# File naming conventions



## Photographe (Mar 23, 2011)

I've always followed one of Peter Korgh's suggested file naming conventions:

XX_YYMMDD_ORIGINALNAME.nef  where XX are my initials.  I am thinking of changing it to:

YYYYMMDD_HHMMSS_XX_Sequence.nef    where "Sequence" is just the number from the original file name.

I get confused by using just two digits for the year, and I don't see the point of saving the entire original file when it's always the same three letters (DSC) plus the number.  Plus it seems the time of day could be helpful to have.

Any thoughts on changing conventions in midstream?  I would not go back and rename old files, of course.  Any thoughts on whether XX (my initials) should go at the beginning or the end?


----------



## Mark Sirota (Mar 23, 2011)

Your initials are only useful if they are there to differentiate from something else.  If your files are not mingled with those of other photographers on a regular basis, I don't see the point.

I don't see a problem with changing your convention midstream, so long as you can easily differentiate between the two (which is true in this case) so you can quickly decipher as needed.

I agree on the two-digit year.  I always use four-digit years.  Time didn't begin in the year 2000.

I use YYYYMMDD-OrigFileNumber.  In rare cases where I'm shooting with multiple cameras, I'll prepend a letter (A, B, etc.) to the file number, after the hyphen.  If I needed to differentiate multiple photographers (potentially with multiple cameras each), I'd stick their initials in there somewhere, probably after the date and before the file number.

Whether the initials should go at the front depends on how you'd likely want to sort when looking at files in the operating system (where you can only easily sort by filename, not by other metadata).  I envision wanting to sort by date rather than by photographer more often, so I'd put the date first.


----------



## RikkFlohr (Mar 23, 2011)

My strategy is to use YYYYMMDD-[Client Name]-Original File Number Suffix. Sometimes client is me in the case of pictures taken for me only. I use my initials then RDF in place of Client Name. 

I want to be able to see when and for whom when I look at a file name.


----------



## johnbeardy (Mar 23, 2011)

While there's not likely to be a problem, I wouldn't change. Your existing method is robust - preventing duplicate originals - and changing would mean you'd no longer have simple sorting by a consistent filenaming convention.

John


----------



## PatrickC (Mar 25, 2011)

I've never understood the desire to use the filename to replicate information which is held elsewhere. 

You are using Nikon, so you have the option to make use of the alphabetical part of the camera generated file name to add your initials. The image number can be set to be sequential, not re-set with every new data card. So, if your initials are AB, your image files will start at _ABA0001.nef and continue to _ABA9999.nef - there's a menu item that lets you edit the DSC to anything you want. 

The only problem which might arise is when you get to 9999, because the camera will automatically go from there back to _ABA0001; you have to manually change the prefix to _ABB. We have overrun occasionally but it's easy to change the A to a B in the filenames of the erroneous files in Lightroom.

An added advantage is that if you ever need to find a file in a backup (we do a backup copy through Lightroom when we download each card), the filename is the same.

With file systems and with file names, the simpler and more automated, the better.

Patrick Cunningham


----------



## johnbeardy (Mar 25, 2011)

The date is a fixed, unarguable property of an image and should be included as it is a safeguard against duplication of filenames, and secondly for convenience when viewing filenames in an unknown range of contexts. For example, sorting by capture date can be approximated in Finder/Explorer list views by sorting on the file name. Equally, descriptive text is for human convenience. The problem is when people try to get too clever with their filenames, chopping and changing them, or loading in too much information that belongs in metadata.

John


----------



## Photographe (Mar 27, 2011)

PatrickC said:


> The only problem which might arise is when you get to 9999



That's actually 80% of the problem.  You can easily get to 9999 several times a year with a single camera, and then your photos will be in hopeless disarray.  Another 10% goes to: having more than one camera at the same time (perhaps because other photographers share the same computer).  And then there are some cameras that shoot video but have two numbering schemes going on at the same time, one for video and one for photo (5%).  For those cameras, the only way to make sure your files are in order is to include the time down to the seconds.  Finally, once in a while I accidentally reset the numbering back to zero before it reaches the max (5%).

So that is the basic "unique filename" problem you're trying to deal with when naming RAW files. There are also added benefits of including the date in the filename.  For example, you always know when the photo was taken even if it becaomes separated from your computer.  For example, if you email it to friends, they will know exactly where you were on such and such a day.  Ok, may be that is not always a benefit.

I have to say that when looking at old photographs, I often enjoy the mystery of not knowing when a photo was taken.  Sometimes without the date you can't even tell who's in the picture ("is that Aunt Betsy when she was 3 years old or her Mom 20 years before?").  But in this digital age, such problems are hard to come by.


----------

