Jump to content

Photos missing from sd card - but show up on/in camera.

jomo

By jomo
in Fuji X-S10 / Fuji X-S20

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
Nesheli99 Newbie

Nesheli99

Posted
Posted

I just received an X-T3 and put my card from my X-T1 in it.

Card is a Lexar Professional 2000x 32GB.

After taking photos with the X-T3, they are visible in camera but not on my computer A (openSUSE Leap 15.2)

I installed the silkypix RAW converter on computer B (OSX 10.11)

Computer B could see all the X-T3 images.

So curious I went back to computer A and selected the folder properties - show hidden files. Now I can see all the images with computer A also. Why is my X-T3 camera saving the images as hidden files?

If you need to download some software that a company such as Fuji only provides the link to the latest version. Try using the 'way back machine' at archive.org. In my case they had no copy of the old software but it was possible to copy the link to where it was. Using the URL to the fuji site I could download the old version of the software from the Fuji website. The old versions are there but you cannot just guess the name of the file to download it! Nor did I have success with an advanced google search. The folder containing the software version has an encoded name that you will never guess. So use the time machine and go back a year and see what the folder was called a year ago!

Anyone who thinks time machines are just imaginary go to archive.org it is amazing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Greybeard Proficient

Greybeard

Posted
Posted

If anyone is following this thread and have the problem that only the first 4096 files are visible on a Mac (or possibly some varieties of Linux) - there appears to be a  Fujifilm firmware bug.

A workaround (until Fujifilm fixes the problem) is to open the card in Finder and click on one of the jpg files so that it appears in Preview - that should fix the directory and the remaining files should be visible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • BobJ
      X-T5 Cleaning Mistake

      By BobJ · Posted

      Because the sensor assembly is moved electrmagnetically. When there is no power it is essentially free moving.
    • jerryy
      Astro-photography (open thread)

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahoy ye hearties! Hoist ye yon Jolly Roger and Cascade away. NGC 1502 The Jolly Roger Cluster:

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

      This is the equivalent of 43 minutes, 40 seconds of exposure. NGC 1502 is a neat little cluster located in the Camelopardalis Constellation. This region of space was thought to be fairly empty by early astronomers, but as you can see, there is a lot there. Kemble's Cascade (a.k.a. Kemble 1) is named for Father Lucian Kemble, a Canadian Franciscan friar who wrote about it to Walter Scott Houston, an author for the Sky And Telescope magazine. Houston named the asterism for Fr. Kemble and the name "stuck". NGC 1501 is the Oyster Nebula. A longer focal length telescope is needed to bring this one into good viewing range, but it is well worth the effort. NGC 1502: https://skyandtelescope.org/online-gallery/ngc-1502/ Camelopardalis Constellation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camelopardalis Kemble's Cascade (and NGC 1501: The Oyster Nebula): https://www.constellation-guide.com/kembles-cascade/ Arrrrrr Matey.
    • Greybeard
      Only comments are baited ads

      By Greybeard · Posted

    • BIGOAK
      55 or 80?

      By BIGOAK · Posted

      Looking for input; there are some decent deals and might want to take advantage to expand my lenses for my 100s already own: 110/2 32-64 35-70 100-200 + TC   Shooting mostly family shots, bringing my kit to capture family outings indoors and out. Tracking the 63/43 effective FLs on the two, but has anybody used both? Would the 55 (covered by two zooms right now) be redundant? Would the 80 be too similar in character to my 110 for portraiture?
    • Fotomatt
      Only comments are baited ads

      By Fotomatt · Posted

      See what I mean? Two instantaneous ads. Worthless.   
×
×
  • Create New...