Originally posted by Solinar
>> I've been using a digital for 5 years. I find the migration from one
I'm surprised that you've migrated at all if you've only been shooting digital for 5 years. I've just finished a migration from my last one about 7 years ago. Yes, it is a chore, but only took a day. 1 day in 7 years isn't an issue for me. I could always farm it out for around $200. And $200 over 7 years again isn't that much in the long run.
>>> I will say it is imperative to at least put your most important image files on a UNIX server and purchasing jewel cases for your CD-R files is money well spent.
A server would be nice but overkill in my opinion. I keep all my important images also on a external 260GB disk for easier access. All the other images are only stored on the discs, and only access rarely. Almost as good as a server.
>>> I find it is commendable that you are able to find all your previous raw files, as well as your finished and manipulated files as easily as you say.
Its not that hard at all if you put it in your workflow. Files get batch renamed, written to disk, and I use IMatch as my image database. They get general categories and keywords assigned to them, and easily retrieved. I don't go nuts with keywords, but I can drill down enough to limit my search to say a couple pages of 50 images each. I can usually find that farily easily on screen in a few minutes.
It probably adds about 5 minutes to my workflow when archiving. A pittance considering the time it takes me to seach for images if I don't do that.
For example, I drill down by entering the following;
Model
Boston
Samantha M
I will get all the iamges I've taken of Samantha M done in boston and filed under model portfolios. Out of all the records, there are about 100 images all taken on two occasions.
Same with Aviation;
Aviation
In-Flight
Turbines
L39
And I get about 200 images. I can find the one I am looking for very easily since I've just eliminated all the other images in the database that are not L39 aircraft.
When I archive the images, I just select the group of images, which is almost always from the same shoot or generic category, and assign three or four keyworks, and I'm done. Burn the disk, file it, and move on. Not as hard as one might think.
It also automatically indexs all the EXIF information, so I can search by camera type, model, exposure, date taken, date modified, date filed, media id, file size, shutter speed, etc. Much of it useless, but none the less, another way to drill down to a smaller subset. T
It keeps all this data in a database, and attaches a 640x480 low res thumbnail to it. I have easy access to search the keywords and data, and it gives me a visual represenation of the image via the thumbnail.
>>> In regard to storing negs and prints with a Print-File system, it too is a chore, but once it's done it's done.
With Print-File system or Clear-File, Its easy to file the images, but extremely hard to find stuff in the future. I know this well since I am scanning a lot of my choice slides and negs now from all my binders. With the digtal archives, its a bit harder to file it, but easier to find it later, just the opposite. But with either system, once its done its done.
I spend more time looking at my images in the archives, than I do filing them. So I prefer to take the hit on time filing, then to take the hit every time I want to find an image, or just browse looking for images to use in photoshop creations.
Basically, I archinve and file every few weeks, and it takes about an hour of my time. but I use the archives about 20 minutes each day looking for materials for use in photoshop, on-line forums and gallerys, selecting and printing images, etc. So not having a digital database would cost me far more time in browsing in the long run.
If I didn't go back and access my files much, I'd just burn the disks and not worry about it. But I do, and it would be very time consuming by not having them organized in some fashion.
In my situation, it works for me. In others, it may not. But I am an active shooter, both personally and professionally, and I have a lot of images which I deal with daily. Organization actually saves me time in the long run, and digital is a godsend in that regard.
Even when I use use film, I get low res photo lab scans done for $2.99 a disk, and catalog the images and file the negatives. I even have a catageory called Rangefinders, since I don't get the EXIF info with the camera type
🙂
