Orphalese Tarot Zone Community Forum

Hi all.

This isn't a big issue but I thought I'd raise it anyhow.

A lot of my Oracle decks are numbered and start at card number 1. Orphalese's card numbering structure is designed for Tarot, starting at 00 for The Fool.

I was thinking, it would be kind of nice (and a lot easier) if the Oracle/Rune etc numbering system for Oracle decks was in line with the card number. (Richard, is this even possible?)

Does anybody have any comments?

Regards
purple_scorp

Hi PS,

I have had similar thoughts when Orphalizing some non-Tarot decks. Yes, it would be nice to be able to start with 01.

On the other hand...

The *only* time the thought crosses my mind is when I'm in the process of naming the image files. When I *use* the deck with OT, I don't know or care about the actual file name. There *is* that little moment of cognitive dissonance when the numbers don't match, but I can't think of a time that it really mattered. You may have some situation in mind where it would matter, though -- I don't know.

I also don't know what mechanisms are used in OT, so starting a deck at 01 might be a trivial thing, or it might be a pain. If the mechanism is array-based, one approach might be to detect the lowest numbered image file, find its offset from zero, and then subtract that offset when addressing the array. That way, the arrays will remain zero-based even if the decks are not. Or, I might just be babbling again.

Regards,

Cowhead

Of course, Cowhead can be very near of the solution (this is up to Richard), but since I'm no programmer, I recommend a brute force approach using Irfanview. I've encountered the same problem with other decks, not only Oracle ones. The real pain is renaming manually the cards, huh? In these cases, just use Irfanview Rename option for doing it in a snap.

Let's suppose we have an Oracle called The Potato Oracle, raided somewhere on the Internet or scanned at the pre-Orphalese era. It has 57 cards starting on 01 (or 1, 1a, or whatever) and you want to Orphalese-it. Let's see:

-First make a copy of the deck in a new folder, just for the sake of security

-Open the first file of the deck on Irfanview, and press B for accesing batch options.

-Press Add All to pass all the graphics from the right window to the left.

-Press Use This Directory As Output for making the changes only in the new folder

-Select Batch Rename

-Press on Set Rename Options. Change Starting Index to 0 and Increment to 1

-For avoiding trouble renaming, do it in two passes. Change Name Pattern to CARD##, make sure third option is selected (Rename original / output files) and press OK. You're ready to go. Press START and after a while, you'll have all your cards renamed as CARD00, CARD01, CARD02, etc.

-Once done this, change Name Pattern in the same screen to ## (that means numbers from 00 to 99). Press START and it's done.

The whole process, once you're used to the program, takes 20-30 seconds. Renaming manually... well... you know. Now you can rename the folder and use it on Orphalese.

NOTE: If you don't want the BACK file renamed in this fashion (or any other file), just look for it on the left window after Add All, select it and press Remove. Just make sure the files to rename are the ones you want.

Well, I cheat. lol
In non standard oracles, I've created a blank card and called it 00. This has precedence in the rune sets, the blank rune aka wyrd. It means unknown or fate or the will of the gods. Whatever you want it to mean.

take care frances

Hi Cowhead, Dominatrix, and Frances. Thank you for your replies.

Firstly, to Dominatrix. I've not heard of that software Irfanview. Is it free to download? Thank you for the very comprehensive step-by-step instructions.

frances, I guess for runes that have the blank card, it is ideal to number it as 00 but not every deck/tool has a blank card. At one stage, I had created the back.jpg also as 00.jpg but that sometimes throws out your readings (when it is dealt). Usually, I end up numbering the last card in the deck sequence as the 00, so that I can keep the other numbering in sequence.

Cowhead, I like your idea of the software automatically detecting the lowest number but also wondered, if that was not possible, whether a new field (similar to the field that holds the number of cards) could be created to identify the first card number). I guess Richard is the only one that can answer that.

Largely it was the initial creation of the deck into Orphalese that presents the most problems. Not only with the numbering of the images, but also with adding the card data/notes. Then, of course, there is the number display in Card Compare (if you want to look at a particular number, you have to deduct one from it to get the right card) and perhaps selecting the card from Free Selection is a little more tricky too (for those times when you're trying to match your onscreen reading to a real one (when you have the physical deck)).

The way the numbering is at the moment is workable, and as I said, it's not a major issue, but I thought I'd raise it to see what other people thought.

regards
purple_scorp

Hi Scorp,

While nothing is impossible, allowing for this would involve some pretty low level changes, and my guess is that making those changes would create a lot of bugs that would take quite a while to iron out. Is there really a general clamour for this or is it just a nice to have?

In favour of introducing custom ranges is that it would allow people to specify using, say, just the majors out of a complete deck, or just the non-majors, which is something which has been requested before.

On the other hand, to the extent that it is just for the satisfaction of having the card indexes match the numbers on the cards I would say forget it. When I started programming I got used to counting from zero (everything starts from zero in programming) and used to switching back to the system used in the real world. It becomes second nature after a while. Now it seems odd to me that we start counting at one. If it makes sense to start with one unit already counted, why not start with one ten counted too and begin numbering at eleven? Or a hundred and eleven?

Damn it, those rune guys weren't as smart as the Babylonians and guess who has to sort it out AS USUAL!

There have been some good work-arounds suggested here. Adding an invented 00 card is a neat solution if it makes sense with the deck in question, and a short time renumbering will even sort out those people who just want to use the non-majors on some occasions.

Cheers

Richard

Of course, Irfanview is free software (already discussed on this forum), and you can get it at http://www.irfanview.com/. Once you're used to it, you can't live without it. Best.

Nice to have. Not a must. I have my own solution to it (adding that blank card). Don't do it if it will create bugs that have to be sprayed heavily with a can of commercial strength Raid.

take care Frances

Hi Dominatrix,

Thanks for the link. I missed that discussion here on the forum but have now downloaded the software and will have a play with it. Will go hunt down that thread now so I can see what else has been discussed. I have Macromedia Fireworks which I think does similar things (batching etc).

It was very interesting seeing how others handled this issue and I'm glad I posted the thread. It's amazing how we can all get so much out of the same software.

Regards
purple_scorp

Hi Richard,

thanks for your reply. I don't mind creating the dummy 00 card but what do you do with it when it shows up in one of your readings??? Do you just draw another card from the pack to replace it?

I'm not a programmer, just a crazy person who dreams up ideas to test the programmer's skills, lol!
But, would it be possible to have the 00 card (as a dummy card) but to exclude it from the reading? (Like having a tick box on the deck options table that we could tick/untick for each deck to state whether or not we wanted the 00 card to be included in the pack for readings)? Would that make it less buggy?

I wrote in the other thread (Oracle and multiple backs) regarding having the ability for sub-categories (Majors, Minors, Courts etc) which I believe would be a really beneficial function.

Regards
purple_scorp