No announcement yet.

Exclude Duplicates from Import

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    This discussion is a bit hilarious. User MattSpew suggests a totally reasonable and amazingly easy to implement feature and half the responses are why he shouldn't want it or how to work around the missing functionality.

    Good reasons why you might want this feature:
    -importing from a memory card to a laptop while on a trip, but it isn't your primary workstation. This way when you get back home you still just slam your memory card in the reader and go fast instead of messing around with network connections and permissions to get the files from the laptop. (my use case)
    -import from phone - but you want to keep copies there to view
    -just because you want to work that way

    There seems to be some argument over what a duplicate is. I suggest that a simple check-box in the import dialog with the label "Don't import files of the same name in target directory" (or something a little tighter here). Then on import, if the file coming shares its name with one in import directory it is ignored. If files are ignored, offer to display a list of them at the end.

    Easy. Give me source access and I'll code it myself tonight!



    • #17
      I bet you could write an import routine that fulfils your needs, I coded my personal import routine about ten years ago and it still works as needed. But it's very hard to code a routine that satisfies everyone.


      • #18
        daver99... If you are serious about your offer, it seems that you should be able to code something up in a batch file or compile an EXE using some version of C then launch as an external editor directly from the GUI... even without any access to any source code.


        • #19
          I would have never thought something so 'simple' would be met with so much resistance, huge assumptions about my process and photo storage and general condescending comments towards my query.

          In my opinion the whole importer in ACDSee needs to be rebuilt. It doesn't even look at the EXIF data during the import.
          Photos are imported by file header "file created", not EXIF "date taken".

          Lightroom(expensive) and Picasa(free) can exclude duplicates on import. Over and out!
          Last edited by MattSpew; 03-28-2017, 06:57 PM.


          • #20
            Originally posted by GusPanella View Post
            I got the impression the issue was with card imports. No matter. In the end, I think you are setting yourself up for failure by keeping the "same" file in multiple places. It is just too difficult to keep things straight. A better workflow would be to focus on keeping each image in only one place... then avoid processes or applications that put the same stuff in two places thus forcing file acrobatics that will always have some doubt (Or course, file backup is an entirely different concept).

            ​In the end, you'd be well served to keep one master copy and one backup... and avoid all processes that threaten that approach.

            Gus - could you outline your system for me? I am CONSTANTLY running into this problem! One thing I want to do with ACDSee is get rid of all my (huge backlog) of old photos. I'm just a mom photographing her family, but oh my, I have like 20,000 dupes! And now I have an iPad that takes wonderful pics, so throw that into the mix.



            • #21
              At one point, I had a process that was very detailed. Folder based organization where each folder was for a specific topic. I then made the mistake of not keeping on top of my sorting and filing. Combined this with local storage, network attached storage, online web site, and online galleries along with a haphazard backup process... my file management was a mess. I also intentionally had RAW files, highRes JPGs, and lowRes JPGs of the same image. I guess these would be considered intentional dupes. Not to mention, having the same files in multiple places. Blech.
              At the time I was doing mostly sports photography and was shooting around 75,000 (not a typo) images per year. I had 3 years worth... of which 30%+ were waiting for attention. I would meet the immediate needs, but the longer term sorting never got the attention originally intended.
              ​Although detailed organization can be good, for me it turned out to be a mistake. I just couldn't keep up with the filing/sorting process I was trying to do. So I did a ground-up rework of my process. After every photoshoot, I would immediately put all the images from that specific shoot into a single folder. I name the folder with the 1.1.2017.[event_name] format (yes, this is a bit redundant as all this information is in the image file). I keep each folder as a sub-folder for the year. This is where ACDSee comes in... ACDSee allowed me to quickly add IPTC attributes. Then I could easily search for files easily and quickly.
              ​Unfortunately, there was no good way to sort through 50,000+ files with ease. I did the work in a brute force fashion over a few months. I know... I know... not the best answer.... but I could not figure out an easier way to go through all the images and make sure I did not delete an important one.
              ​First, I figured out where my master copy would be... the master copy is the "originals" would stay. I considered all other locations as "secondary locations" that can be deleted at any time without worry.

              ​The process was to basically sort all the mismanaged files by the date they were taken into directories in the master file location. Now, this is where the brute force comes in.... I looked at every single file. But, similar files were all in the same directory, it make it relatively quick to go through.
              (I could not figure out a fool proof way to separate the good from the bad. File size, file data, actual image, or combinations of the three could end up deleting an important files.
              Your mileage may vary!!! For example, it is possible for some that a couple files having the exact same size may not be a big deal if one or two were deleted incorrectly. My OCD did not allow me to take that chance.

              All I can say is never again. The sorting of 50,000 images was enough punishment to convince me to keep on top of things by date. It only takes 5-15 minutes on the days that I have images. I can always seem to find that time. I religiously keep everything organized by the day the image was taken and use ACDSee to manage the IPTC keywords and headings.


              • #22
                Awesome response, Gus!! I have exactly the situation you have in paragraph 1. At this point I'm only say, 30,000 photos, but... I do not have RAW, phew.

                Can you tell me what IPTC attributes are? The main thing I'm interested in ACDSee for is the organization capabilities... I don't edit much. (Not that my photos are that good, just a mom with a camera, so don't need to edit much.)



                • #23
                  Originally posted by GusPanella View Post
                  All I can say is never again. The sorting of 50,000 images was enough punishment to convince me to keep on top of things by date. It only takes 5-15 minutes on the days that I have images. I can always seem to find that time. I religiously keep everything organized by the day the image was taken and use ACDSee to manage the IPTC keywords and headings.
                  Agree. The most welcome advantage of this is, that it can be done fully automatic. The import routine creates all folders as needed and moves the files according to the exif data. Then in a second step you need add some descriptive meta data. But at least for me this can take much more time then just a couple of minutes. I've just added some iptc keywords to a bunch a photos taken in 2012 after half an hour of investigation. The reason is simple, in 2012 the info wasn't jet available. We also add meta data based on the designation of our customers to simplify on line searches.


                  • #24
                    Delayed response due to travel.
                    ​For details on IPTC, I would go to ""

                    ​In general, IPTC provides descriptions (standards?) of attribute fields associated with photos. The two attached images generally show the feature in ACDSee where you edit those attributes. When you add/edit attributes, you can later use ACDSee (or other tools) to sort/find files based on the attributes..


                    • #25
                      Thank you!


                      • #26
                        Here is a a system that works. First in the Options- file management section - Overwriting duplicate images click the option to "ask". Then forget about the import function. Open the camera card with Windows file explorer, select the "view" menu and choose " details" and sort backwards by clicking on the date column twice - the little arrow in the column header should be pointed down. Newest files will be on top. Select all the files you wish to import... and hit "Control c" to copy them. In ACDSee go the the folder you want to import them to and hit "Control v" to paste them. For any duplicates, ACDSee will ask if you want to skip, overwrite or rename. At the bottom of this dialogue box there is an option to apply this decision to all remaining conflicts - select it, and "skip" and VOILA!! only the new files will be copied.

                        This only works of course if you are copying to a folder that may contain duplicates. If you, like me, file photos by date, any of my May 2017 pics go to a folder called 2017-05. If you have a different filing system you will have to figure out where you want things, but the principle is the same - you get the option to skip all duplicates.

                        Here's the next trick - in Manage Mode, Tools menu there is a "Find Duplicates" function which you can use to keep your database clear of dups if you so want. Be careful though, if your camera has reset the numbering at any point you can have duplicate file names but different images. I never bother. Disc space is cheap, and my system keeps me free of duplicates unless I deliberately make one,