you just need a database, for starts; and the ability to, in the db, associate tags with the files---then you need a layer that lets you query, and some sorta interface....
chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You know, Alan, I have been having this same issue with my sound work and how much raw material I have created. Once upon a time it was all on tape (and I still have at least 150+ hours of recording on tape), but I've been recording digitally since around 2004 or so and I find that the sheer number of files becomes completely unmanageble. I have tried different naming conventions and that process failed miserably for me. There's never enough in the name to really convey what is contained within. So for the past 2-3 years, I have been going with nothing but TIMESTAMPS. Each file is named after the Year/Month/Date/Time that it was created. My recording software does this automatically, so it's easy, and having a stamped time on the file makes it much easier when I come to questions like, "What was that recording I did right around Halloween of 2005?" It's more useful for me than any other way, and it helps maintain a chronological record. Not sure if that would be a viable naming convention for you and your working processes, but it's the only way that seems to work for me. Chris On Sat, 10 Feb 2007, Alan Sondheim wrote: > Real-time file access and organization - > > Here is the problem, as anyone following my work can attest - there's too > much of it. I'll be at the Openport festival in Chicago the end of the > month, doing a symposium, talk, two performances. So I'm attempting to > organize files for the last, and it's difficult. I narrowed the video/ > audio work to 900 files - and these are edited from the mass of my video/ > audio work in general, running I think around 2500. I've placed the files > in two folders, Performance 1 / 2. The names (titles) of the files convey > nothing. I'm still naming from the film years when one produced "pieces" > with such. So there are 900 names, and I forget what most of these things > are. It's not even easy to tell by extension - there are sound files for > example ending as .mp4, and some of the .mov are set for no framework and > loop; these are most often converted .mp4 in disguise. The problem with > .mp4 in performance - the compression uses a lot of CPU cycles; the result > is that it's actually more difficult to run a number of parallel .mp4 > files (which are quite small) than to run the same from the original very > large .mov or .avi files. > > Thumbnails won't do - they would be too difficult to manage, would clutter > up the screen, wouldn't handle audio. I think of code - G for Geneva, D > for dance, GG for Gruyere, GA for Aletsch glacier work - but then the > individual pieces are still left behind. I've tried brief 2-3 word > descriptions in the titles, but that doesn't seem to help; there are > variations, some of the work is indescribable in terms of a few words, and > so forth. In any case, the directories have to be on the screen when I'm > performing - that's the whole point of it - the ability to choose video/ > audio on the fly. I'm not sure where to take this - memorizing indices, > mnemonics ... The total number of still images that I work with (i.e. not > family) is about 10000. The total of everything is probably around 14000. > > I swim in these. I need a directory structure for everything, coupled with > a search engine; I need keywords and a way to delimit and present files > during performance; I need a system which is easily understandable on the > fly. I'm speaking of approximately 200 gigabytes of material here. I've > been sitting going through file after file; it's a real impossibility! If > the equipment holds up (I've been having difficulties with Quicktime > retaining its preferences which are critical), things should run smoothly > - they'll be more out of control than ever, the semantics of the perform- > ance trying to keep up. But the presentation will, internally, be somewhat > scattershot. I work with laser scan, motion capture, dancers, mappings and > remappings of the human body, landscape, very low frequency and shortwave > radio, filtered and unfiltered recordings of various musical instruments, > images from the problematic of 'wilderness,' video and audio bounced and > transformed across the country, material from Second Life performance, > materials from programs like Netstumbler (tracking wireless), modified > travel footage, local histories and architectures of early mass transit, > sexuality, the 'edges' of languages, choreographies, interactivities, > codework and codework software, Mathematica, and video/audio noise across > the Net, offline as well. All of these areas are subsetted; they spread > like tentacles across my workspace, (in)(co)herent, lost and found; now > when I perform, I'm part audience, seeing the (re)presentation for the > first time, trying more desperately than ever to hold everything together. > This is a world of the forgotten, unorganized in relation to 'the clean > and proper body,' inert to deconstruction (which is collapsed by error, > circles of confusion, exhaustion, loss), open to Levinas' existence and > existents. Never do I know where this has gone, will go. But I still need > something of a system, something of a path through the dark woods. (And of > course any suggestions greatly appreciated.) > > - Alan > Lewis LaCook Director of Web Development Abstract Outlooks Media 440-989-6481 http://www.abstractoutlooks.com Abstract Outlooks Media - Premium Web Hosting, Development, and Art Photography http://www.lewislacook.org lewislacook.org - New Media Poetry and Poetics http://www.xanaxpop.org Xanax Pop - the Poetry of Lewis LaCook --------------------------------- Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
