Workflow suggestions

Hi,

I have been experimenting with both aperture and lightroom for a while and have decided to finally go with lightroom. As I have made my decision I have come to the realization that my photo are in about 6 different catalogues spread over my harddrive. Not very bright really.

So now I need to establish a disciplined workflow, which will revolve around have a working catalogue and a master catalogue with all my keepers. So essentially I can import cull edit and tag the photos into my working catalogue and then export the keepers in a master catalogue.

Is this a good idea?

Does anyone else have an suggestion of how they do it?

Thanks Erol

Hi Erol,

I think the key to using LR is to use keywords successfully. A lot of us still use folders to seperate shoots or subjects but there is really no reason to. With LR's ability to use the library filter I've found it easier to use the Collections feature to keep things sorted out. Mulitple catalogs doesn't really provide any benefit I can see. It does make a bunch of sense to back up your "keepers" to a different hard drive(s).

Cheers,

Steve

Hi Erol!

I second to Steves suggestion about useing the keywords - it makes the workflow A LOT faster in the long run.

Cheers

Karel

Hi,

 

I have been experimenting with both aperture and lightroom for a while and have decided to finally go with lightroom. As I have made my decision I have come to the realization that my photo are in about 6 different catalogues spread over my harddrive. Not very bright really.

 

So now I need to establish a disciplined workflow, which will revolve around have a working catalogue and a master catalogue with all my keepers. So essentially I can import cull edit and tag the photos into my working catalogue and then export the keepers in a master catalogue.

 

Is this a good idea?

 

Does anyone else have an suggestion of how they do it?

 

Thanks Erol

My workflow is slightly different than Steve's I think. On a trip I download my card to my computer and separate the dives into particular dive sites. On our recent trip to the Philippines, that meant that I have 39 separate dives. I then create a lightroom catalog with each dive named for the divesite and 1 of x. On each dive I then cull out the obvious bad ones (most of them) and pitch them off the hard drive totally. Then I go through and develop the ones that have promise. I used to think that the pics had to be perfect to keep, but I have been reading David Vestal and his comments about finding the good part of a photograph have changed my thinking a bit. I keyword the pics using some fairly simple keywords and I rate them from 0 stars to 3 (I haven't found any 4 or more yet). At the end of the day (week/month) I have a catalog from the Philippines, sorted by dive sites, keyworded to find general categories, and if I view sorted by rating, I have all the good ones at the top of the page. Then, I typically export them to a folder for making into a slide show using Fotomagico. With the new LR3, I might be able to get cool enough slide shows without the export but it isn't clear yet that it will be interesting.

Bill

Thanks for the input guys.

One question though if you keep you have 1 huge vault/catalog does that slow aperture or LR down?

I formed the impression that as my aperture vault got larger it look longer to browse etc, but it may have just been down to an ageing computer rather than anything else.

That was primary motivation for a having a ''keepers'' vault and a working vault

Erol,

Remember Lightroom isn't loading the complete file from some giant folder. The catalog is just keeping track of where all your images are located. Think of it as a database program. If you are querying a database you'd want all the info in one place not spread out in multiple databases. I know lots of folks who have 40 to 50 thousand images in LR and don't have speed issues. LR can easily handle more than 50,000 images as long as you occasionally optimise, and ensure that the full size previews are deleted every 30 days (or so), without slowing down. (Assuming you have reasonable hardware) On guy I know has 100,000 images and has no speed problems. It's very hard for me to see the day when I have 50,000 keeepers.

Not sure about Aperture.

Bill, if you use keywords for each dive (applied when you import the images) you can very easily do the sort you need and still be able to do a filter of the best shots from the whole trip, or best nudibrach from any trip for example. I'm not trying to change your process. If your happy I'm happy, but you really don't read the added complication of multiple catalogs to do the same thing.

Have fun,

Steve

Erol,

Remember Lightroom isn't loading the complete file from some giant folder. The catalog is just keeping track of where all your images are located. Think of it as a database program. If you are querying a database you'd want all the info in one place not spread out in multiple databases. I know lots of folks who have 40 to 50 thousand images in LR and don't have speed issues. LR can easily handle more than 50,000 images as long as you occasionally optimise, and ensure that the full size previews are deleted every 30 days (or so), without slowing down. (Assuming you have reasonable hardware) On guy I know has 100,000 images and has no speed problems. It's very hard for me to see the day when I have 50,000 keeepers.

Not sure about Aperture.

 

Bill, if you use keywords for each dive (applied when you import the images) you can very easily do the sort you need and still be able to do a filter of the best shots from the whole trip, or best nudibrach from any trip for example. I'm not trying to change your process. If your happy I'm happy, but you really don't read the added complication of multiple catalogs to do the same thing.

 

Have fun,

Steve

I know I can do that but there are two problems. Not all of my older stuff is keyworded yet, and I might have to hire some smart 12 year old to help me do it. More importantly, in spite of the "databaseness" of LR, on my Imac at least, loading very very large collections and navigating through them via keywords is considerably slower than for smaller folders. Also, I like to keep at least one copy of a backup on DVD/CD so I try to keep them relatively small. For now, I have one big California LR catalog and then one for each major area like Indonesia, Philippines etc. Since I pretty much only rate my pics as zero, one or two stars, finding a "best" one is pretty tough. I am hoping that LR 3 will let me actually make reasonably nice slideshows like Fotomagico but so far I am not smart enough to figure out how to make that happen.

Cheers

Bill

For now, I have one big California LR catalog and then one for each major area like Indonesia, Philippines etc. Since I pretty much only rate my pics as zero, one or two stars, finding a "best" one is pretty tough. I am hoping that LR 3 will let me actually make reasonably nice slideshows like Fotomagico but so far I am not smart enough to figure out how to make that happen.

Hey Bill,

I can help a little with the keywording, although a twelve year old might find a faster way. In the Library Grid view select all the images you want to add keywords to. (Select the first image and scroll to the bottom and shift select the last one) On the bottom right click "Sync Metadata" The sync screen will pop up and if you can scroll to the bottom you'll see the keyword section. Select the box next to keyword and type in any keyword you want on all these images. (Make sure all the other boxes like copyright are uncheckedand are not filled). When your all set hit the "Synchronise" button and you have just added your keyword(s) to all the selected images. If you select your Catalog and "all photographs" you can add a keyword(s) to every pic on your machine in a few seconds.

DANGER, this only works if you have no other keywords assigned to the image you first selected, other wise you will be copying those key words to all the selected images too.

Give it a try, the Sync metadata button is great for all kinds of uses.

Keeping your catalogs seperate by major location makes sense to me too. I misunderstood, when you said a catalog for each divesite. I had visions of hundreds clogging up the works.

Cheers,

Steve