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
Preventing Duplicates...?
The DAM Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 22, 2019, 01:25:14 AM

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
+  The DAM Forum
|-+  Software Discussions
| |-+  Media Pro & Expression Media
| | |-+  Preventing Duplicates...?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Preventing Duplicates...?  (Read 2646 times)
frankgindc
Full Member
***
Posts: 129


View Profile Email
« on: September 30, 2007, 09:33:13 AM »

Long story short, in an effort to weed out duplicates from my library, I accidentally weeded out some photos that were not duplicates.   I discovered this only b/c I noticed that some key shoots were no longer in my EM library.  Luckily, I saved all the images that I weeded out into a "temp" directory for just this sort of emergency (ie screwup), so I do have the images to add back in.  But I want to do that without recreating the problem with duplicates.

My question:  is there any way that I can just re-import the entire folder of temp images and have EM ignore the images that already exist in the library?  I want to be sure that I don't leave any behind w/o creating the dupe problem all over again.

I thought that EM would do this -- and that's how I ended up with all the dupes in the first place -- but it seem that EM won't treat a file as a duplicate and ignore it on import UNLESS both the the filename AND its folder already exist.  This is a problem b/c my images are in bucket folders (with some sub-folders for the shoots within the bucket) so the dupe images are not going to be recognized as dupes, even if the filenames already exist in the library. 

Any advice for weaseling my way out of yet another caper?
Frank

ps One interesting thing that I noticed is that the "Date Finder" created dates for the images that are no longer in the catalog, but now there are now images associated with those dates.  So now (me wonder) whether looking at those dates would be a reliable way to determine what images might be missing....
« Last Edit: September 30, 2007, 09:43:12 AM by frankgindc » Logged
johnbeardy
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1813


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2007, 09:49:56 AM »

If the filename and the folder path are unique, then the records are not simple duplicates so EM shouldn't treat them as such.

You'd be better off importing them all, Frank, and not trying to be too clever! Sort this out the slow way, with your eyeballs. You can use Find > Show last import to isolate the freshly-imported files and mark them eg with a colour, and afterwards you can always sort the database by file name and start working your through (if you consider it's worth doing rather than just living with dupes).

John
Logged
peterkrogh
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5682


View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: October 01, 2007, 04:29:24 PM »

Frank,
You could try something like this.
Save your Catalog
Make sure the files you want to bring back are in a folder TrashMe, (or Whatever)
Select the folder that contained the original images, and "Reset Folder Paths" to the TrashMe folder
Check for missing Items
If no items are missing, you can move this folder back to where the original was, replacing it
If only some items are in the TrashMe folder, then you could transfer them to the original folder and
Reset folder paths from the TrashMe folder back to the original
Run search for Missing items to be sure everything is accounted for.

I think this would work.
Don't save the catalog until you are sure it has.
Peter
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!