More on filenames

[Mike Guilbault]

With the ability to search and find images with the likes of iView MP, Aperture, etc., with metadata, including creation date and such, do we still need to use filenames with the date prefix?   What other options are there for a consistent and unique filename?  Why not simply use an 8 or 10 (or however many you like) digit number that is incremented with each download?

As a side note to this question - does anyone ever have problems with image purchasers that say they want a 'newer' image then one with a filename such as '1985-06-12_1234'?  In other words, if the date is part of the filename, do you get clients that reject the image because it's 'old'?

[peterkrogh]

Mike,
While you could use a sequence instead of a date, that would likely get tricky if you worked on more than one computer.

I would also find it a bit more difficult to remember as I look for an image by name.  I find that if I am looking through, say a folder of printed images on my print server, I remember the name as Image 4203 from June, 06.

 I could find the image by searching for "4203" and seeing which one os from June, 06.  Alternately, I could sort by filename, and look in the sequence Krogh_0606XX for an image that ends in 4203.

If you were only working with a 10 digit sequence number, it would mean remembering 0257834203 or something like that.

Does that make sense?

As to the second question, that's largely irrelevant to my business, but I'm sure there are others who would have this experience.

Peter

[mikeseb]

I wrestled with this subject as well, especially since I had to figure out what to do with a lot of legacy film images. My film naming convention has most recently been YYYY (or YY)nnn_ff where nnn is the film-roll sequence number for the year and ff, the frame number within a roll. I like being able to glance at a filename and figure out about when it was shot. YYYYnnn goes on the negative storage page, and when I scan an image the _ff gets added during scanning.

As I've been transitioning over to digital for 95+% of my work I wanted a system to integrate with this one, more or less. I finally settled on an entirely date and time based naming convention for all my digital images, such that each image is named YYMMDD_HHMMSS.ext . I do the naming on ingestion, and it ensures that every file has a unique name (at least in my setup--I guess it's possible that one could take several images in the span of one second, but not with my MFDB!) While such a long name might seem cumbersome, it ensures automatic sequencing and at-a-glance determination of approximate time frame. I am extensive and anal about metadata / keyword application, so I depend on iView for searching for stuff based on those parameters, and I make extensive use of catalog sets in iView to keep track of everything. Like Peter, I was concerned that I might get tangled up trying to coordinate sequence numbers across multiple files. I wanted to ensure uniqueness of filenames, and to do so based on some unique attribute intrinsic to the file itself. date/time fit the bill.

For me it's more psychological than anything else; looking for image 12764756439 just seems "disembodied" to me; the image has no sense of "place" or "time" in my mind. Not rational I know.

As for the rest of my system, working files (really, masters--spotted, sharpened, curves, etc applied and ready for sizing, OP sharpening, and printing) get appended with _0, _1, _2 etc as each represents a substantial difference in crop, rendering, etc. When I finally resize and sharpen for output, I add--for example--something like _8MT360 which means 8 inch longest side, matte output sharpening at 360ppi (I use photokit sharpener and this reflects PKS's output sharpening choices). I can tell at a glance, then, a lot about a file. Not the most elegant solution, I know, but workable given my diligent (?pathological) efforts at metadata maintenance.

So a final image filename might be: 2006065_16_1_8MT360.tif ( a recent film image I printed) or 060820_212151_1_s6MT360.tif (a digital image). 65th roll of 2006, 16th frame, crop/version/rendering master file #1, output at 8 inches and 360ppi with matte sharpening. Or august 20 2006 image, master file 1, output matte at 6 inches/360 ppi.

[johnbeardy]

Mike

If you only ever saw your files within the DAM program, there could be scope for a purist view such as purely sequential file names. But that's such a big "if" and almost certainly wrong. Almost certainly there will be times when you'll see them in Finder/Explorer or in a dialog box, so it makes practical sense to include a little bit of context such as a date prefix or minimal description.

I actually combine the two principles - a date and a sequential number that has been running since I first got a digital camera. So instead of remembering that my favourite image is 031208_0198 (the 198th image shot on Dec 8, 2003) - or was it on the 9th? - I only have to remember 001348 or my 1348th digital frame. Within any DAM, it's a lot easier to search for _001348 and know that it will return 031208_001348 Tate.dng.

John

[Mike Guilbault]

All good points.  Thanks guys.  I guess I'll stick to my original naming convention with the date at the start.  It's worked so far.