I've looked for similar tools for completely different purposes. I came to the conclusion that I was looking for a program to force me to do what I already should have been doing within my current operation system: create a good organizational structure withing my folders and subfolders, give files informative names, etc. Most of the programs that I looked at would have been useless if I was as lazy with them as I was with my operating system. Good organization still seems to be a human thing, not a computer thing.

Of course, I was looking at this stuff several years ago - eternity in computer time. I'll be interested in the responses to see what is out there now.

I'm sorely tempted to try to live up to my name here, and offer to code something. However, time and inexperience conspire against me.
Sounds like one of these things which would be simple to do but noone does it.

Do you use Vista? That seems to have decent searching/indexing capability built in.

BobRogers wrote: Good organization still seems to be a human thing, not a computer thing.

Absolutely. I've been tossing up whether or not to simply use Windows Explorer, with its built-in search capability and so on. There's something very Zen about that. It automatically launches apps when required, no problem. It seems crazy to go looking for a database application to sort all of these different files when my laptop already has one built in.

Certainly, up until now that's what I've been using. But now I am finding an increasing need to use a lot of keywords for searching. All of my pics, for example, already have enormous file names that clearly indicate the country, the location, the subject, the name of the photographer and lastly the pic's number (as given by the camera). Very handy, but I can only sort them one way - alphabetically by country name. The names are quite big already, I doubt I want to make them any bigger!

I have been wondering if I can store a list of keywords or search strings in the Properties box. But I'm not sure that I can search on it.

Excel could be a candidate for this. (akin to My Big Fat Greek Wedding's all purpose solution of "use Windex" I say "use Excel")

Columns containing all the tags you need, each row is a file. You can select the data and sort it alphabetically based on any column, and all you need to do is set hyperlinks in one column which point to the file, and that would launch it no questions asked.
Unfortunately this method will probably have you busy for months creating a massively complex spreadsheet.

Codemonkey wrote: Excel could be a candidate for this.

That's an interesting suggestion, thanks. I'm going to give it some thought...

I'm definitely interested in using software I've already got!

I've just started playing with a trial version of a DAM program called MediaDex (no relation to Windex, as far as I can tell). It seems quite powerful, but I've still got a lot to learn about it before I can decide if its what I need.

Codemonkey wrote: Excel could be a candidate for this. (akin to My Big Fat Greek Wedding's all purpose solution of "use Windex" I say "use Excel")

Can't figure how to take a directory and export the names of the files into an excel column.

To me it's a bit of quick VBscript or something like that.

I can't say I thought the practicalities through properly. :(

BobRogers wrote: Can't figure how to take a directory and export the names of the files into an excel column.

I would start with dos command to create a text file of the directory:

dir > pathfilename.txt

Then import the text file into excel. You might need to use the "text to columns" tool, but it should be pretty easy to get a column that has all the filenames listed.

Very nice. I probably could have figured that out back in 1984.

Just a thought -
Are you any good with MS Access Simmo?

I've built many a tool along this lines using Access or SQL for various applications. While it is quite possible to launch certain objects from within the database (using OLE object linking), for your purposes, it would probably be best and far easier to simply reference the specific file location or the file itself and double-click to launch its resident app.

I use an Access db to index the contents (or more/less specifically, the projects) on each hard drive. It helps me to be able to find a project. Each hard drive gets a number (which is the Primary Key within the database) and a name (usually referencing the year or portion of a year for which the hard drive was used). In a related and linked table, I list the project contents of each drive (such as Timbuktu Symphony Concerts Jan 2006-Dec 2006).

Folders themselves can be further indexed, but that gets a little more tricky.

It really all depends on:
1 - how good you are with relational databases
2 - how much time and effort you want to put into creating it
3 - how much time and effort you want to put into maintaining it (this last one actually is quite a bit...)

Cheers-
J.

WaveLab has an integrated audio file database. I have not fully explored it, however, so I don't know how well it works in practice.

Codemonkey wrote: I'm sorely tempted to try to live up to my name here, and offer to code something. However, time and inexperience conspire against me.

Thanks for the thought, but it's better not to bite off more than you can chew! (A problem I often come across and, in fact, am stuck in right now...)

Codemonkey wrote: Do you use Vista? That seems to have decent searching/indexing capability built in.

I'm assuming you mean the OS for Intel machines, not the infrared telescope in Chile (which has amazing searching capability but I can't vouch for its indexing).

But seriously... No, I'm using XP Pro with SP2 on a three-year-old IBM T43 ThinkPad that's had a hard life and is currently getting crankier by the day - despite my continual fondling and fawning.

I can't *see* myself using Vista for a while yet, it's a *long way off on the horizon* for me, and I'm too shortsighted to have that kind of *vision*. (Sorry, the bad puns and even worse wordplays were coming thick and fast; I've tried to exercise restraint - I mean, I steadfastly avoided the old obvious 'Hasta la Vista, Baby"...)

Cucco wrote: Are you any good with MS Access Simmo?

MS Access? I've never used it. In fact, I'm pleasantly surprised to find that it is actually installed on my laptop (part of MS Office). I didn't think I had any database stuff. Amazing, and even more proof that I need some way to keep all of my stuff under control!

Cucco wrote: While it is quite possible to launch certain objects from within the database (using OLE object linking), for your purposes, it would probably be best and far easier to simply reference the specific file location or the file itself and double-click to launch its resident app.

Right... but my goal here is to launch them from within the organizing app. Maybe I've finally got a reason to dabble with OLE?

I'm hoping the organising app can audition/view the files internally. As it is, I often find myself burrowing through zillions of folders to find what's wanted/needed in terms of sounds or pictures, opening them to audition/view, and so on. I end up with windows all over the place, and I find myself getting very confused (maybe that's just part of getting older?).

For now at least, I can still remember where most of the recordings were made when I hear them, and if I can't then I can check the creation date and figure out where I was at that time. But eventually some of those recordings are going to fade out of my memory altogether...

Cucco wrote: Each hard drive gets a number (which is the Primary Key within the database) and a name (usually referencing the year or portion of a year for which the hard drive was used). In a related and linked table, I list the project contents of each drive (such as Timbuktu Symphony Concerts Jan 2006-Dec 2006).

Which goes to show that there is no substitute for a clever and well-planned file naming system.

I'm thinking seriously about Bob's earlier comment of using Windows itself. One of the highly-lauded DAMs I downloaded a demo of is actually a replacement for Windows Explorer, with better file management capabilities. I looked at it last night and realised that what I need to do can't be too far removed from what Windows can currently do.

Sigh. So much to figure out... :-)

Cucco wrote: Each hard drive gets a number (which is the Primary Key within the database) and a name (usually referencing the year or portion of a year for which the hard drive was used).

Actually, I just realised something...

This database is for my location recordings and associated pics/videos only. At the moment my content is growing at a slower rate than the growth of readily-available storage media, so it is possible to store all my location recordings, pics and videos on one large hard disk. Prior to my last expedition (November 2007 to January 2008) I could fit everything onto a 750GB drive, which was the largest I could comfortably afford. Now I am seeing drives over 1TB at similar prices, which means I can probably still store all of my stuff on one drive - everything off the 'old' 750GB drive, plus all the new stuff. So maybe I'll never need to adopt a drive numbering system. It would be very cool if all this stuff can be kept in one place, always, and makes the organising a bit easier.

Simmosonic wrote: Prior to my last expedition (November 2007 to January 2008) I could fit everything onto a 750GB drive, which was the largest I could comfortably afford.

Oh, by the way, some of you might find this interesting...

The 750GB drive mentioned above was formatted for FAT32, primarily so that it could be read by Mac and Windows machines. Although I'm a Windows user and believe that NTFS is superior, I needed cross-platform compatibility. I'm *so* glad I chose FAT32!

While in Kathmandu, I had the 750GB drive hooked up to my long suffering ThinkPad when the power went out. Being mains powered, the drive stopped, of course. This happens regularly in Kathmandu (in fact, they have two x four hour blackouts scheduled each day during Winter to conserve electricity).

Anyway, when the power came back on I found that the 750GB could not be read by my ThinkPad any more. The file allocation table (or similar) had been corrupted, and nothing I can find in Windows is able to fix it. The ThinkPad sees the drive on the USB port, but can't open it or repair it.

Fortunately, the drive functions perfectly on a Macintosh.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I'm assuming the Mac and the PC create their own file allocation tables or directories or whatever. Obviously, the PC version got corrupted because it was being accessed when the power cut. The Mac directory remained unscathed. I haven't lost anything except the ability to access the data from a Windows machine.

Now that I'm back to civilisation, I've got to remedy the situation...

Simmosonic wrote:
But seriously... No, I'm using XP Pro with SP2 on a three-year-old IBM T43 ThinkPad that's had a hard life and is currently getting crankier by the day - despite my continual fondling and fawning.

It's been my personal experience that things in general get crankier WITH fondling and fawning, not in spite of. (At least that's the story according to my wife.) :?

Cucco wrote: At least that's the story according to my wife.

:shock:

[EDIT]

Not sure how this reply made it into this thread! I thought I had posted it to another thread. Please ignore.

Maybe from the server transition???
[/EDIT]

One word.... FilemakerPro

There's a premade database that probably already fits 99% of what you want.

Lemme know what platform you're on and I can edit it up a bit to be a standalone runtime for you to try out... or run.

Greg

In relation to the power outage and your 750 Gb drive being unreadable by the thinkpad, here is a thought.

When a drive is formatted and the FAT (File allocation tables) are created, the system actually creates two FAT's that mirror each other. The idea is that in the old days, when anyone worth their IT salt could use a disk editing program and repair the corrupt FAT with the good copy.

Having said that, I wonder if the MAC is just smarter. It may recognise the first FAT as corrupt and automatically look at the copy FAT.

On the same point it's worth noting that as drives get bigger, the chances of you loosing a LOT of data when it fails increases. I know you probably do, but ALWAYS keep backups. With the cost of drive falling all the time, it is often worth have a duplicate drive with the same data on it (Just in case)

BTW Love your work.

Regards
John

Wow... thanks for the wake-up call, JackHenry!

I had prematurely forgotten about this particular thread. I had posted the same initial question (in search of a database) to two other places as well (nature recordists list and phonography list), and seemed to have been getting answers left, right and centre.

I still haven't settled on a database app yet (I've had to put the idea on hold for a week or two) but I have solved my 750GB drive problem. - by copying everything off it onto a combination of a Mac's internal drive and a number of smaller FAT32 drives, then reformatting the 750GB and transferring it all back again. Because I was using a Mac to do all of this, I had to format the drive as FAT32 - the Mac can't write to NTFS drives.

It took many hours, by the way. And I also remembered something I'd learnt a long time ago from when I used to be a Mac support guy - the Mac does not like doing large file transfers over USB2. I was transferring about 40GB or so from the Mac's internal drive to the 750GB and it was taking forever. I took a close look and realised it had simply frozen about 1/3 of the way through the transfer; no drive activity, nothing. I waited about 45 minutes and it was still frozen, and nothing short of unplugging the power brought it back to life (ironically, it was a power cut that started this problem in the first place, but this time I didn't cut the power to the 750GB drive). So I visited the local PC shop and bought a hard drive 'combo' case with USB2 and Firewire interfaces, and started again. Slower than USB2 (400 vs. 480, IIRC) but rock solid.

Now everything is back in order again. The search for the filing method/database will resume soon...

JackHenry wrote: When a drive is formatted and the FAT (File allocation tables) are created, the system actually creates two FAT's that mirror each other. The idea is that in the old days, when anyone worth their IT salt could use a disk editing program and repair the corrupt FAT with the good copy.

Yes, that's what saved my data in this case. However, there was nothing in Windows that could recover it. Also, I downloaded a couple of apps that claimed to be able to rebuild the MBR (Master Boot Record) and they didn't do a good job. One rattled away for a moment and pronounced the problem solved, but the drive was still not fixed. The other sat there for a huge amount of time, until I got nervous and quit.

JackHenry wrote: Having said that, I wonder if the MAC is just smarter. It may recognise the first FAT as corrupt and automatically look at the copy FAT.

Somewhere, in the numerous places I've discussed this, someone said the Mac actually makes its own copy of the MBR and stores it elsewhere on the disk. If that's the case, then it is fortunate that the drive had recently been accessed by a Mac prior to the 'crash', allowing that to happen.

But that would imply that only the files listed on the Mac's MBR would be recovered... Not that it's a problem, this drive does not get daily use, and I don't recall losing anything.

JackHenry wrote: On the same point it's worth noting that as drives get bigger, the chances of you loosing a LOT of data when it fails increases.

Absolutely; something to do with eggs and baskets, isn't it? :wink:

I have at least one set of backups on hard drive for all of my recordings, and I'm thankful for that.

I've also been dabbling with a radically new and highly experimental passive organic backup technology, 100% immune to magnetic fields, power cuts, head crashes and so on. It's quite amazing, and because the NDA expired midnight yesterday I guess I can talk about it here. You FTP your files to the system's inventor, and he then sends them to a dimly-lit sweatshop in China where hundreds of 10 year old kids kneel on the dirt floor over flickering old green CRT screens, converting your files into enormous strings of 1s and 0s, beautifully caligraphed onto the finest rice paper. Redundancy consists of two kids hunched over the same screen, and error correction is a good solid whack across the shoulders with a bamboo cane. It takes one kid about three weeks to do a GB, and it only costs me 10c.

Fantastic! What will they think of next?

May be a bit ghetto, but I've used iTunes with great success for this. The initial setup is a lot of work bringing in titles, artists, etc... but all the music library is in it is a big database.

--Ben

I too used iTunes for something similar.

I have recordings of the birds in my area (feathered) and have a photo of each (again feathered) as the 'Album Artwork'

It works real well. As I have it playing the bird calls, the 'Album' cover scrolls through with each different call playing. Nice and handy for teaching kids about different birds

JackHenry wrote: As I have it playing the bird calls, the 'Album' cover scrolls through with each different call playing. Nice and handy for teaching kids about different birds

Thanks Ben and Jack, those are both great ideas worth considering. Simple, too!

Greg

In relation to the Original Topic of this post, you may find this useful from James Huckle. He's written an app to do what you're after.

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/messages/32342?threaded=1&m=e&var=1&tidx=1

Regards
John

JackHenry wrote: In relation to the Original Topic of this post, you may find this useful from James Huckle. He's written an app to do what you're after.

Thanks very much, John.

It's an interesting path... I started the same thread here, on nature recordists and on the phonography list. Then I watched it get quite detailed (especially with the nature recordists), lots of people getting involved and making many useful contributions. At the same time, my own workload picked up enormously, so all I could do was kind of sit on the sidelines and see what came of it.

I've just downloaded the app, thanks to your post. I haven't paid enough attention to the digests of those groups yet, I've been flat out. So, you've saved me a lot of reading!

I'll give it a try and let people know how it turns out...

@ the Original topic - try using Google Desktop. It's free, stable as hell, a resource hog, but has all the features you're looking for, I think...