Skip to main content
F
FeedbackCommunityMember
Inspiring
June 4, 2011
Not Prioritized

P: Delete Images on Card after Import

  • June 4, 2011
  • 113 replies
  • 5658 views

I would love to get an option to let LR automatically delete images from the card after they have been successfully imported. Images on the card that have not been imported, are let alone, of course.

It would serve two purposes for me:
1. It would save me deleting the images manually.
2. It would dramatically improve the experience of importing images from one card into different catalogs.

An incremental import of subsets of images on one card into a single catalog (but e.g., different folders) is well supported by the "New Photos" filter in the import dialog. However, when I switch catalogs while downloading images from a card -- because some subset of images on the card needs to go into a different catalog -- the "New Photos" filter no longer works. As a result, I have to remember and wade through a lot of images I already imported into a different catalog.

I realise that deleting images from the card is a sensitive issue. It must not happen prior to having verified that the image indeed has been copied (or converted) to a new location. Picasa supports this double checking.

As a safety net, Lightroom could offer a "restore deleted images" feature that would resurrect deleted files from cards. Users will find such a feature tremendously useful for other occasions as well.

I'd be happy with the following compromises as well:

* The option to delete images after import is available only if one activates a second backup location.

* Images are not deleted but the tracking of which images have already been imported is extended to work across catalogs. A record of what images still need to be imported could be associated with a currently inserted card.

    113 replies

    Show previous replies
    M
    Mark Sirota
    Known Participant
    June 9, 2011
    The recommendation is a bit dated, I believe. I think it stems from poor filesystem implementations at the edges -- implementers did a good job with things like format and read and write, but did less well with lesser-used functions like delete, rename, etc. You could trust your camera to do a good job with format and write, but couldn't trust it as far with delete. So it's safest to treat the card as a format-and-create device in the camera and a read-only device in the computer.

    Whether those concerns are well-founded today is unknown to me, but the resulting workflow is excellent for most purposes. It promotes data integrity in a strong way and is not inconvenient for the vast majority. So regardless of the origins, it has become dogma.

    In this thread, TK has suggested a rare use case for which for which this doesn't work well -- he wants to import a subset of the images into one catalog, and a different subset into another. Many photographers solve this by using a different card for each shoot, but if that wasn't done at shooting time there's no good workaround in LR today.
    areohbee
    areohbee
    Legend
    June 9, 2011
    I see what you are saying TK, perhaps people have jumped to some wrong conclusions and that's what's stuck - wouldn't be the first time. - Cheers.
    F
    FeedbackCommunityMemberAuthor
    Inspiring
    June 9, 2011
    Rob, I do not know what the motivation for the "format" recommendation is. I can speculate that whatever the camera does to the card, it has been tested to work with this formatting. However, if the camera does not create a valid file system, preventing you from just deleting files, your camera firmware is at fault, not your workflow. I cannot think of a good reason to always format in camera. You should ask the people who make this recommendation.

    Would the same people recommend that you should not delete files from your USB stick, but regularly format it (in a special device, of course, not with a computer)? Camera memory cards and flash memory based USB sticks are block storage devices that do not differ in any fundamental way.
    areohbee
    areohbee
    Legend
    June 9, 2011
    So then why do you suppose so many experts and camera manuals recommend to reformat in camera vs. delete? - The common "understanding" is that its for technical reasons, not just convenience.
    F
    FeedbackCommunityMemberAuthor
    Inspiring
    June 9, 2011
    Which card bits get written to is controlled by the card controller (not the camera). It uses a wear balancing algorithm. I'd be very surprised if the camera could actually get down to this level. I'm pretty sure the camera just does what an operating system does.

    On the contrary, if one is unlucky the camera does a full-format, i.e., cleans bits that the operating system leaves alone with its "quick format" (or simple deletion of files). In this case the camera would wear out the card sooner than the operating system. Your camera does not seem to perform a full format and I don't know if any camera does, but what it does to the card can only be equivalent or worse what a computer does, I'm pretty sure.
    areohbee
    areohbee
    Legend
    June 8, 2011
    Card bits can only be written so many times, so the in-camera formatting supposedly includes an algorithm for distributing writes, to avoid writing the front part of the card over and over again and the rear part approximately never, improving longevity.

    (Seems I've heard video performance cited too, but I'm not sure about that and I don't understand it)

    But based on my recent experience of being able to re-claim photos I'd taken a long time ago after multiple in-camera reformats, the rationale is suspect, in my mind. Sometimes old news is wrong news...

    In any case, if there still is, even sometimes, a good reason to always reformat in-camera, I wish Adobe would just explain, maybe as part of the "Are You Sure" prompt that comes up when the user enables the delete after import option.

    I mean, defragging wears out your hard drive, but a lot of people do it. Makes 'em a little faster and/or allows you to run 'em fuller, but you have to replace sooner - user's prerogative.
    F
    FeedbackCommunityMemberAuthor
    Inspiring
    June 8, 2011
    The mantra to always use the camera's format function doesn't make much sense. The card uses a standard file format (typically one of the FAT versions). PC/Mac operating systems can deal with these formats and won't corrupt the card when deleting files.

    I have used the format function of my camera perhaps once or twice in the beginning. From then on, I always just deleted the files within the top folder and left the top folder untouched. Number of problems encountered with this approach: Zero.
    areohbee
    areohbee
    Legend
    June 8, 2011
    Yeah, I think people are a little "over eager" to cite "safeguard" sometimes, but I really don't know, in this case.

    I sometimes delete photos from card via computer and sometimes re-format in camera, depending on stuff - never had a problem with the former. But TK's workflow is what's at stake for him here. He may still re-format afterward in camera sometimes, or all the time, I really don't know, but optimizing ones workflow, even if unconventional, in my opinion, is a good reason to do stuff.

    If he were the only one on the planet that wanted this, or it took a lot of work to implement, then I'd agree with John Beardsworth: "tough luck", but neither of those things is true.

    Final thought: Sometimes vendors create mantras to avoid having to explain the real deal, realizing that smart people know when *not* to follow the pied piper...

    Does the fact that many other software's have this option indicate that Adobe is more concerned with our safety than the others? - my guess: they were just too busy doing other things...
    F
    FeedbackCommunityMemberAuthor
    Inspiring
    June 8, 2011
    I've always heard the mantra that rather than deleting the card on the computer, you should format it in the camera instead for various safety-related reasons. That's what I do, after I've verified that the images have been copied to two locations on hard drives.

    That said, most other import programs have the function you're asking for. I think Nikon Transfer has it. I don't think the omission from Lightroom is a safeguard; it is simply that Adobe probably has a different workflow in mind than the one you propose (and this time they agree with me; maybe it's just a bug that will be "fixed" soon).
    F
    FeedbackCommunityMemberAuthor
    Inspiring
    June 8, 2011
    I'm not sure I can add much to this lengthy debate here and elsewhere, but from my perspective:-

    • I have never (that I am aware of) lost an image from a faulty import or disk crash immediately after import.

    • I have, however, accidentally deleted images I thought were imported but weren't.

    • whatever the pros and cons of doing it one way or another, I cannot understand why Adobe insists on treating users of a piece of professional software like they need to be hand held like this. Allow the option (with warnings if really necessary) and let people do their thing and take the consequences.



    For people who do want to delete after import, there is a reasonably straightforward way to do this (at least on LR3.4/MacOS).

    2. set up and save an import preset the way you want it, but importing from e.g. files on your main disk so you can select 'move'

    4. when you want to import from a memory card, select the DCIM folder in the card under 'files', not in 'devices'.

    6. the import preset will probably show (edited) after it - reselect the original preset

    8. none of the copy to dng/copy/move/add buttons show as selected, and you still can't click on 'move', but underneath it should say 'move photos to new location... etc'

    10. click on 'import'



    There may be other permutations of this principle which will work, but that's what worked for me.

    Hopefully Adobe won't flag this as a bug and 'fix' it.
    Show more replies
    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
    Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices