Workflow - LR - consider alternatives ?

[afx]

So who has strong culling discipline and what are your words of advice to Delete More and Save Only Great Shots?

I wish....

Still I try to cull to only keep images with a meaningful subject and decent quality (and fail often enough).
Where I have problems is keeping the one image out of a burst when they are very similar.

In a recent concert shot culling session of a band that did not have that many special poses, I used the rule 5 shots per musician and 5 shots of the band, thanks to Chris Wahl, that worked well.

In the end, any shot requires one to ponder whether it might be resurrected one day is rubbish to begin with. One just has to have the strength to admit it ;-)

Especially on events, I usually have up to three culling rounds.
The first gets rid of the obvious failures.
The second round happens after basic processing and adjustment.
Here the too similar shots and various soso shots get weeded out.
The third is then done with the help of another set of eyes if I still have to many shots of the event that are still too similar.

cheers
afx

[afx]

I can see it would be nice to have the correct date for each image shot as part of its name, but the tool I currently use (Better Rename) doesn't support using variables like that. If I use {year4}-{month}-{day0} <relevant title> {seqn} to ingest/import images from several days, I gather it should use a sequential number for all images, but the dates would be different?
I can't imagine ever needing the file number from the camera?

I think what Anthony refers to is that Bjørn pointed out that one needs image names that are in-volatile, so images can always be consistently identified.
If one does the rename to unique names at ingest and never changes the base image name from there on, there is no need to keep the camera image numbering.

I used to name my images
Project-YYYY-MM-DD-SSS
Which is absolutely unique when using a sequence counter per project/day.
But often enough, the Project string gotten too large to display the file name in a usable fashion in various apps.

I now use
AFX-YYYY-MM-DD-SSS
Where the sequence number gets restarted per day.
Which is good enough for most purposes, but can be tricky when downloading several times a day.

cheers
afx

[pluton]

In the end, any shot requires one to ponder whether it might be resurrected one day is rubbish to begin with. One just has to have the strength to admit it ;-)

For jobs, whether paid or donated, this holds true for me.  I can very quickly decide which to promote and which to delete.
However...
For personal shots, which are by nature exploratory and experimental, I have many times gone back several years later and found shots that did not interest me at the time, but which now are used to make valuable finished files.

[Jørgen Ramskov]

I think what Anthony refers to is that Bjørn pointed out that one needs image names that are in-volatile, so images can always be consistently identified.
If one does the rename to unique names at ingest and never changes the base image name from there on, there is no need to keep the camera image numbering.

That's what confused me until I re-read his reply. A sequential number is unique when combined with a date and title as I do. However I can see the advantage of simply using the camera image numbering variable.

I used to name my images
Project-YYYY-MM-DD-SSS
Which is absolutely unique when using a sequence counter per project/day.
But often enough, the Project string gotten too large to display the file name in a usable fashion in various apps.

I now use
AFX-YYYY-MM-DD-SSS
Where the sequence number gets restarted per day.
Which is good enough for most purposes, but can be tricky when downloading several times a day.

I always have the date first because that means the filesystem will sort them logically.

[Jørgen Ramskov]

He is putting the Date in the folder name and then continuing it to the file name.  I think he can use the Date variables for both the folder and the filename (I do this). I actually make a folder for each level,   2015/10/31   for example as YYYY/MM/DD.  I like the granular folders, other may not.

I guess it depends on how many images you shoot and how often, I don't shoot that many or that often, so I "just" have a subfolder for each year.

Trying out PhotoMechanic has made me realize I am indecisive about photos. I feel "attached" to even the bad ones, well the out of focus or missed shot I will delete. My problem is I keep a lot of mediocre photos, like some magic filter in Lightroom 10.78 will fix my poor composition or technique!!

So who has strong culling discipline and what are your words of advice to Delete More and Save Only Great Shots?

I don't know, but every time I have two or more shots that are roughly similar, I choose what I think is the best one and delete the rest.

[pluton]

Keeping folder names that the file system can always keep in the same order sequence is important to me.
My folder/subfolder names use dates, monthly in my case.  This month's folder, just created minutes ago, is 151130Z.
The -30- symbolizes the last day of the month, and then -Z- symbolizes that it holds all photos ingested(not created) through the end of the month.  Special events/trips/photo safaris get their own folder with a alphabetic tag after the number;  if a created a special folder tomorrow for shots taken on a trip to Joshua Tree National Park, it would get the name 151102JOTRtrip.
The files keep the camera-generated file names, which the filing system also keeps in order.
I have Lightroom set toi always display in the order shot via the timestamp on the files, which for all practical purposes is the same as file number order.

[Øivind Tøien]

Sounds rather labor intensive to me.

Programs like PhotoMechanic or AfterShot that have fully automated batch queues are much more efficient for downloading things while putting them in the right place and applying whatever naming scheme you desire.

Programs that do allow you to tag and advance with one key like PhotoMechanic or Lightroom make the culling&selection process much faster.

Flipping between ViewNX and CNX is something where I finally give up...
CNX should be a superset over VNX, so why hop around?

Each step beyond those of evaluation and editing only takes a few seconds, so it does not add much to the time needed for processing the images, it just looks like a lot when writing up every step in a list as in my initial post. And there is no slow import stage to wait for like in Lightroom.

I keep both ViewNX2 and CNX2 open during editing and use the browser in ViewNX to launch files in CNX2 by pressing the NX2 button in ViewNX2.  The browser in CNX2 is only used for batch processing. Also consider that most simple adjustments are done in ViewNX2, so not every file needs to be loaded in CNX2, except for final batch processing steps like capture sharpening etc., and final batch processing to jpgs.

It would not help me much to add scores and color tags in Photomechanic, if those scores cannot be read back and forth between PM and CNX2.

[Andrea B.]

Unique file naming string in Photo Mechanic for Nikon digicams.

title_{datesort}_{timesort}{subsecond}_{act}
where
{datesort} = yyyymmdd, the capture date year, month and day
{timesort}{subsecond} = hhmmssbb, the capture time hour, minute, second and subsecond
{act} = shutter actuation number for the file being named

Example:  newYorkCity_20151031_13442235_10987

In theory - IF you had a camera in each hand and IF you fired both shutters simultaneously down to the very subsecond and IF, by some miracle, you had an identical number of shutter actuations on each camera, then you could get duplicate file names. But for me, that just is not going to happen!

Note that not every camera brand has subsecond or actuation in the Exif.
I asked Photo Mechanic for that shutter actuation variable because I wanted to use it as a unique identifier (when properly combined with other variables) and they added it !!!

[Jørgen Ramskov]

The files keep the camera-generated file names, which the filing system also keeps in order.

That's something I prefer to change to avoid having files with identical names.

[Jørgen Ramskov]

Unique file naming string in Photo Mechanic for Nikon digicams.

title_{datesort}_{timesort}{subsecond}_{act}
where
{datesort} = yyyymmdd, the capture date year, month and day
{timesort}{subsecond} = hhmmssbb, the capture time hour, minute, second and subsecond
{act} = shutter actuation number for the file being named

Example:  newYorkCity_20151031_13442235_10987

To me, that makes the filename longer than neccesary. Or rather, I prefer to use more text on a relevant title and as little as possible numbers to make them unique and still sort properly.

I don't understand why you prefer to have the title as the first part? I prefer to have the date because then the folders and files will be logically sorted by date when viewed in the filesystem etc. I put dashes in my dates simply to make it easier to read.

In theory - IF you had a camera in each hand and IF you fired both shutters simultaneously down to the very subsecond and IF, by some miracle, you had an identical number of shutter actuations on each camera, then you could get duplicate file names. But for me, that just is not going to happen!

Note that not every camera brand has subsecond or actuation in the Exif.
I asked Photo Mechanic for that shutter actuation variable because I wanted to use it as a unique identifier (when properly combined with other variables) and they added it !!!

You'd need to be sure the cameras are very accurately time synced too, I could imagine that would be a hassle

Very cool that they added a feature you requested, I could imagine it was pretty easy for them to add though.

[Øivind Tøien]

Example:  newYorkCity_20151031_13442235_10987

In theory - IF you had a camera in each hand and IF you fired both shutters simultaneously down to the very subsecond and IF, by some miracle, you had an identical number of shutter actuations on each camera, then you could get duplicate file names. But for me, that just is not going to happen!

Note that not every camera brand has subsecond or actuation in the Exif.
I asked Photo Mechanic for that shutter actuation variable because I wanted to use it as a unique identifier (when properly combined with other variables) and they added it !!!

The inclusion of image no generated by the camera takes care of problems with identical file names.
yyyy-mm-dd-hhmmX-zzzz.nef will always be unique, even if seconds are not included (X is camera code, zzzz camera generated number.)
I also avoid descriptors in the file name unless I distribute to others for specific purposes (and slide scans can be an exception, but only after year and month). Descriptors in IPTC, and in folder names after the date is enough for me. When looking at image files, I usually look at thumbnails that reveal the content anyway.

The most important thing is to find a system that works long into the future for ones own preferences, and then stick to it. For myself, everything sorted by chronology is the main requirement.

[afx]

I don't understand why you prefer to have the title as the first part?

Because the file name makes more sense for humans?

I prefer to have the date because then the folders and files will be logically sorted by date when viewed in the filesystem etc.

Well, for files, the project name is identical within a project, so the sort still works and I would not mix projects in a folder...
For folder names I do use the date first...

cheers
afx

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Ordering files by chronology makes a lot of sense in that their positions will be unique. For all other access aspects, keep a relational database and use pointers to the file(s). It'll never work out trying to implement other sorting criteria into the storage scheme. Put such stuff into the database and use for searching.

[Airy]

I use date (YYMMDD format) to prefix most of my professional files, then followed by clear text. It is indeed the best way to avoid picking the wrong version or mixing up files about similar subjects (say, "budget") from different contexts. Also, they would get sorted properly, even when copied to new drives where creation dates lost its meaning, or saved by mistake although nothing changed, and then it is the last update that loses its meaning.

For photo files, I rely on folder numbering (YYYY-MM-DD) for the same purpose, but I should be more thorough and apply it to files.
I have no sufficient "use case" for relational databases in my amateur photography context, but even so, the keyword taxonomy implemented via LR has become indispensable. How else shall I find my old shots of organ X in church Y  in Warsaw that I remember was shot with the D700 using shift...

[Anthony]

A sequential number is unique when combined with a date and title as I do. However I can see the advantage of simply using the camera image numbering variable.
 

Jørgen, what do you feel is the advantage of renumbering files sequentially in a folder, as opposed to importing the frame number from the Exif?