Summer cleaning - deleting images (Page 2): Sorry to hear this. I can only imagine your frustration. I would have ranted about that for weeks after hearing about it.

Picdude Loc: Ohio

Rongnongno wrote:

I do wish my own family (mother side) had this per... (show quote)

Sorry to hear this. I can only imagine your frustration. I would have ranted about that for weeks after hearing about it.

wteffey Loc: Ocala, FL USA

I try to keep a usable copy of all images of a personal or historical nature, but I am in the "knockout" round for everything else. I keep my personal "10 best" of butterflies, for example, and delete everything else. New images must make the ten best list or they are gone.

pecohen Loc: Central Maine

Rongnongno wrote:

Like many I am a digital pack rat but I have a fla... (show quote)

I have a similar project planned for this winter and with much the same criteria in mind. The project includes moving images from old CD's and DVD's to a big hard drive.

What I'm still thinking about is the fact that in many instance I have both an original JPEG (right out of the camera) and an edited version. I'll have to give some thought about which to keep - my editing skills have improved over the years and so has my editing software. On the other hand am I really going to ever go back and edit all of those old photos?

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Rongnongno wrote:

Like many I am a digital pack rat but I have a flaw as far as pack rat goes, every so and then I 'clean' meaning I savagely cut on the clutter.

What would be YOUR criteria to clean up your own pictures?

Mainly duplicates, well, virtually duplicates. I might take a dozen shots from different angles/different settings. Eventually, I have to delete the extras.

Poor quality is my second target.

Finally, I go through and ask myself why I'm keeping a certain image. Usually, there's no reason.

Doing this is much less expensive than buying larger drives.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Shellback wrote:

We kept them all and my brother is scanning them when he has time. Dad not only had personal photos but a lot from WWII when he was a squadron leader in Italy (those we are turning over to the WWII archive folks after they are scanned).

We consider it family history and it's easy to keep in digital format - something to be enjoyed by the future generations...

Speaking of scanning and donating, I have three local newspapers from the 1950s. I scanned all the pages, put the files onto discs, and brought everything to the local libraries. They weren't interested.

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

[quote=Rongnongno]Between yesterday and this early afternoon I killed 5,395 pictures, some as old as 2004.
quote]

In my photography/computer equipment inventory, I have several 4TB USB drives. After a shoot, I immediately delete any serious photo flaws, such as out of focus etc. I keep everything else and even though I'm retired, I don't want to spend the time to go through and delete old photos.

Since all folders are dated, yyyy-mmdd, I am able to go back in time and see for example: what a train station etc. looked like years ago.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

I guess I am much less of a pack rat than I thought!!!! :shock: :mrgreen: :lol: :lol: :lol:

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

Rongnongno wrote:

I guess I much less of a pack rat than I thought!!!! :

Yea, you're not a real pack rat !

Moles Loc: South Carolina

I would recommend Photo Mechanic from Camera bits. It's the fastest way by far to review photos. Designed for sports photographers who take 1000 photos at an event, but only send 85 or so to the editors within a short time frame. You would do the opposite, by tagging the ones you want to keep, and after saving them, delete the rest. It will change your life for only $150.

Rongnongno wrote:

Like many I am a digital pack rat but I have a fla... (show quote)

anotherview Loc: California

My criteria similar to yours. But when in doubt about an image's value, I keep it, storage being inexpensive.

Further, I've had the experience several times of reviewing older images that at the first time of viewing them I believed them either unworthy of further attention or deemed them beyond my skill to develop properly. Later, I made something out of some these images.

Result: I delete images with caution on initial review.

Have a good day.

Rongnongno wrote:

Like many I am a digital pack rat but I have a fla... (show quote)

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Rongnongno wrote:

Like many I am a digital pack rat but I have a fla... (show quote)

As I have only been at this digital thing (refugee from film) for about 9 months I find that if I kill them as I go there aren't that many left. Probably only about 25% make it past the initial "cut" and about 75% of the rest are keepers.

DrPhrogg Loc: NJ

Rongnongno wrote:

Like many I am a digital pack rat but I have a fla... (show quote)

I keep 2 folders. 1) Those important to me & 2) Those more ordinary. I cut those out of focus, not showing what I want, generally poor snapshots. I also kill duplicates as long as I have 2-3 better. I usually do this on first review. In the "important" folder, I have a folder for originals, for modified, and for watermarked for sharing.

What I find ordinary will sometimes fascinate my kids. (and grandkids)

weberwest Loc: Ferndale WA

Very much the same, I do extensive travel photography, weed out a lot of pictures already in-camera on the trip, then more when I finally work on them at home. I have to repeat the process every now and then, as I find it hard to let go, but find that time and more distance to the trip eventually heals that reflexive retention attitude.

Shellback Loc: North of Cheyenne Bottoms Wetlands - Kansas

jerryc41 wrote:

Speaking of scanning and donating, I have three local newspapers from the 1950s. I scanned all the pages, put the files onto discs, and brought everything to the local libraries. They weren't interested.

It's tough to find anyone who wants to document history anymore - to make sure they are kept forever - post them in facebook ;)

dickwilber Loc: Indiana (currently)

Moles wrote:

I would recommend Photo Mechanic from Camera bits. It's the fastest way by far to review photos. Designed for sports photographers who take 1000 photos at an event, but only send 85 or so to the editors within a short time frame. You would do the opposite, by tagging the ones you want to keep, and after saving them, delete the rest. It will change your life for only $150.

Sounds really interesting. I shot sports for years and learned to be pretty brutal in editing. But it was a matter of eliminating - first the unworthy (bad exposure, focus, etc.), then go back through to get rid of the less interesting, virtual duplicates, etc. On some assignments I would have to go back through half a dozen times making ever more difficult judgements, to finally get down to an acceptable number.