[Greg Hirsh]

Also, @Walter Soyka as a follow up, having gone back and looked at everything again); it turns out you’re right about what is causing this. There is a simple (and new to my workflow) combination of import options that I now realize are the cause of the difference. I’ve been bringing image sequences in and checking the “Force alphabetical order” button. This brings them in without appending the file extension and frame range to their name (which it would otherwise do if the button was left unchecked). In this scenario, it auto increments sequence numbers of new comps of the same naming scheme. If I don’t check the “”Force alphabetical order” button, comps created from the source files will preserve the original name and number (presumably because SourcMovie_001_[01001-010802].exr is a different string then SourceMovie_001). Alternatively if I check both the “Force alphabetical order” button (which I find to be good practice) and the “Create Composition” button (with the Import as Footage option in the following dialogue box) a composition with same name and number is created. This ALSO solves my problem. Either way, HOURS SAVED and I thank you!!!

[Greg Hirsh]

Thank you so much for taking the time to look in to this, @Hector Vera ! Unfortunately, (and this is what is so weird – and I think what is new behavior), After Effects not only looks at comps that have already been made when deciding what a new comp (with a similar name)’s new sequence number will be, it also now looks at the sequence numbers of the source files them selves. So, in other words, even if I start over and have not created any comps yet, when I make the very first comp of the project (using the example file names from my post at the top, SourceMovie_001, SourceMovie_002, SourceMovie_003, SourceMovie_004, and SourceMovie_005 – again these are the names of the files themselves, no comps exist yet) the first composition will be named SourceMovie_006 (it doesn’t matter which of the source files I used to create the comp, it just names it using the next number in the sequence because it’s taking the source file sequence numbers into account now).

Edit: I also realize now (if you see my post below) that there was a kind of user error involved on my part.

Thank you, again, for trying to help research this!

[Greg Hirsh]

Wow!! Thank you so, so much, @Walter Soyka ! This script works, solves the problem, and will literally save me HOURS!!!. I can not thank you enough. Very, very much appreciated.