Just A Bit of Help, Please

[Shamrock]

January 22, 2009
6:26 P.M.


As I was re-naming some older images, I mistakenly named about 85± images as "R7109.01-{filenamebase}", rather than the proper "R7109.02-{filenamebase}". 


This happened once before, and I was able to find the reference in the User Manual for making the appropriate change so that the proper "R7109.02-{filenamebase}" name is affixed to each of the 85± images.  Could someone be so kind as to explain the proper coding to make this correction, as well as the location of this procedure in the User Manual.  Thank you.



Just call me …………

                            SHAMMY

[Kirk Baker]

Shammy,

As I was re-naming some older images, I mistakenly named about 85± images as "R7109.01-{filenamebase}", rather than the proper "R7109.02-{filenamebase}". 


This happened once before, and I was able to find the reference in the User Manual for making the appropriate change so that the proper "R7109.02-{filenamebase}" name is affixed to each of the 85± images.  Could someone be so kind as to explain the proper coding to make this correction, as well as the location of this procedure in the User Manual.

The renaming string you want to use to correct your problem is:

R7109.02-{filenamebase:8}

The above example is skipping the first eight characters of the current filename (which should be the "R7109.01-" part) and is then pre-pending the characters "R7109.02-".  The page of the manual that explains substring extraction is page 47.

HTH,

-Kirk

[Shamrock]

January 22, 2008
7:47 P.M. (EST)


Hi Kirk,


First class (and speedy) help as always.  Thank you very much.


As I have told the Camera Bits people before, the service model adopted by Camera Bits ought to be adopted by the industry.  Not only do you folks help the individuals on these boards, the whole world (by reviewing these boards on a regular basis) is able to learn how easy it is to work with all of the Camera Bits programs, like Photo Mechanic.  We are all so lucky to have all of you at Camera Bits.


Someday, when you decide to take even a few minutes away from these boards, you are going to have to compose a brief autobiography ……… this time about Kirk.


Thanks again.


Just call me …………

                            SHAMMY

[Shamrock]

January 22, 2009
7:58 P.M.


Kirk,


Just so that others considering PhotoMechanic know how easy it is to use the program, and just so that these same people know how much time can be saved by using PhotoMechanic, I thought I might tell all interested about some "past experiences" [before PhotoMechanic (PM)].


In the past (before PM), as I was changing the filenames of images, I was very lucky if I was able to handle six or eight images a minute.  Thus, with 85± images, that would be between 10 and 15 minutes.  Now, with PhotoMechanic (and assuming I don't make any silly mistakes), that renaming process takes perhaps "30 seconds ±" (and that includes the time to "find" the folder with the images, and the time to "open" the images in a "contact sheet").  And with the code that you provided to me (and the User Manual Reference), the correction of that silly mistake took only another "10 seconds or so".   WOW!!!!!


I better stop now, or Dennis will get the idea that he is selling the PhotoMechanic for less money than it is worth.


Once again, thanks very, very much.


Just call me …………

                            SHAMMY