Lightroom Storage

Candid Arts · April 13, 2009

I'm curious out of you that use LR for your editing process, how many of you actually keep all your photos in LR?

As of now, I upload to computer in a generic, date the photo was taken folder, import into LR, do my edits, export all as JPEG, move all JPEGs to the correct storage folders on my ext. hard drive, move all RAW files to the correct storage folders on my ext. hard drive, then remove all RAW files from LR. The problem with this is that all the edits on the RAW files go away once I remove the file from LR. So my new plan is going to be either put everything where it needs to be on my ext. hard drive first, then import into LR, do edits, export JPEGs. This way, the path for the RAW files to LR is via my ext. hard drive, so if I'm working in LR, but don't have my ext. hard drive plugged in, that path will be broken until I plug in the ext. hard drive again and it won't bog down LR (hopefully...if even though the path is broken whilst my ext. HD is not plugged in and LR is still bogged down, then I won't do this. My other option is to do what I'm doing now, but instead of moving the original RAW file to the correct storage folder on my ext. HD and removing it from LR and losing all edits, I'll do all my edits, export as JPEG, then export all the RAW files as RAW files saving the edits, and move those to the correct storage folder on my ext. HD.

I suppose I should explain my issues as well, causing me to re-think my storage and work flow... Right now, but removing the RAW files from LR, I lose all the edits I did to the RAW file. I still have the RAW file, but should I ever lose a JPEG, I'd have to go in and re-edit everything, or if I want to change one little detail, I'd have to get the photo back to the way it was, which is near impossible. Also, I've noticed since I've started keeping all my photos in LR (because I have A LOT to go through and edit/re-edit), LR and my entire computer seem to be working WAY slower than they used to.

So...any thoughts? Did I make myself clear in my options, my problems, and what I'm looking for?

Thanks everyone for your feedback.

DonRicklin · April 13, 2009

100% of mi digital RAW and JPEG (originals, pre RAW shooting) assets. Currently 25K images. I know users with anywhere from 50K to 100K images. There are a number of LR insiders that advocate single cataloges on other LR related forums (like the Adobe UtoU for LR or Lightroom Forums).

Don

Art Scott · April 13, 2009

mY only file not related to LR is my file labled directly off camera ...... this is the first folder on my working HDD.....from there it is into LR for everything until I either upload to SM or move to PS for plug in work or whatever...then it goes inot the final folder for storage and I keep 3copies of everyting (on 3 HDD)

DonRicklin · April 13, 2009

Art Scott wrote:

mY only file not related to LR is my file labled directly off camera ...... this is the first folder on my working HDD.....from there it is into LR for everything until I either upload to SM or move to PS for plug in work or whatever...then it goes inot the final folder for storage and I keep 3copies of everyting (on 3 HDD)

On this note, I also keep three copies of my Originals. Tow done right off and a third on a regular basis.

Don

pathfinder · April 13, 2009

I import my files into Lightroom on one separate internal 1 Tb drive in my desktop computer, and simultaneously on an external 1 Tb drive as well. A final edited file is also saved as a jpg on a different hard drive, a DVD, and on Smugmug. If I lose all these copies, I am in trouble I suppose.

I do my catalogs on a yearly basis, as I have concerns about catalog file sizes, although I no others do not do that.

W.W. Webster · April 13, 2009

Candid Arts wrote:

I'm curious out of you that use LR for your editing process, how many of you actually keep all your photos in LR?l

100% of 40,306 image files, mainly raw files. Why would I want to 'keep' them anywhere else?

Candid Arts · April 13, 2009

It seems as though since I've been keeping the files in LR, that the program has slowed down a lot...that's my biggest issue with keeping them in LR.

I'm on a MacBook with a 2.4 GHz processor and 2GB memory. Also a 160GB internal HDD with 42.23 available.

Thanks for everyone's help.

pathfinder · April 13, 2009

Max out your RAM, and store your images on an external firewire drive, not on your main hard drive on a lap top.

I would not store my files on a 160 Gb hard drive - it is too small.

When I travel, I carry my MBP and two 500Gb external Western Digital drives. When I import images in LR, a copy of my files goes onto each external drive. When I get home, then it is easy to copy these files to the larger drives on my desk top unit at home, and i ALWAYS have two separate copies of my images. One of my 500Gb drives carries a back up of my main hard drive for my MBP as well.

For me, that is a belt and suspenders configuration.

Candid Arts · April 13, 2009

pathfinder wrote:

Max out your RAM.

I'll look into that. Hope it's not expensive (broke college student).

Thanks for the tip.

pathfinder · April 13, 2009

Look here - http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/Apple_MacBook_MacBook_Pro/Upgrade

Depends on your MacBok, but if I read it right it is about ~$50. That sounds really cheap, but check it out with them. They can tell you what you have, and what you need, and how much it will cost.

That is where the extra RAM for my MBP and my Mac Pro came from, and where I buy my extra hard drives as well.

Candid Arts · April 13, 2009

pathfinder wrote:

Look here - http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/Apple_MacBook_MacBook_Pro/Upgrade

Depends on your MacBok, but if I read it right it is about ~$50. That sounds really cheap, but check it out with them. They can tell you what you have, and what you need, and how much it will cost.

That is where the extra RAM for my MBP and my Mac Pro came from, and where I buy my extra hard drives as well.

Awesome. Thank you. I'll contact them.

Do you know if it's better to have 1 4GB memory card or 2 2GB memory cards? It looks like 4GB is the max my computer can take.

But like I said, I'll contact them and get some info. Thanks.

pathfinder · April 13, 2009

I think MBPs take 2 strips of 2 Gb each, but check it out with them or Apple.

colourbox · April 14, 2009

Candid Arts wrote:

...remove all RAW files from LR. The problem with this is that all the edits on the RAW files go away once I remove the file from LR.

Some ideas...

If you do one of the following, the edits should go wherever the Raw goes:

a) Export sidecar files, which contain the edits, that travel with the Raws to wherever they are.
b) Export the Raws as DNG, since DNG contains both Raw and its edits in a single file.
c) Export Catalog for a collection you are going to archive, and keep the exported catalog with the Raws. The catalog contains the edits. Open this catalog to edit any of the images in that archived collection.

Any of these three should keep you from losing edits by storing them with the images. They just do it in different ways. Each lets you load up any image's edits back into Lightroom, even into a copy of Lightroom that has never seen that image before.

DonRicklin · April 14, 2009

colourbox wrote:

Some ideas...

If you do one of the following, the edits should go wherever the Raw goes:

a) Export sidecar files, which contain the edits, that travel with the Raws to wherever they are.
b) Export the Raws as DNG, since DNG contains both Raw and its edits in a single file.
c) Export Catalog for a collection you are going to archive, and keep the exported catalog with the Raws. The catalog contains the edits. Open this catalog to edit any of the images in that archived collection.

Any of these three should keep you from losing edits by storing them with the images. They just do it in different ways. Each lets you load up any image's edits back into Lightroom, even into a copy of Lightroom that has never seen that image before.

This is fine and dandy but does not work for snapshots and Virtual Copies, for those using them to maintain different looks to a single image.

Don

jogle · April 14, 2009

I've got 45K + files in my LR catalogue on my Macbook Pro. I've got a 500Gb drive in it (a nice fast 7200 rpm one) and another 2 external usb drives (one 500Gb, one 320Gb)

I copy the photos off my cards onto a folder (named 09-04_shootname or something like it) on the internal drive where I geotag them and then import them into LR. I then do most of my edits with them on the local disk, trashing the crap ones and rating the others.

Every now and again I'll go into lightroom, into the folder view, and select a couple of shoots I'm done with for now. And this is where lightroom rocks. You can drag and drop those folders from one drive to another and it'll move them for you and update the catalogue.

I use Time Machine on the mac as the last step in my workflow. Backups are my friends. (not just cos I've had failed disks but I've had a failed brain and accidentally deleted things)

colourbox · April 14, 2009

DonRicklin wrote:

This is fine and dandy but does not work for snapshots and Virtual Copies, for those using them to maintain different looks to a single image.
Don

Now that you can transfer snapshots between LR and ACR, snapshots are now written to XMP, right?

Also, wouldn't option C take care of everything, since the images are archived via Export Catalog?

cmason · April 14, 2009

I import all images into LR , and work only in RAW. The image files themselves are stored on an external USB harddrive, but the LR database is on my internal drive on the Mac. This way the database is as nearline as possible, and the only writes to the external are when exporting or reading for database updates. Any exports to JPEG are also stored on the external drive, and automatically placed in a folder labeled 'edit' under the main date folder. I store by shot date on the external drive, but use collections and tags within LR.

I have had no performance issues doing it this way. I backup both the images and the LR database often of course.

One thing you can do is create multiple catalogs, so that you do not have all your images in a single catalog. For instance you may have a 2008 or a 2007 catalog, with just images from those years in them. Then you simply open the catalog you wish to work on in LR. Unfortunately, the tags and collections do not span catalogs, so I have not done this, nor found a need too yet.

DonRicklin · April 14, 2009

cmason wrote:

I import all images into LR , and work only in RAW. The image files themselves are stored on an external USB harddrive, but the LR database is on my internal drive on the Mac. This way the database is as nearline as possible, and the only writes to the external are when exporting or reading for database updates. Any exports to JPEG are also stored on the external drive, and automatically placed in a folder labeled 'edit' under the main date folder. I store by shot date on the external drive, but use collections and tags within LR.

I have had no performance issues doing it this way. I backup both the images and the LR database often of course.

One thing you can do is create multiple catalogs, so that you do not have all your images in a single catalog. For instance you may have a 2008 or a 2007 catalog, with just images from those years in them. Then you simply open the catalog you wish to work on in LR. Unfortunately, the tags and collections do not span catalogs, so I have not done this, nor found a need too yet.

And when you go to do a cross year hunt for images, how do you accomplish that?

Even if you work in one of many catalogs for speed, you should have a MAster catalog with it all, which of course is more work, but is better for that cross referencing!

Don

cmason · April 14, 2009

DonRicklin wrote:

And when you go to do a cross year hunt for images, how do you accomplish that?

Even if you work in one of many catalogs for speed, you should have a MAster catalog with it all, which of course is more work, but is better for that cross referencing!

Don

That is the reason why I DO NOT have multiple catalogs. I have only one.

I was suggesting that if the catalog size was leading to performance issues, you could use smaller catalogs, but the drawback as that it impacts the use of collections and tags.

Thunder Rabbit · April 14, 2009

Howdy.

I catalog 100% of my images in Lr2.

I import straight into Lr from my camera's flash card. In one automated process, the images are renamed, put in the appropriate folder, a development preset is applied, a meta data preset is applied, keywords are applied, and it's all backed up to a separate hard drive. There's your belt. From there, you can add your suspenders by burning discs, online archiving, whatever.

I have no performance issues, it does what I want, fast. But, I am just getting started again, and only have about 13,000 images in my catalog.

"This is fine and dandy but does not work for snapshots and Virtual Copies, for those using them to maintain different looks to a single image."

I'm not sure what you mean by this, Don. If you archive your catalog, any number of virtual images are archived as well. Each virtual copy is a separate XMP file that references the same RAW image.

A recent thread has a discussion of the advantages of Lr2. It's worth a look.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=126836

Lightroom Storage

Comments