TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2001-04 > 0986139841


From: Jim Patrick <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Numbering photographs
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 11:47:05 -0400
References: <48.13af3b85.27f7e38a@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <48.13af3b85.27f7e38a@aol.com>


Lillian Cain wrote:
> I have about 40 years of photographs, all in original store envelopes
>with negatives, and mostly undated/unlabeled. Although the pix thus far seem
>to be in good condition, I am very concerned about preserving them properly
>and want to put all of the pix and negatives in separate archival
>photo/negative sleeves. As I do this I want to number the pictures (either
>in pencil on the back of the photo and/or on a label on the outside of the
>sleeve). I also hope to identify the people and give at least an approximate
>date to each photo.

> Have any of you numbered your pix? I am very interested in knowing what
>you have used for a numbering system and how well it has worked.

Apologies in advance for the length, but I have used dozens of
numbering systems over a period of 20 years and am currently in the
middle of a 35,000 photograph archival project.

IMO the _only_ system is non-significant or sequential numbers.
This is an opinion shared by several major (USA) archives. Assign
number "10000001" to the first photo, "10000002" to the second photo,
etc. If you stay with eight digits or less the filename is compatible
with most past systems and CD-ROM writing file-systems.

Use the database software to classify families, individuals, views,
and other attributes. That's what database software is made to do.
If you find one software program inadequate, you can always export to
another program's format. You can't do that with the filenames.

There are dozens of problems once you assign significant numbers or
coding schemes like a family code: PATRxxxx and DEANxxxx. The most
common is that of mixed family photos where there is one Patrick and
one Dean in a single photograph.

The second problem is that once you've assigned such a system you've
reduced the numbers allowed. At this time you yourself may not have
so many photos to use up all the numbers, but it is a restriction that
has future consequences.

Other problems arise with mis-identified photos and mistakes. Also
under this category are photos that may be 'officially' a certain
family picture, but is of more significance for the background or
something else that isn't obvious when you assign the filename.

Similar to the philosophy that TMG uses; a non-significant filename
system allows conflicting information and multiple classifications for
any exhibit(s).

This thread: