🚀 go-pugleaf

Rather than provide an answer (I would if I could), I will ask you a question. Why not copy the files from the memory card to your computer? I believe this is, by far, the safest way.
Q

I suppose I can try that but it is still very frustrating that before adobe, I could juts plug in the usb and go...I plug it into any other computer that way...thanks though :)

Melinda,
I'll repeat that it is far safer to download your files directly from the memory card. It is much MORE FRUSTRATING to lose your files, which is more likely to happen downloading from camera. What you are considering a problem is really a blessing.
Q

I just attached my Nikon D3 to my Macpro and it immediately showed up on the desktop as two mount disks since I have two cards in the camera. Via USB?

I have the CS 4 Master Collection installed.

There is a conventional wisdom that suggests that a memory card and reader are far less costly to replace, (in the case of a goofy electrical spike/surge/dip while transferring your files), than a camera is. If one were to be using the camera when such an anomaly occured, one might be in the market for a new camera!

Besides transferring from your camera uses your camera battery. Why reduce the charge of the battery for something that can very easily be done with a memory card reader?

and then there is what Q said! ;)

Just my $0.02 worth! :)

Hopper

The only time I've lost data from a memory card was at some point in the sequence of taking it out of the equipment, taking it to the PC, and inserting it in the reader. It was alive at the start and dead at the end. Static hit? Who knows. Why is it considered best not to leave it safe in the camera and transfer direct (genuine question, I'm interested to know)? The potential damage to the camera itself as Hopper suggests??

When you lost your images, did you perhaps withdraw the card from the camera before turning off the power?

The risk of damage to the camera, as well as the potential loss of images, have been discussed in every Manual and photographic Forum that I have come across.

I don't imagine that there would be a market for Card Readers if this was not a very real issue.

So why take the risk?

      I don't imagine that there would be a market for Card Readers if this
      was not a very real issue.




Well - logically I could respond "I don't imagine camera manufacturers would provide the means to download direct from the camera if it was a very real issue". But it's hard to say that without it coming across as contentious, so I won't! :)

My own singular experience obviously can't counter a lot of other people having the reverse problem, so I shall simply count myself lucky, rather than counting myself correct.

A quick Googling turned up this:

 <http://www.digicamhelp.com/accessories/memory-cards/memory-card-reader.php>

      Advantages of using memory card readers





      The main advantage of using a memory card reader, rather than the camera
      cable, is that you will not put additional drain on the camera batteries.
      Using a card reader can also reduce wear and tear on the hinges and the
      terminals within the cameras memory card compartment. Some card readers
      transfer images to a computer faster than transfers using a digital camera.
      ----

Indeed it's unwise to transfer from one USB device to another if there's any uncertainty over the power available. Ideally plug in a power adapter for the source device.

      Using a card reader can also reduce wear and tear on the hinges and the
      terminals within the cameras memory card compartment.




That seems the wrong way round. To get the card out of the camera and into the reader, you have to open the door to the card compartment and (slightly) stress the contacts of the camera's card holder when getting out the card. If you leave the card in the camera, then unless the usb door is the same as the card door, neither the hinges nor card contacts are involved.

But I'm happy to concede the overall point if that's the accepted wisdom.

      logically I could respond "I don't imagine camera manufacturers would
      provide the means to download direct from the camera if it was a very
      real issue". But it's hard to say that without it coming across as contentious,




No, that would not be contentious, it would be ludicrous.

The camera connection has to be supplied because of the mass consumer market, where many users don't even know what a card reader is.

Just this Friday I was being photographed next to a very dear person whom I had not seen in eight years but who had been a Nikon 35mm film user up until the previous time I had seen him, when he asked his wife to "please turn the camera to a horizontal position, because I have a very hard time on the computer with vertical shots".

I didn't ask, but I'd be surprised if he uses a card reader. :|

And this is a highly educated orthopedic surgeon, with degrees from universities in three different countries and licensed to practice medicine in four countries, including the US and the UK.

Of course the mass market demands contacts on the camera. :/

After the first time I plugged the card directly into the computer, I never went back to using Canon's too-helpful and too-restrictive file copying software. I'm thinking about uninstalling it because it just gets in my way.

If someone has a solid understanding of disk formatting, partitions, allocation, and directory structures, there's no reason you can't format the cards with the computer, too. So, I guess that means 98% of people should only format cards in the camera.

Someone made a comment in this forum about FAT32 not supporting partitions larger than 2GB, and nobody called him on it. It's not because people don't know. For me, photography is a right-brain thing, while computers and gubbins are left-brain. They're different types of creative activities.

I have never, ever, installed the software that came with a digital camera.

(Or most other computer peripherals either!)

Ditto John!

      Someone made a comment in this forum about FAT32 not supporting partitions
      larger than 2GB, and nobody called him on it.




True for files, false for partitions.

How in hell to you use a printer like the Epson 3800 without installing the software? Or a monitor calibrator? Or.....

I don't know where to start here.

Jeeze!

Larry, I said:

      I have never, ever, installed the software that came with a digital camera.





      (Or most other computer peripherals either!)




Notice the word "most"?

Of course some items have to have the software (or some of it) installed!

I usually install it � and then work out what I can discard � such as Nikon's terrible Capture NX2 and unnecessary Nikon Transfer!

:(

Nikon's Capture (throughout it's various incarnations) has always been slow for me. But, it does have the "benefit" of Nikon knowing what exactly goes into their NEF files, and getting the most accurate (IMO) rendering of them.

Problem is, it's shoddy software. Nikon should stick to hardware, and let me decide how I want to process MY photos. (Yes, we've been down this road before. It's littered with BS, as we all know.)

I need help buying this lens. donations accepted.

 <http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-2-8-6mm-Fisheye-Nikkor-Auto-non-AI_W0QQitemZ370154210322QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_Lenses?hash=item370154210322&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1205|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318|301%3A1|293%3A1|294%3A50>

At least you will be saving the 19% VAT (sales Tax) of $6,669 that a European would be charged!

Good point. sorry i screwed up the format with the link.