# Filenaming - best practice - advice please



## ruthiebabe (Mar 21, 2014)

Hi, new to Lightroom and want to get filenaming consistent from the start, as an amateur I have had zero consistency in my Windows file structure prior to now, keep changing my mind!

I realise it's personal but I don't want to regret what I decide now. 

I am thinking myname+date+a one word identifer such as'trees' or 'yorkshire'

I would welcome opinions on the following:



whether to include hour+minute
any thoughts on format of date eg yyyy-mmdd or what to avoid
Whether you favour including an identifing word or not? I just think it might help if I inevitably have to search in windows files at any time

Thanks


----------



## clee01l (Mar 21, 2014)

You are correct, it is personal.  You are likely to get answers here that are all over the spectrum. 

I use one of the default date named folder schemes on import and NEVER rename my originals.   On export, I give the exported file a meaningful name since it is almost never cataloged in LR and is often accessed using the file system.  I only ever access my originals using LR and only LR.  The file name  in LR is not important since my files are filtered using Keywords and other metadata and grouped in Smart Collections for quick access.

By not renaming on import and not pausing to choose cute folder names on import, my import moves quite efficiently.  I insert the camera card, choose an import preset and press the import buttonI then wait for the first thumbnail image to show up in the Pervious Import grid panel and begin culling while the import continues to completion.


----------



## Tony Jay (Mar 21, 2014)

Yes, it is true that file naming is a somewhat personal exercise however what you really decide to do should be governed by certain practicalities.

It is no use renaming thousands of files that then subsequently organise themselves in a hodgepodge pattern.
Practically, according to some of the thoughts you have already aired it would seem logical to start with the date specifically YYYYMMDD followed by an identifier that usefully describes a particular shoot. After that I would use a four-digit sequence. A four digit sequence allows one to shoot up to 9999 images on a calendar date before the sequence rolls around.
The result looks like this YYYYMMDD-'identifier'-0001.CR2.

The index role of renaming files is to ensure that each file is uniquely named with no chance that it could ever be duplicated. I try to keep my filenames to 32 characters or less because of certain limitations imposed by different operating systems that a file might encounter if it sent across the WWW and stored on a server somewhere. It is also true that most operating systems that are current do not have such restrictions.

If the folder from that shoot is also renamed YYYYMMDD-'identifier', then it is very easy to see when files are in the wrong place. Also files and folders will arrange themselves logically according date and time shot (see below for more details).

A lot of us use virtual copies to apply different treatments to the same RAW master. These can have small identifiers inserted into their filename such a BW for Black & White etc. These should go just before the sequence number.

With regard to including time details into filenames there are situations where that would be helpful, or even vital, but those scenarios are very specific and self-evident. If you are not sure whether it would be helpful or not that is probably evidence that it is not necessary in your case. In any case if you arrange your images in Lightroom according to time shot then the renaming will occur in the same sequence so YYYYMMDD-kakadu-0001.CR2 will always have been shot before YYYYMMDD-kakadu-0002.CR2

Now, while it is true that I take file renaming seriously but when I want to find images in Lightroom the last thing that I actually want to do is try to find them by filename. In that instance I want to use keywords and other metadata to identify the images of interest. So, it is pointless trying to define everything that the image is about through the file renaming.

In summary file renaming is an important fundamental in digital asset management but should not become the prime search mechanism, particularly in Lightroom where keywords and other metadata should be the criteria by which images are organised and found.

Tony Jay


----------



## ruthiebabe (Mar 21, 2014)

Thanks guys for those thoughts

Ruth


----------



## johnbeardy (Mar 22, 2014)

A little point, but I would differ from Tony's suggestion of YYYYMMDD-'identifier'-0001.CR2 and instead go for YYMMDD_0001 'my identifier'.CR2.

We're talking preferences/judgement rather than fundamentals, and I'm not quibbling with YYYY or YY, or the use of "-" or other separators. But I think it's better for the sequence number to come directly after the date, and with a separator. YYMMDD_1234 will travel with the photo wherever it goes, while the identifier is subject to change. For instance, my original might be "YYMMDD_1234 Wetherby.cr2" but a magazine or other client may require flattened pictures to include my surname and an article reference, so I might work up a picture in Photoshop and send it as "Beardsworth BWarticle YYMMDD_1234.tif, dropping the Wetherby text perhaps to keep the name below 32 characters, just in case. I may also keep a layered version YYMMDD_1234 Wetherby.tif, and maybe a colour version too. Because YYMMMDD_1234 is my truly _unique identifier_, I can quickly find all versions of the picture. You might not submit pictures to publishers, but you might have different versions of pictures and keeping together the date and sequence number often help track stuff down.

It also helps sorting. Let's say I have a folder of images which might be shot on the same day but are a mix of subjects. Putting text in the middle means the pictures may not sort in the order they were shot, while my renaming template YYMMDD_seq {IPTC Title} guarantees that.

John


----------



## erro (Mar 22, 2014)

I personally rename, after import (so that LR still can revert back to the original name), to:

YYYY-MM-DD hhmmss org-seq#^ some short descriptive text

this makes photos from different cameras sort correctly down to within a second.

then I also use a lot of keywords


----------



## Anthony.Ralph (Mar 22, 2014)

Many good suggestions and comments. The only difference in my naming structure is that I use the file number from the original rather than assigning a fresh sequence number on each import. (A copy of these original files having gone straight into an archive.) In this way I can easily find the archive versions of specific files should I need to.

Anthony.


----------



## ruthiebabe (Mar 22, 2014)

all good suggestions guys. Now ....:hm:

I do quite often use 2 cameras on the same day so think the advice to include the hhmmss or just hhmm might be useful. 

Thanks

Ruth


----------



## tomar (Mar 22, 2014)

you have to keep in mind when naming any file on a computer photo or otherwise that not only must the file name have a meaningful name but it must also be easy to find.
I use the format yyyymm place or event 
within my catalogue I have a  folder for each year   [my catalogue goes back to 1900] ..
If you are using lightroom , although it takes time it is worth attaching tags to your photos I use the grouping *where, who ,things,  events*

so then it becomes easy to find for example all photos of yourself, or photos in Paris or all wedding photos, photos of flowers etc...


----------



## clee01l (Mar 22, 2014)

johnbeardy said:


> ...a magazine or other client may require flattened pictures to include my surname and an article reference, so I might work up a picture in Photoshop and send it as "Beardsworth BWarticle YYMMDD_1234.tif


John this all happens on Export and still does not require the renaming of the master original proprietary RAW file which presumably will never be sent to anyone. 


ruthiebabe said:


> I do quite often use 2 cameras on the same day so think the advice to include the hhmmss or just hhmm might be useful.


 Capture time is a metadata attribute that LR can search and sort with. It does not need to be in the file name.  I shoot with two cameras at times too. I assign a unique first 4 characters to the file name created by the camera for each camera.   Most prosumer DSLRs will accommodate unique file naming in the camera.


tomar said:


> you have to keep in mind when naming any file on a computer photo or otherwise that not only must the file name have a meaningful name but it must also be easy to find.
> I use the format yyyymm place or event
> within my catalogue I have a  folder for each year   [my catalogue goes back to 1900] ..
> If you are using lightroom , although it takes time it is worth attaching tags to your photos I use the grouping *where, who ,things,  events*
> ...


 Lightroom is a Data Asset Management (DAM) tool.  If you want to find an image, use the DAM tool  not the filesystem.  Scanning lists of files in Explorer/Finder or even the LR Folder panel is very inefficient.  Adding additional human readable text to file names, takes time, time that could be better spent managing your images through keywords and collections.


----------



## johnbeardy (Mar 22, 2014)

clee01l said:


> John this all happens on Export and still does not require the renaming of the master original proprietary RAW file which presumably will never be sent to anyone.



Sure, Cletus. it doesn't mean renaming the original raw file. The point is that I'm keeping not just the raw file, but a number of derivatives whose name may vary for reasons I can't control, and which can be in different folders. By keeping a unique identifier date+seq together, rather than inserting some text between the date and seq no, I can quickly find the related files.

John


----------



## ruthiebabe (Mar 23, 2014)

Question:

whilst i I realise its easy to reorder files in library view according to capture time is it possible to make them stay in that order? (Without renaming) 

It hasn't been in any system I've used before and I can't think it will in LR?

so, if I have imported from 2 cameras used on the same day, named yyyymmdd but not included hhmm, when I export a set of the best, they will be all mixed up chronologically, right?

Or possibly it is too early in the day for my brain and I'm missing a trick. 

If I am correct, including hhmm would help me keep a sequence without renaming? 

Welcome your thoughts,

thanks, 

Ruth


----------



## Tony Jay (Mar 23, 2014)

Ruth, all images shot in a camera have capture time recorded in EXIF metadata.
That information is accessible in Lightroom.
All this you know.
If you shoot with two different cameras (as long as the time in the two cameras is correct and synchronised) then you can order the images in Lightroom chronologically if you wish.
I am not sure about your reference to exporting and the images being mixed up chronologically.
Certainly adding the time to the filename will not arrange images chronologically in Lightroom per se.

Perhaps a little more thought about what you are really trying to do will help.

Tony Jay


----------



## Jim Wilde (Mar 23, 2014)

Ruth, there's a very common misconception about what happens when a bunch of images are exported "in order", and subsequently viewed outside of Lightroom. For a start, the exports are not necessarily placed on the hard drive in the order they were exported, they are simply placed by the OS file system wherever there is space for them....on a heavily fragmented disk that could mean the files are scattered all over the place, but their location is recorded by the file system.

Consider then what happens when you attempt to "view" or "list" the files using an external program, such as the simple file manager (Windows Explorer in your case) or perhaps in a slideshow program. In the case of Windows Explorer, when you display the contents of a particular folder of images they will be listed in some form of order (irrespective of where the actual files are physically placed on the disk) which is usually in file-name order but can be re-ordered using any one of a host of different criteria, including "Date Taken" (which really means "capture date and time"). And it is possible to change the defaults to the specific order you would prefer (so using "date taken" should ensure that the images from both cameras are "merged" to be listed chronologically, assuming the clocks are synchronised of course). Something like a slideshow application may be more restricted in what options are available for the viewing order and for this reason some users may include a sequence numbers in the filenames of the *exported *files, thus making displaying in a certain order easier.


----------



## MarkNicholas (Mar 24, 2014)

I only rename to avoid having files with the same name. Therefore the initial IMG_0001-9999 are unchanged. The subsequent IMG_0001-9999 are changed to JMG_0001-9999 and so on. I will worry about what happens after ZMG_0001-9999 when I get there.


----------



## Tony Jay (Mar 24, 2014)

Mark this is an interesting scheme but would it not be better to put together a prospective renaming scheme that will scale infinitely.
That last sentence bothers me a bit.

Tony Jay


----------



## clee01l (Mar 24, 2014)

MarkNicholas said:


> I only rename to avoid having files with the same name. Therefore the initial IMG_0001-9999 are unchanged. The subsequent IMG_0001-9999 are changed to JMG_0001-9999 and so on. I will worry about what happens after ZMG_0001-9999 when I get there.


 Changing the first 4 characters in the original file name is what I do in the camera.   Your naming scheme results in 260,000 unique file names before repeating. 

I'm not really concerned about file naming collisions since by the time there is a repeat, I'll be in a different date named folder. My Nikon permits me to adjust the first three characters (but not the "_" !) So I can manage 26X26X26X10,000 something over 175 million.  I have a newly acquired D800E to go along with my D800..  So my in camera naming scheme is "D8n_xxxx" for the D800 and  "E8n_xxxx" for the D800E.  So I am good for ~200K images before I need to come up with a different naming scheme.


----------



## ruthiebabe (Mar 24, 2014)

Thanks Guys, lots of useful thoughts here


----------



## erro (Mar 24, 2014)

Relying on the standard camera filenames can be a problem if you shoot with multiple cameras at the same time. Two (or more) cameras can produce photos with the same filename. This is one of the reasons why I rename all my files to:

YYYY-MM-DD hhmmss org-seq-#

This way I get unique filenames to within a second, even if two cameras happen to use the same filename.


----------



## johnbeardy (Mar 24, 2014)

erro said:


> Relying on the standard camera filenames can be a problem if you shoot with multiple cameras at the same time.



Yes, that's a big weakness. Shooting with multiple cameras doesn't mean going round with a couple of DSLRs slung round your neck - phones and tablets sometimes take photos worth keeping. 

John


----------



## Jim Wilde (Mar 24, 2014)

I used to be similarly concerned about the possibility of two identical filenames being created by different cameras on the same day, but the more I think about it the less I understand that concern. I very rarely, if ever, reference images by their filenames within Lightroom....shooting with multiple cameras the only thing I really need to know is which camera produced the specific file I'm looking at, which is easy using the various view options that are available.

Sure, there may be other reasons for wanting to rename, client-facing pros in particular, but for a hobbyist such as me I can no longer see the need to do any renaming at all. Historically, when I thought it was important to prevent duplicate filenames, I renamed on import to add the date to the camera-generated name.....and I'll probably carry on doing that simply to maintain consistency with the rest of my library. But I now think that's the only reason....


----------



## johnbeardy (Mar 24, 2014)

Though the concern isn't limited to identical names. That should only happen rarely, though perhaps more if you're photographing an even with a couple of DSLRs, and you'd probably waste as much time figuring out other inconsistencies caused by not renaming - eg sorting by filename. Renaming all pictures means you have one consistent naming scheme, which is always a good thing.

John


----------



## erro (Mar 24, 2014)

johnbeardy said:


> Yes, that's a big weakness. Shooting with multiple cameras doesn't mean going round with a couple of DSLRs slung round your neck - phones and tablets sometimes take photos worth keeping.
> 
> John



Exactly. I've just returned from a vacation where we were just two people and still had six cameras (one DSLR, one waterproof compact, two iPhones and two iPads). If we've had company there would probably have been 10 cameras or more.


----------



## Jim Wilde (Mar 24, 2014)

Sure, if there are "other inconsistencies" that are a concern. I'm just saying that duplicate filenames isn't one that I'd now worry about.


----------



## clee01l (Mar 24, 2014)

erro said:


> Relying on the standard camera filenames can be a problem if you shoot with multiple cameras at the same time. Two (or more) cameras can produce photos with the same filename...


 Assigning unique file names in the camera is the solution that Nikon and others have provided to avoid file naming collisions when shooting with multiple cameras.  I am a little surprised that more people don't utilize this in camera solution.  I've never been a fan of long file names that need complex rules to decipher. If I have an interest in a file name at all, I'm only needing the 4 char sequence number to distinguish one image form another just like it.


----------



## ruthiebabe (Mar 21, 2014)

Hi, new to Lightroom and want to get filenaming consistent from the start, as an amateur I have had zero consistency in my Windows file structure prior to now, keep changing my mind!

I realise it's personal but I don't want to regret what I decide now. 

I am thinking myname+date+a one word identifer such as'trees' or 'yorkshire'

I would welcome opinions on the following:



whether to include hour+minute
any thoughts on format of date eg yyyy-mmdd or what to avoid
Whether you favour including an identifing word or not? I just think it might help if I inevitably have to search in windows files at any time

Thanks


----------



## MarkNicholas (Mar 26, 2014)

Tony Jay said:


> Mark this is an interesting scheme but would it not be better to put together a prospective renaming scheme that will scale infinitely.
> That last sentence bothers me a bit.
> 
> Tony Jay



Tony,

It will only become an issue after I have shot another 150,000 photos. I don't think my Canon 30D will last that long as I have only shot about 40,000 in 7.5 years ! I will be using my new Canon 5D mark xx long before then and I will have a new numbering system in place.


----------



## Tony Jay (Mar 26, 2014)

MarkNicholas said:


> Tony,
> 
> It will only become an issue after I have shot another 150,000 photos. I don't think my Canon 30D will last that long as I have only shot about 40,000 in 7.5 years ! I will be using my new Canon 5D mark xx long before then and I will have a new numbering system in place.


Fair enough!

Tony Jay


----------



## johnbeardy (Mar 26, 2014)

Potential duplication isn't the core issue, but only because of being less likely. It's handling pictures from multiple cameras, and having naming schemes tied to them. While you can make any system work, it doesn't make it one that should be recommended.


----------

