Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/60/9972860/html/smf/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/60/9972860/html/smf/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/60/9972860/html/smf/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/60/9972860/html/smf/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
Latest posts of: frankgindc
The DAM Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 11, 2020, 05:49:08 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
28033 Posts in 5147 Topics by 2904 Members
Latest Member: kbroch
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9
16  Software Discussions / Lightroom / Rec'd characters for nested keywords? on: August 19, 2008, 12:31:17 PM

I'm using LR2 and have hierarchical (nested) keywords.  Nothing as complex as many of the other DAM users (just about 20 parent keywords, at present).   

My quick question is this:  Does anyone rec'd any particular nomenclature for the parent keywords?   

I remember someone (somewhere) suggesting to use a symbol like ">" in the keyword -- e.g., ">Parent1", ">Parent2", etc.   The advantage to that is that in LR all the parents will then sort to the top of the keywords field and you can keep good track of new keywords that accidentally mushroom outside of the heirarchy (this seems to happen alot with my own keyword entry).  I've been using that technique and it works farily well, but it seems that now LR is adding a ">" to denote when a keyword is a parent so....things are starting to look a little crazy.

Probably more info than you all need but, in short, does anyone have a parent keyword naming/nomenclature system that seems to work well and will work over the long hall?   Or should I avoide this "prefix" type of approach altogether?

17  Software Discussions / Choosing Software/Other DAM Applications / Re: Lightroom or Expression or PhotoMechanic or ImageIngester...What combinat on: July 31, 2008, 08:24:09 PM
What functionality in Lightroom do you lose if you do not have Photoshop?


For me, I miss the levels, real point curves, plug-ins -- especially for noise reduction.  And if you want to round trip through anything except CS3 it's a pain in the tuchas.  I've got an old version of CS.
18  Software Discussions / Choosing Software/Other DAM Applications / Re: Lightroom or Expression or PhotoMechanic or ImageIngester...What combinat on: July 31, 2008, 02:39:17 PM
Personnally, my main complaint about LR is that it is too tied to CS3 (which is too $$ for my needs) and I think limits some of its funcionality to keep folks tied to CSx.  HOWEVER, if you are already invested in CS3, and would be able to upgrade from old LR to LR2 for $99, then I think that would be a great option.   I've been pretty happy with LR's DAM capabilities, which were enhanced in LR2, and they have made the connection between LR and CS3 more seamless now.   In short, once a person is invested in CS3, I think LR woudl be a great "DAM program with benefits."
19  Software Discussions / Lightroom / Re: Keeping originals and derivatives separate in LR on: June 14, 2008, 04:41:49 AM
Difference between derivative files (or files that go through PS) and LR "virtual copies."   I more commonly use "virtual copies" and LR doesn't actually create a new file for that at all, just a new set of instructions for the edits.  Typically, when I send files to PS it is only for batch noise reduction and sharpening on the way to becoming prints or posted to web.  I let those "derivatives" hang around in a separate folder ("exports") folder, which I don't tend to keep around (those files are jpgs and contain the keywords that I applied in LR, so they could be imported somewhere else if need be).  I can freely delete these whenever, since I am not relying on them for long term use.  If I want to recreate them i can just export again in LR (again, using batches through PS so it's not labor intensive).

If I work on a file more intensively in LR--say, with layers or masking or something--I WILL import that image back into LR.  Usually I do this as a hi-res .jpg (sometimes a .tiff).    That way, my keyworded LR catalog still has a searchable copy of every flavor of image that I have (the masters, I suppose).  And I'll use some file name suffix to indicate that.    I wouldn't want to have large numbers of derivatives and originals in the same folders, but for the very few cases where a file gets special treatment, this seems to work fine.

Of course, if I wanted to catalog the "exported" files, of if you wanted to catalog them in their entirety, since they are exported with LR keywords, you could do so.   You could have a LR catalog that contains all your masters and one that contains all your exports/derivatives, sorta treating the masters files as a "working" catalog that you would use for keywording, ranking, and editing only.

20  Software Discussions / Lightroom / Re: Keeping originals and derivatives separate in LR on: June 12, 2008, 02:37:23 PM
FWIW, for the most part, I am using LR only to track the originals and "virtual derivatives" (using virtual copies to create different crops or treatments of the same pictures).   I am creating derivatives mainly on the fly: just rendering what I need for jobs or uploads to printing service etc.   

Library-wise, then, I'm got LR pointing at my RAW folder with sub-folders like DVD_001, DVD_002, et (ala the DAMbook).   

21  DAM Stuff / Data Validation / Re: Comparing Folder Contents on: May 27, 2008, 06:20:28 AM
That folder match program looks like EXACTLY what I need (assuming it can look through subfolders as well) but....alas, I am on OSX and the program appears to be Windows only.   That's a particular drag b/c it also appears to be able to id identical files that no longer have the same name.

I think I might have to do something along the lines that you are suggesting:  import each parent folder into iView, keep images inplace, capture filename (and filepath) from list view and crunch in Access or Excel to find missing files.  I'll expect alot of false positives (e.g., images that appear to be missing but have simply been renamed) but this should whittle it down.

I'll probabably do a more thorough eye-balling first, to see if the files that I found to be missing before were an annomally or if there's reason to expect others. But this looks like the direction I'm heading.

22  DAM Stuff / Data Validation / Comparing Folder Contents on: May 26, 2008, 06:52:09 PM
Is there an easy (software) way to check the image contents of one folder against the contents of another folder?  e.g., does any DAM program allow a database type check like this between two catalogs?

Here's my situation:  I have two parent folders--each with multiple subfolders totalling about 50 GB each.   One parent folder ("Frank_new") contains what SHOULD BE the complete cleaned up set of images for my master image library; the other folder ("Frank_old") is a mixed bag of redundant stuff, derivatives, RAWs etc. that was accumulated, er, before I had my act together on DAM.   Anyway, I'd like to be able to get rid of the 50 GB in "Frank_old" but need to make sure it doesn't contain anything that was not properly migrated over to the "new" folder (I have found some files like this, just by chance, and that is making me want to do a more thorough check before getting rid of the folder).

In using database programs like MS Access, I know there are queries one can run to compare records in two data tables to see if one table contains records that don't exist in the other.  I'm wondering if there is any way to do something similar with the .jpg and .CR2 contents of these folders.

I am mostly using LR for my DAM but have also used EM/iView. 

Some ideas:  I'm wondering if I had the two folders imported into EM/iView catalogs if there is any way to do the comparison between catalogs.....or would it be advisable to create a backup of my current LR catalog and import all of the contents from the "OLD" folder into the current catalog -- on the assumption that LR would not import filenames that already existed in the current problem is that the directory trees within each parent folder are totally different, so I would need the comparision to go by filename and/or size only, regardless of the folder tree it is in.

Any other ideas?

23  General / General Discussion / Re: Sorry I've been away... on: May 20, 2008, 02:23:45 PM

Among the words that one should never use in an effective apology are the  following: 
Hawaii.   Tasmania.   Africa.   

Still, it's good to have you back!!

24  DAM Stuff / Loss and Recovery / Re: Corrupt SD Card on: May 08, 2008, 05:06:32 PM
I tried the PhotoRescue demo and came up empty -- actually, I came up with all of the photos that I had deleted from the card months ago, which didn't help.   Wink

Anyway, I dropped the card off at the camera store and they're going to take a look at it--they have an in house whiz who has three  programs that he uses.  It'll be free if they can't help, but $40 if they recover the corrupted files.  Steep, I know, but worth it.  The thought of losing any pictures kills me...

25  DAM Stuff / Loss and Recovery / Re: Corrupt SD Card on: May 08, 2008, 09:27:56 AM
Thanks, John.  Yeah this is my first experience with a corrupt card and it's a real drag -- it is the week link of a good DAM backup system, I guess, because the failure is before the images escape the card.

I think I might have mispoken about the formatting (I think I was confusing that with a jump drive that I had to do that with, I think) but I need to doublecheck.   

I would have thought the connection via the camera would be a good strategy but when I loaded it back into the camera it's clear that the camera doesn't like the images now either.  I'll try it anyway.  And also try the card read on a PC at work.

I'll check out options that might be available through the manufacturer (ProMaster) and possibly try Photorescue again.   Looks like I'm dead in the water without that. 

Just very weird that most but not all of the images are corrupted and that it seems to have happened (or was first apparent) during the import itself.

Thanks again,

p.s. I checked the ProMaster website and am now headed (optimistically mind you) to my local ProMaster dealer where I bought the card.   BTW, here's what ProMaster has to say about formatting of cards (not something that I've been doing):

"Preventing Corruption:
First and foremost, FORMAT the card everytime you put it back into the camera. Use the format menu option (consult the camera manual) You can format the card in Windows via the card reader and in most cases this will be fine, but to be sure, format the card again in the camera.

If you do not format the card each time, you risk file and image corruption everytime you take a picture.
It isn't foolproof, corruption can still happen, but it does lessen the chances of file or image corruption.
Next, be aware of the causes (see list above) and avoid them!"

26  DAM Stuff / Loss and Recovery / Re: Corrupt SD Card on: May 08, 2008, 07:09:45 AM
Thanks David.   Any tips on using Photo Rescue for this type of thing?  I've had great success with recovery of accidentally deleted cards but I don't know how to make the "export" mode here focus on the right things.

Also, i was thinking that the card might benefit from a 'disk repair' type operation.  Bad idea?

27  DAM Stuff / Loss and Recovery / Corrupt SD Card on: May 07, 2008, 10:12:56 PM
I have about 60 images on an SD card, 55 or so of which seem to be unreadable.  I viewed them on my snapshot camera (a Canon 870is) and they looked fine.  I shut camera off and then removed card to import to LR.  LR gave me a message that the SD card might be corrupt and it was only giving me limited function with the images.  The images all imported at full file sizes (+/- 3 mb each) but the images themselves are SUPER blocky.  Outside LR, say using the Preview function (Mac) the images look...well...all messed up:  portions of the image are missing, or replaced with blocks of color, or there will be blocks of the image that are now colored (like green monotone) and shifted up or down in related to the orginal photo.  Also, of the 5 or so that seem to be okay, they are interspered among the 60 or show shots.   When I put the SD card back into the camera, the bad photos now show tiny thumbnails rather than the nice looking (LCD anyway) image that it showed before.

So, it seems like the card got corrupted between my reviewing on the camera and my importing to LR less than 5 mins later. 

I have not idea what kind of error this is., or how to recover.    I haven't taken any new pictures or deleted anything yet.  I've tried using Photo Rescue and it doesn't bring back any of the problem images.

Any ideas at all?  I'm on a MAC.  Would a PC be able to "fix" the SD card?  I mention that because I think that's how it was formatted (many imports ago) and one of the error messages from LR said something about the card not being fixable on this computer, or something to that effect.

This is not a life or death emergency -- and no monetary loss here -- but it was a great batch of images from a rather nice weekend -- some of which would have been great for Mothers Day. Embarrassed

Any ideas??

28  DAM Stuff / Loss and Recovery / Re: EMERGENCY on: May 07, 2008, 05:07:28 AM
Arghhh.  I can't imagine that you slept at all last night so you might have already considered this but since the memory cards are probably not going to help then the best hope seems to be that the files are on your HD somewhere, but were misnamed or misplaced, and so they're not coming up in your searches.   

Maybe the import routine did not use whatever file naming convention you intended so they are saved under entirely different names that you wouldn't pick up using Spotlight.  Or did you accidentally load the "brown" job using the metadata or file naming convention intended for one of the other jobs you did?   Or did one of your jobs later in the weekend use the same file naming convention that would have cause them to overwrite the previous job?   Is it possible that the "created" date that your camera applied might be incorrect -- in which case searching by date wouldn't work?   Or that the "brown" metadata wasn't applied to the files.   

I'm not at my Mac right now, but you could use the "Find" command from a folder and it will let you search better than Spotlight.   FYI, on my old Powerbook (and under Panther) I noticed an issue where Spotlight and the Find command seemed to only work down to 4 or 5 levels within folders -- they would both miss files that were nested more than that.  I used a shareware program called FileBuddy and that was able to find files that Find/Spotlight could not. I have no idea if that's still the case under Leopard but worth a shot.

And I assume you've checked your Trash folder to see if files are there?  Also, I'm not sure what the Trash folder will display if there are multiple drives connected to it (you might get only the contenst from one of the drives) but grasping at straws here.

Good luck,
29  Software Discussions / Lightroom / Re: Library organization question on: April 30, 2008, 02:39:59 PM
No, I got what you are saying:  you wanted to show the "bucket" folders (and allow them to be expanded to show the subfolder shoots in them) but not the whole tree.   I was coming from a different situation where I already was showing the bucket folders but also showing their parent folders.   In short, we both want to find out how to change what is displayed in the Folder panel, without mucking up the underlying folders.

Here's the link to where I posted in the Adobe forums.

Stay tuned.

30  Software Discussions / Lightroom / Re: Library organization question on: April 30, 2008, 11:53:17 AM
Mine is set up that way, with the numerical "bucket" folders shown in the panel on the left, so it's not a problem.   I believe it set up that way b/c I first imported those folders (along with their subfolders) so LR imported them and their subfolders.   But I THINK that if you import the subfolders, LR will default to show the subfolders, without showing the parent.   I maintain that setup because on import I have LR put the images into the bucket.

Assuming you don't want to re-import everything, I'm not sure how to change what gets displayed. 

I've noticed that LR, previously in my disorganized setup, would actually show the same folder twice, but with different parts of the folder tree shown.  (eg.  it would show   User/Pictures/LR Library/DVD_1/xmas07  AND further down on the panel it would separately show DVD_1/xmas07.   In other words I had the opposite problem as you:  I wanted it to show less of the folder tree, and you want it to show more.

I'm not sure how to "cleanup" the displayed folder tree without actually moving stuff around.   

I believe that if you imported ONE IMAGE from each of your DVD_x folders, that the DVD_x folder would then be shown on your tree in the panel, but it might not be shown in the nested way that you'd want.   In any case, I'd like to know the answer, too, so please post back if you figure it out.   And I might post it myself over on the Adobe forum.

Good luck,
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!