Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,691 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
As I begin to go over all of my images and add File Info to each one (for more efficient and accurate searcheing), I am left wondering what others do with theirs. Do you leave your images as their default names (numbers) right out of your camera and just add File Info and then nest them in appropriately named folders or do you rename them to identify them by sight of what they are of? Also, where do you enter your information- in just the Keywords section (in my case, I am referring to GraphicConverter) or also in Category, etc.?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
781 Posts
I name photos according to when they were taken. I use Automator, so if I have a set of Canada Day Photos, they become "CanadaDay00X". Don't bother with anything else...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,427 Posts
Do you leave your images as their default names (numbers) right out of your camera and just add File Info and then nest them in appropriately named folders or do you rename them to identify them by sight of what they are of? Also, where do you enter your information- in just the Keywords section (in my case, I am referring to GraphicConverter) or also in Category, etc.?
I have a folder with all of my original downloaded pictures with the original file names. Then I make copies of them to other folders that are part of any projects I am working on.

For instance, pictures that are for my genealogy project are given Accession Numbers, and filed in sequential order and indexed in a master list that gives all of the information I need. These are mixed in these folders with any scanning of old photographs I have, or documents, or other ephemera that I have collected. So I have: Originals as downloaded; Accession Copies in sequential order and cross referenced with the master listing; Working Copies, normally that have been downconverted to 300dpi and compressed so they work with my word processor; and Display Copies converted to 75dpi for any screen displays. In fact, I did a presentation WITHOUT using presentation software by simply setting all of the pictures and diagrams I wanted to sequential file names and using Preview in full screen mode. Worked fine and sans dorky graphics, the presentation went quite well.

For my regular photographs I have: Originals as downloaded; Working Copies that are 300dpi and compressed; and Display Copies at 75dpi. If I am sending them as e-mail attachments, I also downconvert the number of colours and change the size to 3x5 - which looks just fine on the other end on a screen. I change the file names of all but the originals to reflect whatever project I am working on.

It is a bit of work, but since I value both the originals and my working copies, this has worked quite well for me. I use a utility like the Scooby Renamer to sequentially rename the COPIES I am working on. (I make sure never to loose an original, even if it is a bad or out of focus one because you just never know...)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,459 Posts
Good question!

There are many who say that each image should be renamed. I'm not in total agreement.

As a professional, I don't need 150 hits when I search for the "John Smith" family photo session. All I need is one, a single folder, namely, "Smith, John, 01/24/07".

Same thing for the 1200 "Brown" wedding images. A single folder will do fine.

If you get to the point where you have 150 weddings or 200+ family sessions (or whatever), then create a folder dedicated to "Weddings", "Family Portraits", "Commercial", "Nudes", "Stock Photos", whatever.

If you end up having too many images in one folder, then it may be time to subdivide the folder into categories, ie. "Mountains", "Rivers", "Birds", etc.

If more information is needed, then include it in the Metadata info.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top