Paths to Multimedia Objects

keithsheffield · Post by **keithsheffield** » 18 Dec 2004 20:18

I have set up a hierarchy of folders to hold different types of objects to simplify their management. vis:
G:FHImages

Pictures...

Docs....

Certs

Birth

Marriage

Death

Census
etc etc

The problem will come if at some future date, I wish to move these folder to another disc or PC that may have different HDD structure, or re-arrange the existing folders, as of course all these paths are currently held in full for each occurrence in the FH Gedcom file.

Can we have some form of short 'pointer' containing the path leading to the object such that FH adds this to the file name to calculate the 'full' path name (similar the the share option in Windows, where instead of specify G:FHImagesCertBirth, one could say \Birth and Windows will them expand it appropriately.

If this were possible, it would only be necessary to adjust one record containing the path information instead of possible hundreds or thousands. Yes I know I can do search and replace with a text editor, but this is not a very elegant solution!

With the ability to have long folder names the amount of file space (bytes) used could be reduced considerably with all sorts of knock on advantages.

If somebody has already thought of this, or if I have missed it in the documentation somewhere, I apologise!

ID:697

YouTube · Post by **Jane** » 19 Dec 2004 23:11

You can always use the multimedia tool to reconnect broken links such as you suggest if the structure is similar it only takes a minute or too to fix, even with a couple of hundred links.

I fact if the relative paths remain the same FH will automatically correct most problems.

Post by **Guest** » 29 Dec 2005 12:25

Hi Jane ... you say that:

'You can always use the multimedia tool to reconnect broken links such as you suggest if the structure is similar it only takes a minute or too to fix, even with a couple of hundred links.'

Due to, erm, user error [oops] our images were deleted and so became unlinked - we've decided to put them in another more obvious folder, and so now we're faced with re-linking them all. I can't see how you do this except by reconnecting every image, from 'Work with multimedia objects ...'

Are you saying that there is an easier way (for a whole bank of images at once)?

One other minor point: when we have specified the new location for the image, it doesn't immediately refresh in the preview window. You have to click another item and then click back ... maybe this is fixed in V3.

Martin Taylor

pbryan · Post by **pbryan** » 29 Dec 2005 13:04

Don't forget that the Gedcom file is a text file, so you can always used notepad and the search and replace feature to alter the file.

Paul

YouTube · Post by **Jane** » 29 Dec 2005 17:57

As long as all your images have the same names as they had before you can use the work with external links tool to reconnect them, just select the old folder in the tool and replace with the new one

aragorn · Post by **aragorn** » 30 Dec 2005 11:04

I keep all my multimedia files in one folder on my desktop (but this could be anywhere) called 'IMAGES LINKED TO FAMILY HISTORIAN'.In it I keep all the files in various sub-folders i.e. Birth Certificates,Maps,Letters,Photos etc. If I move the folder I can reconnect the links using the 'Work with External File Links' in Tools quite easily as I only have to move the one folder.It seems to work OK for me so maybe this would be a solution?[smile]

Post by **Guest** » 01 Jan 2006 13:11

Thanks all

That's helpful advice. I'd not even realised that the 'external file links' tool existed [rolleyes].

Martin

Post by **Guest** » 06 Jan 2006 15:59

I'm trying to understand why FH recommends linking files rather than embedding them. What sort of degradation is there on openning and closeing the GEDCOM file. I have a 1.7Ghz processor and 1Gb RAM.Also, having now linked to 100 or so external files is there some sort of utility for embedding these files if I choose to 'leap' in the direction? TIA. Happy hunting everyone. Graham.[cool]

Post by **nsw** » 06 Jan 2006 20:22

I'm sure I can think of lots of reasons why it would be a bad idea to embed the images. Here are a few!

1) Images embedded take up more disk space than they do when not embedded. I just tried embedding a couple of files which were around 700k in size each and they added over 2000k to the size of my GEDCOM file.

2) Embedding your images would make your GEDCOM file very very big and unwieldy. I would imagine it would take a lot longer to open, It is noticably slow to open the file with just a few embedded pictures.

3) If you have 100 pictures even at 500k each this would lead to a 50Mb file which is far too big to email to people. My GEDCOM file is not particularly big containing around 1500 people (I know of a number of people with over 10,000 individuals in their file) but I have 350 images (mainly from the census). My file would probably be around 400Mb in size. This is a huge file.

4) By having the images embedded in the file you will not be able to view them or edit them in other applications (e.g. picture viewers) unless you keep a second copy of the image so you will probably end up keeping the images separately too, e.g in case another member of your family wants a copy of an image.

5) I often transfer my Gedcom file to my laptop via a wireless connection. This only takes a few seconds but would take I would guess around 10 mins at least to transfer if all the images were embedded in it.

6) It just feels wrong! The GEDCOM file is a meaningful pure text file which can be loaded into text editors and makes sense. With embedded images you would end up with huge blocks of meaningless text representing the binary image information within the file. This is ignoring the fact that Windows notepad will probably take several minutes to even open the file in the first place and it would be slow to scroll through, etc.

Don't do it! [smile]

YouTube · Post by **Jane** » 06 Jan 2006 22:36

I concur with Nick

Post by **Guest** » 07 Jan 2006 15:27

Well I asked and I got told! You make very good points and I will therefore 'NOT DO IT'!!!! Thanks for the guidance.

Family Historian User Group