe similar issue is how images are copied off the card to the HD.
    For some reason, the order of the folders sometimes get screwed up.
    But that generally happen more when a folder starts in the middle of a
    count and doesn't have a full 100 images in it.For example, if forlder
    1 has XX56 to X100 and folder 2 had X101 to X138 then you remove the
    card and folder 3 had X139 to X200, etc. Then I've had pix all of of
    order.

    Smarter people than me will tell you why, but I just avoid it to keep
    out of trouble.

    Good luck.
     
    Pat, Jun 1, 2006
    #6
  7. Joan

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    I do that all the time, and have never once seen anything like that happen,
    with a D70 and a D2X.
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Jun 1, 2006
    #7
  8. Joan

    DoN. Nichols Guest

    Do you mean that when you downloaded *some* shots, you deleted
    those from the media and left others which might have had higher and
    lower image numbers?

    And did you do this with the card in the camera, or by moving to
    to a card reader and then moving it back.

    Note that I use the D70, not the D50, and thus use CF cards, not
    SD cards, but otherwise things should be about the same.
    O.K. There are not enough images in that first folder to
    account for the creation of a second folder. Normally, that happens
    either when there are 999 images in a folder, or when the image number
    reaches 9999.

    What I *think* happened here is (assuming that you deleted some
    images in a card reader on the computer and then re-inserted the card in
    the camera) that the camera started reading through the highest-numbered
    folder looking for the end after finding the first image number in that
    folder. What happened is that it reached (say 5250) and saw that 5251
    was not present, it set the number to 5251, without bothering to see
    whether there was anything beyond that (after all, that takes longer to
    get the camera started up if it does that). Then you took 5251, and the
    next shot (5252) it discovered was already present in that folder, so it
    created a new folder and put the remaining images from that session
    there. This prevents overwriting of existing image files, though it
    does confuse the image-numbering sequence somewhat.

    I've not encountered this, yet, with my D70, in part because
    I've been using 1GB CF cards, and an image size which will not get as
    many as 999 images on the whole card, let alone in a single folder.
    However, I've added a 4GB CF card to my collection, and depending on the
    image size, I can get well over 1000 images to a single CF card. (I had
    been shooting with Medium/Fine settings, and going to RAW only for
    special cases. On the 4GB card, that will get over 2K images.
    Large/Fine gets over 1.1K, and only full-time RAW will get be below 1000
    images about 716).

    I used to have a script (unix system) which downloaded the
    contents of the DCIM/100NCD70 folder (yes, I know that on Windows, it
    would be seen as DCIM\100NCD70).

    Now, since that risks not downloading everything from the card,
    my script uses tar to copy the entire tree of directories and their
    contents into the unix system, so I don't have to worry about any
    accidental duplication of filenames resulting in something lost.

    And, as soon as the download (and duplication to a second hard
    disk) is complete and verified, I put the CF card back into the camera
    and format it to start over.

    I also reset the image number back to 0001 at the beginning of
    each year.

    If the image number goes past 9999 in a shooting session, it
    will (of course) create a new folder to make sure that things do not get
    overwritten. If I need to combine them back to maintain a proper
    sequence later, I can rename the later ones from DSC_???? to DSC1????
    and on as needed.
    I presume that you first safely copied the duplicated filenames
    to separate directories -- or renamed them first? I have this image of
    the files being lost when you reformatted the card.

    I do sometimes delete obviously bad images from the card, if
    there is a question of room, but I tend to keep the card in the camera
    until I am out of room or have another reason to change CF cards. I
    suspect that your problem occurred when you re-inserted the card after
    deleting some files via an external computer. (It may be that the camera
    keeps some information on the card to keep it from duplicating numbers,
    and this was corrupted by the computer downloading the files.) I've got
    things set up so my cards mount read-only (again, a unix system), so I
    *can't* corrupt the filesystem -- and this forces me to always use the
    camera itself to format the cards. (Besides, on a unix system, I have
    too many options for how to format a card -- not just the FAT
    filesystems which the cameras use. :)
    That should not be the cause of the problem -- but if you did
    delete images from the CF card in an external computer, and then
    re-install it in the camera, *that* might have triggered the problem as
    I described above.

    As I mentioned above, I *do* delete images from the CF card
    before I am done with it -- but I do so using the camera, and I've never
    had the camera loop back to re-use some deleted numbers.

    I hope that this helps,
    DoN.
     
    DoN. Nichols, Jun 2, 2006
    #8
  9. Joan

    Joan Guest

    I never delete files from the card in the camera. I always copy files
    to the pc and when I'm ready I put the card back in the camera and
    format it. I have the camera set to continue numbering.

    --
    Joan
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly

    :I don't know why you would have dup numbers on the same card, but if
    : you use the camera to delete pictures as you are taking them, it
    : sometimes makes the numbering go funny, especially if you take some
    : pictures, sit down and delete what you don't want, then take more
    pix,
    : etc.
    :
     
    Joan, Jun 2, 2006
    #9
  10. Joan

    Joan Guest

    Nothing there explains the cause. Photos 5243 to 5308 were in folder
    100 along with a few from the day before.
    From folder 100
    5243 was taken at 4:30PM
    .... more at short intervals and then
    5251 was taken at 4:41PM
    5252 was taken at 4:41PM
    .... more at short intervals and then the last one
    5308 was taken at 5:00PM

    In folder 101
    5251 taken at 5:03PM
    5252 taken at 5:03PM

    The card didn't come out of the camera in that time and no photos were
    deleted. I have them all on the PC. It was sunset and I took lots of
    shots, a sequence of 11 of them are on Flickr, but the exif is
    removed.

    After that, as I said, I formatted the card and took another photo and
    it's 5253. So it looks like the numbers up to 5308 will be re-used.

    --
    Joan
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly

    : According to Joan <>:
    : > Up until now I haven't had enough files on a card to cause the
    camera
    : > to create a second folder. Today I didn't clear the card after
    : > downloading a bunch of shots and went out to take a few shots of
    : > tonight's sunset.
    :
    : Do you mean that when you downloaded *some* shots, you deleted
    : those from the media and left others which might have had higher and
    : lower image numbers?
    :
    : And did you do this with the card in the camera, or by moving to
    : to a card reader and then moving it back.
    :
    : Note that I use the D70, not the D50, and thus use CF cards, not
    : SD cards, but otherwise things should be about the same.
    :
    : > Looking at the card I have a second folder - no surprise there.
    : >
    : > But while copying the photos from the second folder I get asked if
    I
    : > want to overwrite a file.
    : >
    : > Looking at the first folder, I had 230 files ending with file
    number
    : > 5308. In a second folder there were 4 files for 2 photos numbered
    : > 5251 and 5252. These numbers were of course in the first folder
    as
    : > well.
    :
    : O.K. There are not enough images in that first folder to
    : account for the creation of a second folder. Normally, that happens
    : either when there are 999 images in a folder, or when the image
    number
    : reaches 9999.
    :
    : What I *think* happened here is (assuming that you deleted some
    : images in a card reader on the computer and then re-inserted the
    card in
    : the camera) that the camera started reading through the
    highest-numbered
    : folder looking for the end after finding the first image number in
    that
    : folder. What happened is that it reached (say 5250) and saw that
    5251
    : was not present, it set the number to 5251, without bothering to see
    : whether there was anything beyond that (after all, that takes longer
    to
    : get the camera started up if it does that). Then you took 5251, and
    the
    : next shot (5252) it discovered was already present in that folder,
    so it
    : created a new folder and put the remaining images from that session
    : there. This prevents overwriting of existing image files, though it
    : does confuse the image-numbering sequence somewhat.
    :
    : I've not encountered this, yet, with my D70, in part because
    : I've been using 1GB CF cards, and an image size which will not get
    as
    : many as 999 images on the whole card, let alone in a single folder.
    : However, I've added a 4GB CF card to my collection, and depending on
    the
    : image size, I can get well over 1000 images to a single CF card. (I
    had
    : been shooting with Medium/Fine settings, and going to RAW only for
    : special cases. On the 4GB card, that will get over 2K images.
    : Large/Fine gets over 1.1K, and only full-time RAW will get be below
    1000
    : images about 716).
    :
    : I used to have a script (unix system) which downloaded the
    : contents of the DCIM/100NCD70 folder (yes, I know that on Windows,
    it
    : would be seen as DCIM\100NCD70).
    :
    : Now, since that risks not downloading everything from the card,
    : my script uses tar to copy the entire tree of directories and their
    : contents into the unix system, so I don't have to worry about any
    : accidental duplication of filenames resulting in something lost.
    :
    : And, as soon as the download (and duplication to a second hard
    : disk) is complete and verified, I put the CF card back into the
    camera
    : and format it to start over.
    :
    : I also reset the image number back to 0001 at the beginning of
    : each year.
    :
    : If the image number goes past 9999 in a shooting session, it
    : will (of course) create a new folder to make sure that things do not
    get
    : overwritten. If I need to combine them back to maintain a proper
    : sequence later, I can rename the later ones from DSC_???? to
    DSC1????
    : and on as needed.
    :
    : > I popped the card back in the camera and formatted it to see what
    : > would be the next number and it's 5253.
    :
    : I presume that you first safely copied the duplicated filenames
    : to separate directories -- or renamed them first? I have this image
    of
    : the files being lost when you reformatted the card.
    :
    : I do sometimes delete obviously bad images from the card, if
    : there is a question of room, but I tend to keep the card in the
    camera
    : until I am out of room or have another reason to change CF cards. I
    : suspect that your problem occurred when you re-inserted the card
    after
    : deleting some files via an external computer. (It may be that the
    camera
    : keeps some information on the card to keep it from duplicating
    numbers,
    : and this was corrupted by the computer downloading the files.) I've
    got
    : things set up so my cards mount read-only (again, a unix system), so
    I
    : *can't* corrupt the filesystem -- and this forces me to always use
    the
    : camera itself to format the cards. (Besides, on a unix system, I
    have
    : too many options for how to format a card -- not just the FAT
    : filesystems which the cameras use. :)
    :
    : > The only thing that I did during the shoot was change the battery,
    but
    : > it was long after the original 5251 and 5252 were taken.
    :
    : That should not be the cause of the problem -- but if you did
    : delete images from the CF card in an external computer, and then
    : re-install it in the camera, *that* might have triggered the problem
    as
    : I described above.
    :
    : As I mentioned above, I *do* delete images from the CF card
    : before I am done with it -- but I do so using the camera, and I've
    never
    : had the camera loop back to re-use some deleted numbers.
    :
    : I hope that this helps,
    : DoN.
    :
    : --
    : Email: <> | 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 ---
     
    Joan, Jun 2, 2006
    #10
  11. I haven ever experienced anything like this with my CP990/CP5700/D70/D200
    all using the same numbering system. Time to call Nikon Tech support, imo.
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Jun 2, 2006
    #11
  12. Joan

    Joan Guest

    Maybe it is, Ed. Certainly it never happened on the CP5700 which
    frequently used multiple folders on the card.

    I think I'll just not format the card for a while and see what it does
    next time it wants another folder. I might even switch back to just
    JPG so that more photos will fit on the card.

    --
    Joan
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly

    message : On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 19:01:58 +1000, in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
    "Joan"
    :
    : >Nothing there explains the cause. Photos 5243 to 5308 were in
    folder
    : >100 along with a few from the day before.
    : >From folder 100
    : >5243 was taken at 4:30PM
    : >... more at short intervals and then
    : >5251 was taken at 4:41PM
    : >5252 was taken at 4:41PM
    : >... more at short intervals and then the last one
    : >5308 was taken at 5:00PM
    : >
    : >In folder 101
    : >5251 taken at 5:03PM
    : >5252 taken at 5:03PM
    : >
    : >The card didn't come out of the camera in that time and no photos
    were
    : >deleted. I have them all on the PC. It was sunset and I took lots
    of
    : >shots, a sequence of 11 of them are on Flickr, but the exif is
    : >removed.
    : >
    : >After that, as I said, I formatted the card and took another photo
    and
    : >it's 5253. So it looks like the numbers up to 5308 will be
    re-used.
    :
    : I haven ever experienced anything like this with my
    CP990/CP5700/D70/D200
    : all using the same numbering system. Time to call Nikon Tech
    support, imo.
    : --
    : Ed Ruf ()
     
    Joan, Jun 2, 2006
    #12
  13. Joan

    Dmac Guest

    Simple fix
    Set the camera to consecutive file numbering instead of having it start
    from scratch each time you format the card. This also helps you ID how
    many clicks the shutter has done so you can replace the camera before
    reaching the shutter life expectancy... 60,000 for most consumer DSLRs.
    The rate some people around here take pictures that'll equate to end of
    life in about 3000 AD. Except for Anika1980 - AKA Bret Douglas. He
    reaches that count every second lunch time.!
     
    Dmac, Jun 2, 2006
    #13
  14. Joan

    Joan Guest

    How do you think the file numbers got to over 5000? I've had the
    camera since October 2005 and I shoot mostly raw+jpg.

    --
    Joan
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly

    :
    : Simple fix
    : Set the camera to consecutive file numbering instead of having it
    start
    : from scratch each time you format the card. This also helps you ID
    how
    : many clicks the shutter has done so you can replace the camera
    before
    : reaching the shutter life expectancy... 60,000 for most consumer
    DSLRs.
    : The rate some people around here take pictures that'll equate to end
    of
    : life in about 3000 AD. Except for Anika1980 - AKA Bret Douglas. He
    : reaches that count every second lunch time.!
     
    Joan, Jun 2, 2006
    #14
  15. Joan

    Dmac Guest

    I've no idea, Joan. Perhaps you took some photos with it? But hey, With
    your attitude you don't need my help, eh?

    The simple fact is this...
    You are creating duplicate file numbers. Why do you suppose that is
    happening if you truly do have the camera using sequential numbering?
    Rocket science, perhaps?

    I think you've been working with database software so long you can't see
    the forest for the trees getting in the way. Or... Perhaps you are doing
    something differently to everyone else who doesn't have this problem
    ....like erasing the cards or even formatting them in the PC instead of
    the camera?

    Far be it from me know anything you don't. You haven't changed in 5
    years, have you? Still got the attitude for bra cups.

    Douglas
     
    Dmac, Jun 2, 2006
    #15
  16. Joan

    Pete D Guest

    Switch your brain on Doug, you are looking like a stupid idiot saying things
    like that.
     
    Pete D, Jun 2, 2006
    #16
  17. Joan

    DoN. Nichols Guest

    According to Dmac <>:

    [ ... ]
    Well ... On a Nikon, understand that the image number resets to
    1 every time it hits 9999, so you will have to keep count of up to six
    rollovers.

    And -- if you use something like "exiftool" (or whatever tool
    you can find for your OS) to look at *all* of the information buried in
    each image file, one of the items is:

    ======================================================================
    Shutter Count : 7502
    ======================================================================

    so -- you don't really need to do that with the image filenames.

    However, I also keep the image count set to consecutive, and
    only manually reset when the year rolls over.

    All in all -- a *lot* better than the NC2000e/c (A Nikon N90s
    converted to digital by Kodak for the AP), which set the lowest three
    digits of the filename from the two-digit frame number in the film which
    the camera still thought that it was using, and would start on a new
    PCMCIA disk drive with the upper digits all set to zero. (Note that it
    incremented by tens to keep the intermediate filenames available for the
    ..wav voice annotation files.) So, an image number might start on a
    fresh drive at 0350, count up through 0990, and then roll over to 0000,
    and count up to 0340 before incrementing the next digit to 9000. This
    made filenames a rather awkward thing to use for sequencing images. You
    had to pull the date/time information from the exif data and use that to
    rename the files if you needed them in proper sequence. There was no
    practical way to reset the camera's own frame counter to zero. Even
    rewinding the "film" didn't seem to do it. All that did was to run the
    batteries down a bit faster. :)
    I wonder how high the "Shutter count: " in the D70 can go before
    it overflows? And -- has anyone actually read a projected shutter life
    for the D70? Since the higher speeds are done electronically, it might
    well be that it will last longer than a shutter which depends on
    mechanical features for timing at *all* speeds. The D70 can run at a
    fairly leisurely mechanical shutter speed, so it may well have a longer
    life. (I suspect the same to be true of the D70s, the D50, and the D200
    at least. Probably the D2x and others which were produced after the D70
    came into being. I'm not sure whether they used the same technique for
    the D100 and earlier cameras.

    Enjoy,
    DoN.
     
    DoN. Nichols, Jun 3, 2006
    #17
  18. Joan

    Joan Guest

    Joan, Jun 3, 2006
    #18
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.