Organising photos (folder name format, keywords, collections, etc.)

[Thupten]

Hi,

My photo folders are a real mess. I really need to organise them but I don’t find the time. I suppose that I should, at least, start by finding a system to use when importing and organising all new photos. And slowly organise the backlog, time-permitting.

Please can anyone advise me? I would be interested to know the most popular / efficient methods.

A few comments about my current workflow:

Most of my folders are named according to the location and then date, e.g. “London – November 2008”, or “Dad’s birthday – dd-mm-yyyy”. I never re-name my photos, and my Nikon D80 has been “round the clock”, so there are some duplicate numbers (file names). So far, this has never been a problem. Once I did try to add keywords to a folder of photos from a two-month trip, but I got carried away and added too many – keyword oversaturation! I quickly learnt that too many keywords per photo becomes very unhelpful and a lot of that detail should have gone in the “description” box. Having made this mistake, I’ve been hesitant for a long time to make more mistakes in how I organise everything – as a result, not much organising has taken place!

I import photos with Nikon Transfer, then view them in Nikon ViewNX 2, adding stars to those I want to edit, then use ACR. I rarely use Bridge these days. I never understood the full screen “preview” function in Bridge. Unless I am doing something wrong, it is like a low resolution version – not half as sharp as reviewing an image in Nikon ViewNX 2. And I don’t mean because Bridge shows a RAW file as “flat” compared to Nikon ViewNX 2 previewing a Nikon RAW file and making “auto” adjustments. I mean “finished” photos, saved as JPEGs. In Bridge it’s like an enlarged (and grainy) thumbnail. In ViewNX, it is like looking at the finished photo.

Anyway, I am considering changing to Lightroom, and using this for pretty much everything. I understand that I do not have to “import” (i.e. duplicate) photos, but Lightroom can read them from the original folders (on external drives). However, I like how ACR stores those xmp files in the original folder. According to my limited understanding, Lightroom will read from the original folder but will not put any kind of file (i.e. like an xmp file) in the original folder, and that all “edit” info is stored in Lightroom on my computer? Please can anyone correct me here if I am wrong. Related to this, I understand that Lightroom can read my xmp files from my ACR work, and so all of that work is not lost if I ever find myself without Photoshop and ACR? Finally, Lightroom’s “Collections” function seems to be a useful way to organise photos in addition to folder names and keywords, so I will be looking into that once i have got the basics organised.

I suppose at some point I should look into that whole debate on RAW files vs. Adobe digital negative (dng). Hopefully I have time to organise my photos and folders, and then convert everything later if necessary. The idea of effectively duplicating all the chaos I have by making dng files is not appealing whatsoever.

Thanks in advance for reading this – good advice and ideas will be very much appreciated!

All the best!

 

[yardcoyote]

I work with OOC JPEGS only, if that makes any difference.

My first sort with any images is by camera and lens. Each combination has its own master "catch" folder. Within that, I copy images directly form the camera card into folders by date (for everyday walkaround ) or specific activity (wrestling at the Moose Lodge plus date, zoo trip plus date, steam show plus date).

Then comes the culling process-- I will discard most of my shots at this point keeping only the good and the useful. Useful ones get copied into general folders in another file structure-- animals, trees, figures, cars- for use as photo references. Good ones get further refinements plus any necessary tweaking or cropping, and sometimes end up combined with images from other cameras into general folders for specific topics or events.

Eventually the very best of the best get individually named and are sorted into general keeper folders in their own file structure.

The keeper folders are heavily backed up and consist of best of each camera and lens, best of each year, and best of folders by topic (dog portrait, wallpaper, flower picture, people, cars, street,etc.,). This sounds complicated, but there are very few images in those keeper folders ...

I am in process of changing computers right now and this is the refined file structure I am moving into.

 

[ajscullard]

You'll probably get the same answer that is given every time somebody here asks the same question (about every couple of months) - borrow or buy a copy of "The DAM book" by Peter Krogh. It details various options for workflow, keywording and cataloguing and should allow you to decide what will work best for you.

Different photographers have different requirements and will adopt different solutions, but this book will put you on the right path. People here will give you multiple answers based on what works for them, but they may not work for you.

 

[AlbertTheLazy]

The only general advice I can give is to always write dates in YYYYMMDD (20160514, for example) if they are ever likely to part of a search or sort.

If you don't use a proper DAM database it makes sense to name folders with the date first and then any description following. I can generally remember which year, probably which month, I took a shot I'm looking for but starting with the description makes life harder.

 

[hotdog321]

If you do a search you will see this subject comes up from time to time. Every person is going to need to find a system that works for him/her. For me, I do this stuff for a living and organize it according to "client" "date" "subject" The entire shoot: raw, jpegs and finished images are saved in the same folder.

chron 05-05-16 NFLBIZ

chron 05-08-16 Church merger protest

hbj 04-24-16 Logical Innovations

personal 05-12-16 Yosemite

etc.

I probably have close to a million images going back to 2002 and can literally find a particular image while talking to the client on the phone (I've done this.)

 

[robgendreau]

Whether your folders are disorganized shouldn't matter that much.

What matters is whether you can find what you want to find.

And folders are one of the WORST ways to do that. For example, an image can only be in one folder without copying it. So does that portrait of Dad go in "Portraits" or in "New Year's at Dads"? If you applied both of those terms as keywords you be done, even if the image was stored in folder iufm98hfs'0JFN;ojpdf'sf.

Lightroom DOES have to import images. But it imports REFERENCES to those images, in whatever folder you have already put them in, or it will copy them to new folders. It doesn't put them in a managed library/catalog (like say Apple Aperture), and it isn't a browser: something that just goes to folders like the Mac Finder or Windows Explorer, or Bridge.

The advantage of Lr is that it could import all your messy folder structure and keywords. You wouldn't have to change anything in folder names; you could make hierarchical keywords or collections and collection sets that could more flexibly impart the same info, which means an ability to find those images based on searching or filtering for that info.

 

[Thupten]

Hi Yardcoyote,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and details about your methods. Seems like you are quite ruthless in deciding which ones to "cull". I need to develop that skill ;-)

 

[Thupten]

Hi ajscullard,

Thank you. That book like very informative. I note that the first edition was in 2005 and the second edition was 2009. I just emailed the publisher on the off-chance that a revised / updated edition is on the way. It would seem a shame to spend so much money on that book and then find there is an up-to-date version. Otherwise, I will buy the second edition.

The second edition has excellent reviews on amazon. One interesting review on the amazon page for the first edition (the grammar typos are not mine!):

“Great for those that want to work this way but I dont. Too long winded - Im a photographer not a librarian. Minimal keywording and smart collections in Adobe Lightroom are the way to go for me”.

I do like the idea of keeping things simple, but I can't help thinking that "becoming a librarian" is somehow inevitable, and not such a bad thing.

Thanks again.

 

[Thupten]

Hi Albert,

Thank you. Good advice. Actually, I realise that I do have some folders which are YYYY-MM-DD, but mostly the other way. I will follow your advice and become consistent.

For me, it seems better to have the subject first and date second, since I am more likely to search for “New York” (and then see “New York – 2010-01-10”, and then “New York – 2012-06-02”, and so on), and rarely need to search primarily in chronological order. I think if I can remember a date when something was taken, then I can certainly remember where the photo was taken. But whatever works, works, I suppose.

Do you separate with hyphens or underscores, or literally “20160514”?

ajscullard just recommended “The DAM book” by Peter Krogh. It's the first I heard of a DAM database; your message was the second. I’m considering buying that book. Meanwhile, I have no idea what a DAM database is, but very curious to find out.

Thanks!!

 

[Thupten]

Hi hotdog321,

Close to a million? Wow. Good to know that system works. Do you also use keywords? Lightroom "Collections"? Or Bridge?

 

[Thupten]

Hi Robgendreau,

Thank you for your comments and info. It’s really helpful.

Generally, I can find what I am looking for amongst the chaos – I seem to have a good memory for events and dates. But I am slowed down by lack of time spent organising and “culling” (as one person described above).

I feel like, as suggested by others above, a simple folder structure of “Place or event” followed by “YYYY-MM-DD” makes sense. Then, as you suggest, “portraits” would best be marked with a keyword – or assigned to a “Collection” in Lightroom?

A few questions about Lightroom:

(1) You wrote, “Lightroom DOES have to import images. But it imports REFERENCES to those images”. So, if a RAW file is 5GB on an external drive, it does not import a 5GB file, right? It imports a “reference” which is, presumably, just a small data file? So I am not going to be using up 100s of GB of space on my computer’s hard drive?

(2) You wrote, “The advantage of Lr is that it could import all your messy folder structure and keywords. You wouldn't have to change anything in folder names; you could make hierarchical keywords or collections and collection sets that could more flexibly impart the same info, which means an ability to find those images based on searching or filtering for that info”. So, my question is, if I then use Nikon ViewNX or Bridge to organise my messy folder structures, how will Lightroom know where to find anything? My understanding, according to your comments, is that I cannot do the kind of file- and folder-organising “librarian’s work” from within Lightroom; best to use Bridge for that? I’m guessing. Am I right?

(3) You said, “it isn't a browser”. I think this relates to my comments above (No. 2). You mean in the way that Bridge is a browser – where everything can be organised? But, as I mentioned in my original post, I never understood the full screen “preview” function in Bridge. Unless I am doing something wrong, it is like a low resolution version [like an enlarged thumbnail] – not half as sharp as reviewing an image in Nikon ViewNX 2. So I find that ViewNX is a good place to “view” photos and show others, whereas Bridge is not. According to my limited understanding, Lightroom is good for this (as well as all the editing capabilities)?

Sorry if some of my questions seem a bit “basic”! Thanks for your help.

 

[BertIverson]

Use a photo organizer which uses an *index* instead of folders. Like others have said, learn about *DAM* (digital asset management). Examples would be PhotoShop (even Elements) LightRoom. Many more I'm sure. I use ThumbsPlus.
When creating your tags/keywords, answer the questions: When, Where, Why, Who/What for each photo.

my 0.02 only,
Bert

 

[cookedraw]

Most basic low tech solution I have found is this, but works very good.

Rename files by star system , say a file is named file1 and you give the file three stars, rename it to AAAfile1 . sort in alphabetical order or search in parent folder. it works

Use a minimum of AA and you can search for AA and you will find all rated files in the subfolders.

--
" Use the shutter button on the headset cord " - Leonardo Da Vinci

 

[AlbertTheLazy]

Hi Albert,

Thank you. Good advice. Actually, I realise that I do have some folders which are YYYY-MM-DD, but mostly the other way. I will follow your advice and become consistent.

For me, it seems better to have the subject first and date second, since I am more likely to search for “New York” (and then see “New York – 2010-01-10”, and then “New York – 2012-06-02”, and so on), and rarely need to search primarily in chronological order. I think if I can remember a date when something was taken, then I can certainly remember where the photo was taken. But whatever works, works, I suppose.

This is to a certain extent a matter of taste. For me the risk of using 'Manhattan' or 'Bronx' instead of 'New York' would override the convenience.

Do you separate with hyphens or underscores, or literally “20160514”?

Personally I just use YYYYMMDD because I know the order and extra characters like hyphens just add typing, plus it's less likely that you will sometimes use hyphens, sometimes underscores, etc.

ajscullard just recommended “The DAM book” by Peter Krogh. It's the first I heard of a DAM database; your message was the second. I’m considering buying that book. Meanwhile, I have no idea what a DAM database is, but very curious to find out.

DAM = 'Digital Asset Management' In other words a way of organising information about things of importance to you ('assets') on a computer. It allows you to classify ('tag') pictures in various ways and then search using those tags and various EXIF data. Unfortunately this is only as good as the consistency with which you use tags and apply them every time you load images into your computer.

You can also organise tags hierarchically so, for example, tagging a photo with 'Bronx' would mean it would automatically turn up in searches for 'New York'.

Lightroom is probably the best known photographic DAM system and because it includes the image processing tools as well it's probably the most popular. It's only available for Windows and Mac, so I don't use it and there might be other, less full-featured systems that would suit you.

 

[Thupten]

Hi, just seen a few responses here since I last checked last night. I have read them and will read again and reply later today or tomorrow. Meanwhile, I just wanted to say thanks for all the help! I still need to look into the whole DAM system idea, etc., and I have questions about Lightroom verses Bridge, etc. But last night I typed out a kind of plan of how I want to organise and name all the different types of folders etc. that I have. Suddenly I can see a more organised and less chaotic future, and it's very good to be able to have an overview of how to go about this without wasting time making big mistakes.

 

[KCook]

I don't cull much. I do have a backup program that copies all image files to a USB drive. When things get to nuts on my PC hard drive I select a few old folder sets for deletion. Check that the backup was successful, then delete those folders from the PC. So this is a once-in-a-while chunkachunka process. Not something that I fuss with continuously.

I remember seasons of the year a whole lot better than what the year was. For example - Christmas photo, oh yeah, that would be month 12. So all of my image folders are MM-DD-YYYY. Then all of the Christmas shots are in adjacent folders, regardless of year.

I don't modify the original image file names at all. Don't append tags for subject, place, etc. I use my DAM (happens to be ACDSee) categories and tags for that.

When using LR the Collections are very handy for organizing workflow and output image sets. But I don't use Collections for organizing original images. Categories and tags are better for that.

When importing an image in LR you have the option of copying or moving the file to another volume, or just leaving it in place. Leaving it in place is the "reference" case. I do my actual transfers from memory card to PC with ACDSee. So if/when I happen to use LR on that file, the file is already where I wanted it, I just use the reference case.

DAMs do not talk to each other or read each others databases. You have to select one for your file organization, and then stick with it. Which does not mean other RAW developers cannot perform edits on those files. The drill is to first use the DAM to identify the folder and filename. Then remember that file location when opening the "alien" RAW processor.

LR can be used as a viewer. Unless you are trying to view images that never were imported into the LR DB in the first place. In that case you would need to perform the Import prior to viewing. All DAMs have a viewer panel built in.

DAMs also provide star tags.

This is a big topic. Linky for more views -

How do YOU organize photos on your computer?

And here is a good article that maps out the Lightroom solution in detail -

How to Organize Photos in Lightroom

The general aspects of image organization in LR are also found in other DAMs.

Kelly Cook

 

[Thupten]

Hi Albert,

Thank you. Good advice. Actually, I realise that I do have some folders which are YYYY-MM-DD, but mostly the other way. I will follow your advice and become consistent.

For me, it seems better to have the subject first and date second, since I am more likely to search for “New York” (and then see “New York – 2010-01-10”, and then “New York – 2012-06-02”, and so on), and rarely need to search primarily in chronological order. I think if I can remember a date when something was taken, then I can certainly remember where the photo was taken. But whatever works, works, I suppose.

This is to a certain extent a matter of taste. For me the risk of using 'Manhattan' or 'Bronx' instead of 'New York' would override the convenience.

Do you separate with hyphens or underscores, or literally “20160514”?

Personally I just use YYYYMMDD because I know the order and extra characters like hyphens just add typing, plus it's less likely that you will sometimes use hyphens, sometimes underscores, etc.

ajscullard just recommended “The DAM book” by Peter Krogh. It's the first I heard of a DAM database; your message was the second. I’m considering buying that book. Meanwhile, I have no idea what a DAM database is, but very curious to find out.

DAM = 'Digital Asset Management' In other words a way of organising information about things of importance to you ('assets') on a computer. It allows you to classify ('tag') pictures in various ways and then search using those tags and various EXIF data. Unfortunately this is only as good as the consistency with which you use tags and apply them every time you load images into your computer.

You can also organise tags hierarchically so, for example, tagging a photo with 'Bronx' would mean it would automatically turn up in searches for 'New York'.

Lightroom is probably the best known photographic DAM system and because it includes the image processing tools as well it's probably the most popular. It's only available for Windows and Mac, so I don't use it and there might be other, less full-featured systems that would suit you.

 

[Thupten]

Use a photo organizer which uses an *index* instead of folders. Like others have said, learn about *DAM* (digital asset management). Examples would be PhotoShop (even Elements) LightRoom. Many more I'm sure. I use ThumbsPlus.
When creating your tags/keywords, answer the questions: When, Where, Why, Who/What for each photo.

my 0.02 only,
Bert

Hi Bert,

Thanks for your advice on ‘DAM’ and tips on key wording, etc.

Much appreciated.

 

[Thupten]

I don't cull much. I do have a backup program that copies all image files to a USB drive. When things get to nuts on my PC hard drive I select a few old folder sets for deletion. Check that the backup was successful, then delete those folders from the PC. So this is a once-in-a-while chunkachunka process. Not something that I fuss with continuously.

I remember seasons of the year a whole lot better than what the year was. For example - Christmas photo, oh yeah, that would be month 12. So all of my image folders are MM-DD-YYYY. Then all of the Christmas shots are in adjacent folders, regardless of year.

I don't modify the original image file names at all. Don't append tags for subject, place, etc. I use my DAM (happens to be ACDSee) categories and tags for that.

When using LR the Collections are very handy for organizing workflow and output image sets. But I don't use Collections for organizing original images. Categories and tags are better for that.

When importing an image in LR you have the option of copying or moving the file to another volume, or just leaving it in place. Leaving it in place is the "reference" case. I do my actual transfers from memory card to PC with ACDSee. So if/when I happen to use LR on that file, the file is already where I wanted it, I just use the reference case.

DAMs do not talk to each other or read each others databases. You have to select one for your file organization, and then stick with it. Which does not mean other RAW developers cannot perform edits on those files. The drill is to first use the DAM to identify the folder and filename. Then remember that file location when opening the "alien" RAW processor.

LR can be used as a viewer. Unless you are trying to view images that never were imported into the LR DB in the first place. In that case you would need to perform the Import prior to viewing. All DAMs have a viewer panel built in.

DAMs also provide star tags.

This is a big topic. Linky for more views -

How do YOU organize photos on your computer?

And here is a good article that maps out the Lightroom solution in detail -

How to Organize Photos in Lightroom

The general aspects of image organization in LR are also found in other DAMs.

Kelly Cook

Hi Kelly, thanks for your very detailed reply and the links. I have bookmarked those and will read them over the next few days.

Thanks!

 

[James Larsen]

That seems like a heck of a job, if you didn't start organizing them from back in 2008...thats a problem.
I don't even know what advice to give besides getting an external drive and putting all of them onto that in a good order.