phipop: hello everybody,i bought LR a few months ago, did some tests and not much more until now.I bought it because i read so much good comments on LR in the french photo press. And that's all. I DONT want LR catalogs and LR collections, and i just want the ability to put let's say one 1000 raw files from d90 or d800 and process to the best jpegs as possible and that's all.I even wonder now if this is just possible!i dont mind LR spirit and i am ready to 'destroy' the usefuless others catalogs created by LR, as i want to take the raws files where i put them, and 'export' the jpegs from LR where i want. Saves and others things i do myself.Excuse my english and THANKS!philippe
Hello Philippe. I have been using LR for the last few years to process my raw image files and generate TIFF or JPEG output files. I really like the efficiency LR offers for processing large numbers of images (shot at the same event). You can very quickly adjust white balance, noise reduction, sharpening, etc. and apply it to all your output images in seconds. I also find the exposure controls, brushes, gradients, etc., very efficient and easy to use.
I keep my own filing structure that makes sense to me. I simply configure LR to import the images from the camera's memory card into the appropriate folder when I begin processing my images. As I discovered from this forum, I am apparently not taking advantage of the catalog and collection features of LR, but they appear to offer limited benefit for me, and maybe the same will be true for you. I still recommend using LR, even if you're only interested in the image processing capabilities.
NoVI Photo: I have used LR for the last few years and find it far more efficient than PhotoShop for editing large batches of images from a single event. It takes seconds to set white balance, exposure, noise reduction, sharpening, etc. for the whole batch. I haven't used the keywords technique until reading this article. I just opened up all the catalogs that I made in 2012, and within a half hour attached keywords on the thousands of images. Like the image editing, it was very easy to select dozens of images at once and give them the same keywords. So far, so good.
But I fail to see the advantage of how this helps me find a particular image more quickly. I can search within a catalog to find an image that has been tagged with a particular keyword, which is a time saver, but only a small one since the catalog only contains images of a particular event anyway. I don't see how I can search other catalogs, or my hard drive for images with the same keyword. Am I missing something?
I just watched the LR catalog tutorial on Adobe's site. It explains, "you can create as many catalogs as you like" and, "I always put the catalog file in the same directory as the source image files". There was never mention of using one giant catalog, or the advantages of having one giant catalog for all one's images.
But I also found this FAQ: "Unless you're working with thousands of photos and performance is a concern, try not to use multiple catalogs. Multiple catalogs can become complicated to manage. Lightroom offers myriad ways to sort, filter, and otherwise organize and find photos within one catalog. For example, you can use folders, collections, keywords, labels, and ratings. With a little thought and practice, you can probably find ways to organize and manage all of your photos successfully in one catalog."
I have 10's of thousands of photos, and performance is always a concern, so it doesn't appear that supporting Google-like searches of all one's images is realistic.
Thanks for all the replies. I will definitely consider merging all my catalogs into one as I do like the idea of searching by keywords.
I'm beginning to think I'm not missing something, but rather see LR's current keyword feature as lacking. If it allowed for searching keywords *across* catalogs, it would be useful.
My directories, sub-directories, and files are already organized by year, then the name of the sub-directory under the year is the name of the event (e.g., 2012\Christmas). I create the LR catalog file within the appropriate directory, and then import the raw images into that same directory. When I export the edited images, I put the files in a sub-directory of the catalog directory called "edited".
It's very simple to go to a year and find a particular event with my directory organization. I can use Windows 7 Explorer like Google to find the name of any event, and with Windows' indexing feature, it's as fast as a Google search on the Internet. Inside that directory, I just browse the thumbnails in the "edited" sub-directory to find the image I'm looking for. It takes seconds.
It could be that I'm using catalogs incorrectly. I create a new catalog whenever I take photos of a new major event. But unless I have one giant catalog that contains a bunch of collections for all the photos I've ever taken, I don't see how the tagging of photos with keywords in LR will help me do a "Google-like" search of all my images to find every instance of photos of my son, for example.
How do you partition your catalogs? What's the logic for when to start a new catalog v. just making a new collection within a catalog?
I have used LR for the last few years and find it far more efficient than PhotoShop for editing large batches of images from a single event. It takes seconds to set white balance, exposure, noise reduction, sharpening, etc. for the whole batch. I haven't used the keywords technique until reading this article. I just opened up all the catalogs that I made in 2012, and within a half hour attached keywords on the thousands of images. Like the image editing, it was very easy to select dozens of images at once and give them the same keywords. So far, so good.
These photos remind me of the first time I experimented with an off-camera flash when I was teenager back in the 1970's. My results were similarly awful. I never showed the photos to the people whose time I felt I had wasted.