Author Topic: Workaround for ingest?  (Read 3158 times)

Offline vAfotoriporter

  • Uber Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1029
    • View Profile
    • Attila Volgyi photojournalist
Workaround for ingest?
« on: January 26, 2008, 07:04:15 PM »
I know ingest puts some valuable info (like folder num and so on) into the images but I usually have to copy my memory cards to a mobile storage device and after shooting work with them on it. So it would be less space consuming - and perhaps faster too - to have PM's ingest optionally overwriteing (maybe using temporary files like it does renaming) the files stored on the storage instead of copying making it to be twice on the same device.

Is there such a solution or the only way is having the ingest or using a rename and add IPTC info but loosing other valuable details?
Working on Mac, OSX, iOS and with some Canons.
Allways shooting RAW.

http://www.volgyiattila.com

Offline Kirk Baker

  • Senior Software Engineer
  • Camera Bits Staff
  • Superhero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20516
    • View Profile
    • Camera Bits, Inc.
Re: Workaround for ingest?
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2008, 07:11:39 PM »
szurkebarat,

I know ingest puts some valuable info (like folder num and so on) into the images but I usually have to copy my memory cards to a mobile storage device and after shooting work with them on it. So it would be less space consuming - and perhaps faster too - to have PM's ingest optionally overwriteing (maybe using temporary files like it does renaming) the files stored on the storage instead of copying making it to be twice on the same device.

Is there such a solution or the only way is having the ingest or using a rename and add IPTC info but loosing other valuable details?

I'm not sure I fully understand what you're trying to do, but renaming does not change metadata in your images.

I think you just want to browse images on your mobile storage device without transferring them to your computer's internal hard drive?  As long as your mobile storage device mounts as a disk, then you could just open contact sheets from it and work with the images directly.  But I wouldn't recommend that since it sounds like those images are your only copy so if you accidentally delete a file then it could be lost for good.

If I haven't answered your question, please let me know.

-Kirk


Offline vAfotoriporter

  • Uber Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1029
    • View Profile
    • Attila Volgyi photojournalist
Re: Workaround for ingest?
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2008, 07:52:47 PM »
Thanks I know it is not safe to work with them (had some losses) but since working on deadline I have to and I either don't have the space on the notebook necessary or have no time for waiting the ingest.

What I do now:

Shoot on more cards, copy them dudring work to the storage (after format shoot again on the cards). After finished connect the storage to the notebook and ingest the images from one directory to the other (notebook hard drives via USB not really fast especially with great amounts of data and many files). I export the embedded JPG to work with - this part can be on the notebook not needing the originals on the storage. But the ingest part is too time consuming and I cannot start the actual work before it is done.

As for loosing metadata: as I recall you mentioned in one thread that Ingest copies for example the original file name set by the camera to the place where the {frame} variable looks for it. Or am I mistaken and all PM variables work if images are renamed and processed without ingesting?
Working on Mac, OSX, iOS and with some Canons.
Allways shooting RAW.

http://www.volgyiattila.com

Offline Kirk Baker

  • Senior Software Engineer
  • Camera Bits Staff
  • Superhero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20516
    • View Profile
    • Camera Bits, Inc.
Re: Workaround for ingest?
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2008, 10:18:51 PM »
Thanks I know it is not safe to work with them (had some losses) but since working on deadline I have to and I either don't have the space on the notebook necessary or have no time for waiting the ingest.

What I do now:

Shoot on more cards, copy them dudring work to the storage (after format shoot again on the cards). After finished connect the storage to the notebook and ingest the images from one directory to the other (notebook hard drives via USB not really fast especially with great amounts of data and many files). I export the embedded JPG to work with - this part can be on the notebook not needing the originals on the storage. But the ingest part is too time consuming and I cannot start the actual work before it is done.

Why can't you work in the foreground while Ingest works in the background?

Quote from: szurkebarat
As for loosing metadata: as I recall you mentioned in one thread that Ingest copies for example the original file name set by the camera to the place where the {frame} variable looks for it. Or am I mistaken and all PM variables work if images are renamed and processed without ingesting?

This only is of importance if you have a camera that doesn't set a frame number in the EXIF data.  Almost all professional-grade cameras have this EXIF data.

-Kirk


Offline vAfotoriporter

  • Uber Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1029
    • View Profile
    • Attila Volgyi photojournalist
Re: Workaround for ingest?
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2008, 05:29:36 PM »
Why can't you work in the foreground while Ingest works in the background?

I have to inget all images of all cards to the hard drive first then rename them in a full batch because I am using two (some times more) bodies and usually want the filenames to sort in timesort so after every image is uploaded I timesort them and rename to a kind of seqn.

Quote from: szurkebarat
As for loosing metadata: as I recall you mentioned in one thread that Ingest copies for example the original file name set by the camera to the place where the {frame} variable looks for it. Or am I mistaken and all PM variables work if images are renamed and processed without ingesting?

This only is of importance if you have a camera that doesn't set a frame number in the EXIF data.  Almost all professional-grade cameras have this EXIF data.

So my Canon 1D mark II and 1Ds mark II bodies surely write the frame number into the EXIF thus ingest is not absolutely necessary and is more likely a copy+rename operation that could be replaced by a simple rename once the files are allready copied to a hard drive before the ingest?
Working on Mac, OSX, iOS and with some Canons.
Allways shooting RAW.

http://www.volgyiattila.com

Offline Kirk Baker

  • Senior Software Engineer
  • Camera Bits Staff
  • Superhero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20516
    • View Profile
    • Camera Bits, Inc.
Re: Workaround for ingest?
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2008, 06:58:36 PM »
Why can't you work in the foreground while Ingest works in the background?

I have to inget all images of all cards to the hard drive first then rename them in a full batch because I am using two (some times more) bodies and usually want the filenames to sort in timesort so after every image is uploaded I timesort them and rename to a kind of seqn.

Quote from: szurkebarat
As for loosing metadata: as I recall you mentioned in one thread that Ingest copies for example the original file name set by the camera to the place where the {frame} variable looks for it. Or am I mistaken and all PM variables work if images are renamed and processed without ingesting?

This only is of importance if you have a camera that doesn't set a frame number in the EXIF data.  Almost all professional-grade cameras have this EXIF data.

So my Canon 1D mark II and 1Ds mark II bodies surely write the frame number into the EXIF thus ingest is not absolutely necessary and is more likely a copy+rename operation that could be replaced by a simple rename once the files are allready copied to a hard drive before the ingest?

I suppose so.  Try it on a test sample of images and see if it works for you.

-Kirk