I am a member of Lynda and watched the 2012 training videos and the updated features video (much prefer the style and set up of the this video - seems to contradict the 2012 training) Perhaps we need a full update when Aperture 4 comes out?
Anyhow this is the naming convention I took from the videos and started down this path. I put two and two together and found this site and did some more reading and wondering if I have made poor choices?
Any issues with this naming convention? Does it matter that I am leaving gaps in the file name?
Project Name
2014-01-17 | Nakiska | Snowboarding
Picture name (plus renaming master and storing on another drive)
2014-01-17 | (myname) | Snowboarding | Nakiska | 741.CR2
The picture name is redundant to the project name. You could place that picture name in the Title metadata field if you like. That would make it accessible to BorderFX for exporting images with that name placed on the image in addition to a copyright watermark. My image names have nothing to do with what is in the image. I use my initials, the digits of the date taken, and the four digit sequence number of the raw file (eg WPR-20140117-9536). Everything I need to know about the content of the image is embedded in the metadata fields so I can easily search for them and create smart albums when needed.
Photographer | https://www.walterrowe.com | https://instagram.com/walter.rowe.photo
Walter, do you allow Aperture to name your images on import or enter data after import? If it is on import, can you explain how you get Aperture to create your naming convention in the metadata field? Don’t see the option to grab just part of the sequence number or how to enter the date without spaces or characters.
I am familiar with image databases but new to Aperture.
Thanks
I manually seed the image sequence number. Unfortunately Aperture does not have a variable you can plug into the naming field that represents just the image sequence #. This is my File Naming preset.
WPR-{imageyear}{imagemonth}{image day}-{counter}
I manually set the value for {counter} to be the first sequence number on the card I am importing. I don’t delete images as I shoot. I delete them after import. That insures that the sequence numbers on imported images always match the original file names.
That said, I imagine someone with AppleScript / Aperture coding experience could write something that extracts that sequence number and creates a version name based on it.
Anyone up for the challenge?
Photographer | https://www.walterrowe.com | https://instagram.com/walter.rowe.photo
Thanks for the info:
By leaving spaces in the file naming convention (have down approx 500 images) will this cause any issue you can think of?
2014-01-17 | (myname) | Snowboarding | Nakiska | 741.CR2
should it be changed to 2014-01-17_(byname)_Snowboarding_Nakiska_741.CR2
Question: If your renaming images on import what is the reason you need to reference the original file in your version name on import?
Thanks
Special characters in names can cause issues when you export to actual files using those characters in the name. Pipe symbols and parentheses can be problematic on any OS, and web URLs that include those in the name will surely break.
Photographer | https://www.walterrowe.com | https://instagram.com/walter.rowe.photo
Question on the side,
What about_underscore_are_they_OK ?
I have a photographic memory but never got it developed
Yes.
Photographer | https://www.walterrowe.com | https://instagram.com/walter.rowe.photo
Thanks for taking the time Walter I appreciate the response. I will change to underscore for my naming convention. Can you explain why it is important to include the original file name in the (eg WPR-20140117-9536) is this only if you are using referenced images? If I am renaming the master file on import and then backing up those photos as well after renaming I won’t have the original file name in my aperture library or my backup location.
It isn’t important to retain part of the original camera raw name in the renamed master or version name. It is a personal choice I make that allows me to recreate the original file name. I do this for legal reasons - copyright protection. If someone tries to claim one of my photographs as their own, I can use my original raw file as evidence proving I am the author of the photograph. I also can easily recreate the original name and ask them what is the original name of their file. If they make up a name, it is unlikely to match mine. Weak as it may be, it is further evidence they didn’t author the photograph.
Photographer | https://www.walterrowe.com | https://instagram.com/walter.rowe.photo
Good tip there Walter … Thanks for that. One to remember :)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
Arguing with a zealot is only slightly easier than tunnelling through a mountain with your forehead.
"Can't innovate any more, my ass" Phil Schiller