Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Nikon Capture and View NX' started by Palouse, Jul 7, 2008.
Found this on Photo.Net. http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00Q5Ig
That's interesting, Nick. Thanks for sharing it.
Why would anyone want to open a file that's on a different drive than the drive that stores the program files? In the very least, it seems reasonable to me to copy the image files onto the drive that is storing the program files before opening them in the program.
I store all my NEF's on an outboard hard drive. However, I don't store any changes to them, I make my changes to the NEF then convert to TIFF or jpg, depending on what I want to do with the file.
Why on earth would yo want to limit somebody like that? It shouldn't matter what drive any file is on. On some systems (Unix types for example) you might not even know what drive the file is on.
Actually, it's considered good computer practice to store data on a different drive than where your executable programs reside. For no other reason, it's easier to backup your data that way. Others with more computer experience than me can chime in with other reasons...
In addition, ideally the operating system should reside on its own partition, as well.
Oh, heavens no. Not when you're keeping your OS separate from your data, and certainly not when you have multiple people/machines working on images.
You folks are obviously in a different league, so I look forward to the discussion about this.
EDIT: My follow up would be that if it's so darned important to be able to store data files on a different hard drive, why in the world would Nikon design their system requiring that the data and program files be on the same drive? Is Nikon truly that far over the top? (Not rhetorical questions.)
If that's the case... There's a new HUGE reason to use something else. Not only are my images not on the same "drive" as my installed applications, they're not even on the same machine. The only reason I would see you needing to copy them before editing is if you only have read access on the secondary or remote drive. There's no other reason their implementation won't work.
Maybe NX2.1 needs a feature allowing changes to be stored in a database or db file of some sort for people needing remote limited storage...
The issue noted in the reference article definitely sounds like a bug to me.
i don;t get it. i have always stored the NX program (from version 1.0 until 2.0) on the "C" drive and my NEF images on the "D" drive on my win XP machine. Never have seen the problem mentioned in the article.
I don't think it's a case of that being a design feature - they have a big-time defect on their hands.
Maybe we're jumping to conclusions assuming the veracity of the statement. I see on plausible explanation for instability of data depending on which drive it's stored. As for storage of data, in my career in computing as far back as 1983 one did NOT store data on the same drive as the executable code. For PC's ,Applications on C:, data on D:
I'm going to pay attention at home. MY XP desktop has some pics on C and others on D. I wonder if the few "crashes" I have experienced have been when working with D files?
Incidentally, the Cafe has so far generated more interest on the topic than the original post on Photo.Net.
Wow, I'm amazed to find these kinds of bugs in such a program. This is a pro tool, and no way a pro is going to have all his files on his C:\ drive. And who would write code that requires such a thing. Don't those guys at Nikon Software follow computer 101?
(Mike, if you want in depth info, there should be FAQs out there. In short, there are a number of advantages that make it proper basic computing to separate your OS and software from your data. Your data will change more often, resulting in fragmentation. Mixing all those ever changing bits with your software bits means everything is all over your harddrive, making it slower to find anything and run programs. Also, in the case of system failure, you can format c:\ without losing your data, docs, photos etc. So, it makes your system faster as well as safer, even if you're only using a single physical drive with two partitions).
My initial joy of using the new CNX has ran into too much frustration, not because of this issue but because of the combination of issues. It has so much potential though!
Well stated. While most computers come with one large partition, it's better to have a smaller partition for your operating system and put data on other drives. I have all my programs installed on my C: drive along with the OS, but all of my media is on my D: drive, a physically different hard disk.
This is very very common. I find it interesting that Nikon would allow this type of bug to remain and recommend people copy their files to their program drive. Ridiculous. An extra step in an already extremely complicated workflow... Actually extra steps, because after copying to edit, you have to move the files off the drive... Nuts!
I'm a bit skeptical that this bug does indeed exist. Bill's post is the only one about the issue, and has not been confirmed by anyone.
That makes utterly no sense to me. First, each NEF is encoded with the "as-shot" settings, no matter where it resides. NX does not override these data.
Second, any changes made to a NEF file are written into that NEF file, regardless of what drive it is on.
Third, I use separate drives ALL THE TIME, and have never, ever seen anything odd happen.
The ONLY thing I can think is that if you have DUPLICATE NEFs and you edit one copy of the file, the other file will remain untouched (as you might expect).
The poster's message is confusing, to say the least. Not a very informative post if you ask me...
I've been using Nikon software less than a year. In the past, if there has been a major bug, has Nikon not sent a message about it to registered users via the same messaging system that they automatically deliver messages about updates?
I don't recall any warnings etc. about having your image files not being stored on a separate drive. I played with my home desk top for about 2 hours and found no difference with files from drive C vs. drive D for either NX2 or NX 1.X.
I'm incline to ignore the thread on Photo.net! I even have a few files that were originally worked on on my tablet PC and then moved to the Desk top machine. I have a portable USB2 drive that I use to "store" and transfer stuff between machines and the home and office, when I get time I will see if that generates any issues.
I think we're giving this "bug" too much attention. My experience mirrors others, if you will pardon the pun. I always have my images on a separate physical drive from the program and back up to external drives. Like Jason I have never had a scintilla of a hint of this type of behavior. Before we leap to beat up on Nikon I would like to see this bug replicated by someone else who has creds.
I never store the image files on the same drive where the program itself resides -- and the same for all raw converters I use. Never have had a problem like that.