tklancer

For anyone still curious about the topic, I think I've settled on a slimmer approach, changing the 3rd and 4th steps: <br>

Using <a href="http://pixort.com/index.html">Pixort</a>, I select each photo as a keeper or a reject. Rejects get sent to a folder called "the rest", and keepers are gone through again for hand tagging. Only shots that I'm tagging ("nice", "good idea", etc.) get a name. If pixort had a better renaming capability, I'd make it one step.<p>

After that, everything's the same -- numbering the photos, etc. I'm going to try this for a while and see how it goes, but I tried it out today and it seems much faster. Two things would speed it up further -- better renaming support in pixort (specifically, the ability to hit a button to rename the photo), and the ability to apply multiple tags to a single image. Then I could go through the photos one time, apply all the tags, do the appropriate renaming, and everything else would be automatic.<p>

Thanks to you all for your help!

<b>Obi</b>: Thanks, I'll look into ImageIngester.<p>

<b>Don</b>: Yeah, I'm definitely not a pro (only 5400 images since last september?) Sorting everything into date folders is really easy, so that's not a huge worry for me. Naming and tagging are the hard parts.<p>

<b>Scott</b>: I think you hit the nail on the head. My asset management workflow is where I've got a problem. I'll definitely check out the O'Reilly book.<p>

A related question for all of you, though (amateurs or pros): How do you handle this issue? Specifically, how do you handle asset management? Do you just pick selects and refrain from any sort of captioning?

So, I've got a perfectly workable digital workflow right now, with one major problem: it's slow. Very slow. In fact, I just finished sorting my photos from August 2005 a few days ago (now I'm only 5400 shots in the hole!). So, I'm looking to see what I can do to speed up the process, and to see what other people do. But first, my current workflow:<p>

1) Download everything.<br>

2) Run a custom python script on the download folder that sorts everything into month/day folders with a title for the day (like this: [...]\2006 07 (July)\07-03-06 - Shenandoah in summertime) <br>

3) View every image for a particular day and, if I think it has any potential: <br>

a) Name it something moderately descriptive <br>

b) Possibly tag it ("nice", "good idea", etc). Note that there might be multiple tags assigned to an image. This tagging allows me to find a particular class of image easily later. <br>

4) Move the un-named (i.e. rejected) images into a sub-folder called "the rest" <br>

5) Run a custom python script on the named files that numbers them based on their EXIF exposure time (note: this is a relic from when Windows didn't have the ability to sort based on EXIF info). <br>

6) Eventually, if I feel a strong enough desire, I go back and pick out the best ones and fix them up in photoshop.<p>

Really, the naming and the tagging are the hard bits... I name them and tag them so I can do a file search later and find all the "nice" shots or the shots that have "dad" in the title (I end up with filenames like this: "051 - Hunting for dinner (nice) (mod).jpg"<p>

So, having said that, does anyone out there have any ways to speed up the process? Is there some sort of tool that will help with metadata tagging and file naming? How do others handle this? Am I the only person that goes through the whole naming process?<p>

Thanks,<br>

-Tom

So, I've got a perfectly workable digital workflow right now, with one major

problem: it's slow. Very slow. In fact, I just finished sorting my photos from

August 2005 a few days ago (now I'm only 5400 shots in the hole!). So, I'm

looking to see what I can do to speed up the process, and to see what other

people do. But first, my current workflow:

1) Download everything

2) Run a custom python script on the download folder that sorts everything into

month/day folders with a title for the day (like this: [...]\2006 07

(July)\07-03-06 - Shenandoah in summertime)

3) View every image for a particular day and, if I think it has any potential:

a) Name it something moderately descriptive

b) Possibly tag it ("nice", "good idea", etc). Note that there might be

multiple tags assigned to an image. This tagging allows me to find a particular

class of image easily later.

4) Move the un-named (i.e. rejected) images into a sub-folder called "the rest"

5) Run a custom python script on the named files that numbers them based on

their EXIF exposure time (note: this is a relic from when Windows didn't have

the ability to sort based on EXIF info).

6) Eventually, if I feel a strong enough desire, I go back and pick out the best

ones and fix them up in photoshop.

Really, the naming and the tagging are the hard bits... I name them and tag

them so I can do a file search later and find all the "nice" shots or the shots

that have "dad" in the title (I end up with filenames like this: "051 - Hunting

for dinner (nice) (mod).jpg"

So, having said that, does anyone out there have any ways to speed up the

process? Is there some sort of tool that will help with metadata tagging and

file naming? How do others handle this? Am I the only person that goes through

the whole naming process?

Thanks,

-Tom

So, I've got a Sigma 14mm lens -- the kind with no filter screws on

front and a built-in lens hood. I love the lens, but I'd like to be

able to shoot landscapes with a grad ND filter on it. Are there any

tools out there to hold a cokin P-type filter in place on this lens?

Has anyone made a custom filter holder? I'm not entirely sure a plain

P-type filter will cover the entire field of view (though, I'm using

the lens on a 10D, so that may help) -- is there anyplace I could get

larger graduated filters?

Any help would be most appreciated, thanks.

The permits are just for the huts/campsites, or would they even be needed for a day trip hike?

(Hoping to go to New Zealand in December, thanks to Peter Jackson...)

I do a few things:

1) I avoid the really nasty areas, but I'd do that with or without the camera gear. I have no desire to meet criminals, foreign or otherwise :)

2) I carry my gear in a backpack-style bag from Tamrac (the 750 -- http://www.tamrac.com/750.htm). Nobody looks twice until I open it.

3) I keep the important pockets on the bag locked (with luggage locks, obtainable in any travel store -- make sure you can put them on the bag properly!) Try to get ones that blend with the bag, not shiny ones that stick out.

4) I keep the bag on and locked, except when I'm pulling something out of it. When it's on, I keep the front strap on -- that makes it tough to pull the bag off from behind. I also keep a VERY close eye out when I open it. If there's someone sketchy hanging around, I go elsewhere.

5) I will admit to walking around with my camera out a lot, which is a no-no, but I try to keep it around my neck and off to the side, with a hand on it, so it's tough to get close at take it without a struggle. My guess (hope) is that in a crowded urban area, a thief is going to go for the tourist who isn't guarding his stuff instead of me, despite the expensive equipment. When you're being chased by a tiger, you don't have to be fast, you just have to be faster than the guy next to you.

Some of these rules are relaxed when I feel safer (i.e. if I'm in the middle of nowhere the locks stay off, etc.) but mostly I stick to the rules. Oh, and if I set up the tripod to do a photo of myself (travelling alone), I don't do it if there is anyone even remotely sketchy around.

So, keep your stuff close (and hidden when possible), make yourself a tough target, and keep an eye out for anyone suspicious (eyeing your equipment with something more than mere interest, following you closely, etc). Oh, and I've found that having a nice metal tripod to swing around can make you feel a bit more secure sometimes...

I know questions about Iceland have been asked before, and I've

looked at them, but my question is slightly different. I've got two

weeks in Iceland coming up (6/24-7/7), but I'm not sure where I

should go in the country. So, with an eye towards landscapes and

miscellaneous nature photography:

What are the absolutely can't-miss, must-see, you-haven't-seen-

Iceland-if-you-haven't-seen-x spots? General advice is also welcome

(cheap car rentals, if such a thing exists in Iceland?), but I'm

mostly looking for top 10 type stuff.

Well, first off, I don't think there is such a thing as a "simple" philosophical question -- or at least no simple answer. If there was, it wouldn't really be philosophical, I think :)

So then, in some sort of order:

1) Should art be made with a purpose?

I think all art has a purpose, whether its conscious or not. It may be to express a specific sentiment or it may just to be a conduit for some percieved beauty. My photography, if it can be called art, tends to be the latter. I mostly focus on nature photography, where the point is simple: show beauty. When I see something I percieve to be beautiful in the woods, I want to be able to capture it on film (well, bits) and make it permanent, so I can see it again and share it with others -- and hopefully pass on that perception of beauty with it.

The simple act of picking up a camera, or a brush, or whatever -- that is intent. It may not be seen as intent by the person doing it, but there it is. The mere act of intermediating nature (or whatever your subject of choice is) gives it a purpose, whether its purely an excercise in using the tools, or to document, or to edify, or whatever.

After answering 1), I'm not sure 2) really has an answer, but I will say this: A completely computer generated landscape is still intentional artwork. The artist (in this case the programmer -- believe me, software _is_ an art form) has an intent, even if it's just to test out some slick new algorithms.

I think the answer I'm coming up with (slowly :) is that any time you express a vision through some form of intermediation (camera, paintbrush, or CPU), you have an intent. Trying to infuse it with a Message is another layer on top of it -- it's artwork either way, but it may not have been assigned a specific meaning by the artist. Bob Dylan generally infuses his work with specific meaning, but Aphex Twin doesn't generally seem to -- but both Bobby Zimmerman and Richard D. James are musical artists.