Photo Transfer
May 9, 2020 08:42:14 #
I think now my biggest obstacle was changing from Windows 7 to Windows 10. I finally figured that out. I transferred all photos last night.
May 9, 2020 15:48:18 #
dave.m wrote:
I'm guessing you have CF not SD card - one of the great advantages quoted originally for SD is that there are no pins to bend either with the card or within the camera...
I didn't know that. I still feel the handling can wear the contacts.
As for speed, while not blasing, it only takes me seconds to upload a typical session worth of photos. Then again, I mostly just take high res jpgs.
May 9, 2020 17:19:56 #
PHRubin wrote:
I didn't know that. I still feel the handling can wear the contacts.
As for speed, while not blasing, it only takes me seconds to upload a typical session worth of photos. Then again, I mostly just take high res jpgs.
As for speed, while not blasing, it only takes me seconds to upload a typical session worth of photos. Then again, I mostly just take high res jpgs.
Bottom line - if it works for you don't fix it!
May 10, 2020 11:10:26 #
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
Card reader vs. USB to Camera
I do card reader but my wife uses a cable from her P1000 to her Windows 10 PC. They both work. However, as a general observation, using the cable to the camera is limiting in a number of ways because it depends on a whole additional layer of programming (firmware, probably) and uses power in the camera. In addition, I'd worry more about wear and tear on the mini USB port on the camera than I would about it on a SD card or card reader. I also find that it's a lot slower than a direct read of the card using a card reader that is either built into your computer or a good one that plugs into your computer. I note in passing that not all card readers are equal either in quality or in speed. A few extra dollars may be worth it - user choice. If you don't have huge sessions to download then speed may not be an issue. For us, some days there are several GB's of files and speed is an issue just for the nuisance value.
BTW, the speed of a download is limited by the slowest link. That link can be a USB 2.0 spec anywhere in the chain which can be the port on the computer, the reader or even the cable. When you get to USB 3.x the speed improves radically but not all USB 3.x speeds are equal. The speed at which an SD card can be read depends on the specs for the card. I always buy fast ones which are usually also of somewhat better quality (reputation at least). The particular camera you are connecting by cable can be the slow link but that's uncertain.
Here's a little bit of advice I gave my fellow oldsters when teaching computers and, once, camera basics. Using a catalog program such as LR is a reasonable choice but I always recommend a download direct to the file system and only then an import to the catalog, with or without culling first with a different program (I recommend FastRawViewer even for JPG).
But here's the important advice: do not under any circumstances allow a brand-specific program to do the import to your file system because it may create its own proprietary file structure inside the computer's own. That is not only not necessary but it means that if you get another camera of a different make or even a different family within brand you will have issues. Just a heads up. Cameras from many makers such as Nikon and Canon will come with a CD and such programs or even offer them as free downloads. Be aware and be independent.
I do card reader but my wife uses a cable from her P1000 to her Windows 10 PC. They both work. However, as a general observation, using the cable to the camera is limiting in a number of ways because it depends on a whole additional layer of programming (firmware, probably) and uses power in the camera. In addition, I'd worry more about wear and tear on the mini USB port on the camera than I would about it on a SD card or card reader. I also find that it's a lot slower than a direct read of the card using a card reader that is either built into your computer or a good one that plugs into your computer. I note in passing that not all card readers are equal either in quality or in speed. A few extra dollars may be worth it - user choice. If you don't have huge sessions to download then speed may not be an issue. For us, some days there are several GB's of files and speed is an issue just for the nuisance value.
BTW, the speed of a download is limited by the slowest link. That link can be a USB 2.0 spec anywhere in the chain which can be the port on the computer, the reader or even the cable. When you get to USB 3.x the speed improves radically but not all USB 3.x speeds are equal. The speed at which an SD card can be read depends on the specs for the card. I always buy fast ones which are usually also of somewhat better quality (reputation at least). The particular camera you are connecting by cable can be the slow link but that's uncertain.
Here's a little bit of advice I gave my fellow oldsters when teaching computers and, once, camera basics. Using a catalog program such as LR is a reasonable choice but I always recommend a download direct to the file system and only then an import to the catalog, with or without culling first with a different program (I recommend FastRawViewer even for JPG).
But here's the important advice: do not under any circumstances allow a brand-specific program to do the import to your file system because it may create its own proprietary file structure inside the computer's own. That is not only not necessary but it means that if you get another camera of a different make or even a different family within brand you will have issues. Just a heads up. Cameras from many makers such as Nikon and Canon will come with a CD and such programs or even offer them as free downloads. Be aware and be independent.
May 10, 2020 12:21:33 #
May 10, 2020 15:21:07 #
a6k wrote:
...But here's the important advice: do not under any circumstances allow a brand-specific program to do the import to your file system because it may create its own proprietary file structure inside the computer's own...
Different programs create different structures, but ALL allow the user to specify the target folder, thus eliminating the issue.
May 10, 2020 15:22:22 #
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
PHRubin wrote:
Different programs create different structures, but ALL allow the user to specify the target folder, thus eliminating the issue.
Well it would if they did not use their own database structures inside the OS folder.
May 10, 2020 16:03:40 #
a6k wrote:
Well it would if they did not use their own database structures inside the OS folder.
I stand corrected - ...all simple ones... I have a few versions of utilities that simply move files from computer to PC. All of them may do nothing else except maybe change the file name. I didn't think of those like Lightroom with their structures.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.