SL file numbering?

[trond]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It may be a mess, but: I consider the file name assigned to the exposure to be an identifier, not a sequence number. The sequence is better determined by the capture time embedded in the EXIF data. If I need my files to be sequenced and named in a specific manner, I do that later, on my computer, where I have full control over the ordering and specifics of the file name.

 

With the tools available today (Lightroom, Bridge, tons of others) this is a ten second job.

 

I do hope Leica fixes the file numbering silliness. It's a bit strange that it's even a noticeable issue. How hard is it to just increment from L0000001 to whatever, regardless of the number of bits you've got? Anyone there ever heard of BCD? ...

 

Dear Ramarren,

 

A couple of comments here.

 

1. It may be that the SD card reader probably is a third party sub-assembly, so Leica need to get the FW from the card reader manufacturer. The fact the some Fuji X-cameras have the same numbering issue points to that. So this may not be entirely Leica´s fault.

 

2. In my case I cannot rely on the capture time in the EXIF data. My camera is one of the very first SL, and it has a peculiar behaviour with respect to the recorded time in the EXIF.

   After power up, and until the camera get an GPS position fix, the recorded time is always 18/10/2015 09:30 + the time since power up.

   This time corresponds to the production date. So unless I have a valid GPS fix, the date is 18/10/2015 regardless.

   A large part of my images have this date, so I have to rely on the image number sequence.

   The unfortunate result since I discovered the numbering problem all too late, is that now, one year down the road,

   I am not able to determine the right sequence and date of images. I can almost get the week correct but not the day or time.

 

Best regards

 

Trond

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[scott kirkpatrick]

Fuji, Olympus, and Leica have all brought out cameras supporting two SD cards in the past year.  The Fuji XT2 supports two fast cards (using the extra pins on the UHS-II socket), the others can only support the extra wires and bandwidth to socket #1.  The Fujis and Olys all seem to permit writing two different data streams at once to the two cards, raw file to #1 and jpg to #2, but Leica only permits duplicating the data to both cards, or writes to one only.  So they are not the same inside, but still, the card interfaces are such a tricky subject that I would assume that all manufacturers would prefer to buy the firmware that comes with the hardware, written by folks who know how that hardware works.  

 

I have some Fuji gear.  I'll see if the peculiar behavior when reformatting, and sensitivity to whether you have two chips or one in the camera when formatting is a problem there, too.

 

scott

[ramarren]

My catalog starts with (1) Year; next subdir will be (2) Camera Used; then (3) Shoot Name or General Type (Street, Sports, City/Landscape); next subdir will be (4) Date of Shoot. Within each Date of Shoot the files are listed as YYYY-DD-MM_Frame#_Total #Frames Imported.  

 

I also shoot film which I digitally scan; my negative sheets are labeled and ordered the same as they appear in LR.

 

(bolded) I used to do this when I had multiple copies of the same camera, but realized I could always find the camera type in the standard EXIF data, and could add an IPTC keyword to differentiate between the camera bodies.  Similarly, I add keywords to differentiate image types. 

 

If I'm working for a client, the client's name is the name of a subfolder in the date folder (that contains all the pertinent image files and any other collateral needed for the shoot), and the client name is also a keyword in the image files. 

 

When I shoot film nowadays, I usually scan, add all the annotations to EXIF and IPTC metadata, and then discard the original film ... I've been doing this so long I know I'll never re-scan the film so the digital scans become my originals. 

 

As you suggested, there's no one and only way to do this organization that is "correct". You work out your organizational structure and the policy for using it, and then be consistent. That's what counts. 

[ramarren]

Dear Ramarren,

 

A couple of comments here.

 

1. It may be that the SD card reader probably is a third party sub-assembly, so Leica need to get the FW from the card reader manufacturer. The fact the some Fuji X-cameras have the same numbering issue points to that. So this may not be entirely Leica´s fault.

 

2. In my case I cannot rely on the capture time in the EXIF data. My camera is one of the very first SL, and it has a peculiar behaviour with respect to the recorded time in the EXIF.

   After power up, and until the camera get an GPS position fix, the recorded time is always 18/10/2015 09:30 + the time since power up.

   This time corresponds to the production date. So unless I have a valid GPS fix, the date is 18/10/2015 regardless.

   A large part of my images have this date, so I have to rely on the image number sequence.

   The unfortunate result since I discovered the numbering problem all too late, is that now, one year down the road,

   I am not able to determine the right sequence and date of images. I can almost get the week correct but not the day or time.

 

Best regards

 

Trond

 

 

It doesn't really matter who supplied the SD card cage and its firmware. One would hope that any such OEM supplier would give Leica the tools required to customize the adaptation of their product, or customize it to Leica's specification. 

 

My SL was manufactured 13/10/2015 and doesn't demonstrate this capture time ordering issue. That's a truly odd problem. I'd report it to Leica and perhaps ask them to update the camera's logic board. I have never seen a case in which the camera's set date and time was not reflected in the capture time embedded in the files EXIF data, whether GPS was currently locked in or not. 

[Guest]

I am running into the same issue as this on my brand new Q.  I always like to know how many pictures I have taken, so I was assuming it would just go from 0998, 0998, 1000, etc but as you know behavior is exactly as you describe in your message.

 

Did Leica ever write back to you and explain why it works that way?  It seems very counterintuitive and strange to someone like me, who can take more than 1,000 pictures in a day.

 

I solve the problem by using Capture One to organize my pictures, and so I don't care about the file name except for a nice "at a glance" display of the number of shots taken by the camera.  Especially since the Leica way to disclose the actual number is apparently some kind of oddball hex scheme that you have to translate to decimal!

 

As per the instructions you quote above  ..... if you want to set everything back to L100 0000 then use a newly formatted card with no images on it and then invoke 'Reset Image Numbering'  - when I do this in this order with both card slots filled - this is correct the only way to get the file numbering to start from the beginning again.

[Guest]

I would like to be able to have the camera name the files spb_????, my initials folled by a sequence number.

[helged]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would like to be able to have the camera name the files spb_????, my initials folled by a sequence number.

 

 

Add this request to the FW v3-thread (if it's not already included).

[scott kirkpatrick]

I did a quick test of formatting actions on my Fuji X Pro2.  With a new card in slot 1, no card in slot 2, the first shot on the newly formatted card is consistently numbered, one more than the last shot on the chip just removed, and the folder number is the same as what was in use before.  I repeated everything with a half-full card in slot #2, and the result was the same, no change in the folder number on the newly formatted card.

 

That's how it should be, I think.

 

scott