Yup already using fast usb 3.0 readers. Yes, finding dupes since they are all ending in a letter isn't difficult but it forces you to WAIT for the entire ingest to get done. This is a waste of time especially when you have 700-900 photos on the card. Attempting a first pass review and selection with every other photo being a dupe is also a major PITA. Haven't spent any time with command lines. So far I just go into the OS, do the search followed by a mass delete but again, it shouldn't be necessary. PM should allow filtering out dupes BEFORE it ingests. Yes I know it does this but that's only on the same card.
It's somewhat hard to believe others haven't been bothered by this issue.
A simple check box in the ingest window for: Ignore duplicate files from a different card would solve the issue.
There is another thread where the user had a similar issue. Unfortunately it is not an easy problem to solve and have it be both fast and foolproof. To make it foolproof, Ingest would have to read the entire file and produce a checksum and then compare against a list of checksums to know if the image had ever been seen before. This would slow things down significantly when a file is rejected but not copied. (When a file is copied anyway, then the impact is far less severe.)
The way Incremental Ingest works now is that it puts an ID file on your card and then uses that ID to look up filesystem information (name, date, file size) to determine if a file has already been ingested. Very fast and foolproof for an individual card, but doesn't work when a card with the same files is presented to Ingest (the ID on the card will differ and a different set of data will be consulted.)
Currently Incremental Ingest is fast and foolproof for individual cards. The other method would work among multiple cards but while it would be foolproof, it would be (possibly) slower to the point that some may complain why it takes so long for Ingest to copy only the new pictures.
Is it guaranteed that the files on the secondary card are identical in every way (filename, file size, modification date/time) or can this vary?
-Kirk