Lightroom catalog

[DMKAlex]

My understanding is, Lightroom keeps all the edit information inside the catalog, thus, the non-destructive edit.

I do all my edit with Photoshop and save the edited version separately. I have to resync the folder to import the edited version into Lightroom.

Is there any reason I need to maintain a catalog. I have been working with just the folders structure, which is identical to my HDD.

 

[charlyw64]

My understanding is, Lightroom keeps all the edit information inside the catalog, thus, the non-destructive edit.

Correct.

I do all my edit with Photoshop and save the edited version separately. I have to resync the folder to import the edited version into Lightroom.

That's because you insist to work around using Lightroom, you make life harder for yourself because you don't use Lightroom but rather use Photoshop. Why do you use Lightroom at all if you aren't using it?

Is there any reason I need to maintain a catalog. I have been working with just the folders structure, which is identical to my HDD.

Nope. Uninstall Lightroom and use Bridge to do your image selection and management.

I would strongly advise to no longer avoid Lightroom, instead I would start looking into what Lightroom can do more easily than Photoshop (which is quite a lot by now) and if any round trips to PS remain I would initiate them from within Lightroom. That has so many benefits that trying to avoid this is a major hassle that IMHO only is justified if you don't have the time to learn how to use Lightroom.

 

[dwight3]

My understanding is, Lightroom keeps all the edit information inside the catalog, thus, the non-destructive edit.

Correct.

I do all my edit with Photoshop and save the edited version separately. I have to resync the folder to import the edited version into Lightroom.

That's because you insist to work around using Lightroom, you make life harder for yourself because you don't use Lightroom but rather use Photoshop. Why do you use Lightroom at all if you aren't using it?

Is there any reason I need to maintain a catalog. I have been working with just the folders structure, which is identical to my HDD.

Nope. Uninstall Lightroom and use Bridge to do your image selection and management.

I would strongly advise to no longer avoid Lightroom, instead I would start looking into what Lightroom can do more easily than Photoshop (which is quite a lot by now) and if any round trips to PS remain I would initiate them from within Lightroom. That has so many benefits that trying to avoid this is a major hassle that IMHO only is justified if you don't have the time to learn how to use Lightroom.

Agree. Lightroom does 90% of my editing and handshakes with PS so I can use it for the other 10%. The result is returned to LR as a new image but can be automatically stacked over the original. That way both versions are available. Keywords are preserved. Filenames are preserved.

FWIW I think meaningful file names are useful (at least for family photos) because my family hasn't a clue how to use LR to find things. A good folder structure will help them when I can't.

 

[DMKAlex]

I have been using Bridge since PS version 3 or 5? I think I might have reached the limit of Bridge with the number of files. The keyword search was not reliable and very sluggish. So I switched to Lightroom for managing my portfolio.

I have been using PS since version 3 and it became second nature to me. I know LR has some editing capability and it maybe a good tool for wedding photographer who may have a batch of images that needs the same adjustments. But I have been using the selection tools like quick select, selection by channels, or refined edge. For more detail selection, I'd mastered the pen tool. I didn't find that readily available in LR. Mask layers are something I cannot live without in photo editing. Plus, my subscription includes PS. I don't see why I should abandon something that works like 2nd nature to me.

 

[jonby]

I have been using Bridge since PS version 3 or 5? I think I might have reached the limit of Bridge with the number of files. The keyword search was not reliable and very sluggish. So I switched to Lightroom for managing my portfolio.

I have been using PS since version 3 and it became second nature to me. I know LR has some editing capability and it maybe a good tool for wedding photographer who may have a batch of images that needs the same adjustments. But I have been using the selection tools like quick select, selection by channels, or refined edge. For more detail selection, I'd mastered the pen tool. I didn't find that readily available in LR. Mask layers are something I cannot live without in photo editing. Plus, my subscription includes PS. I don't see why I should abandon something that works like 2nd nature to me.

No of course you don't have to abandon the workflow and techniques you have developed in Photoshop. These skills take a long time to develop and it's entirely understandable that you want to stick with those. If you start to use Lightroom more then you will probably find that you can do many of the things you currently do in PS, but probably not everything. You are correct that there is no equivalent to the pen tool in LrC, for example. The masking is fairly advanced now though, with recent updates. There are many potential advantages also, but of course these would take time to take advantage of. One major one is that you don't generate huge files every time you edit an image - all that gets stored is metadata and masks.

You asked about whether you need to maintain a catalogue in Lightroom. If you want to use Lightroom for image viewing/sorting/finding/management, then yes there's no way around it. Lightroom maintains a catalogue in order to work, whether you do your editing there or not. However, what features you use is entirely up to you. If you just want to do keywording, star rating, selecting, viewing etc. then that's fine. It all gets stored in the catalogue and as long as you don't delete the catalogue file you don't have to do much to 'maintain' it.

 

[DMKAlex]

I have been using Bridge since PS version 3 or 5? I think I might have reached the limit of Bridge with the number of files. The keyword search was not reliable and very sluggish. So I switched to Lightroom for managing my portfolio.

I have been using PS since version 3 and it became second nature to me. I know LR has some editing capability and it maybe a good tool for wedding photographer who may have a batch of images that needs the same adjustments. But I have been using the selection tools like quick select, selection by channels, or refined edge. For more detail selection, I'd mastered the pen tool. I didn't find that readily available in LR. Mask layers are something I cannot live without in photo editing. Plus, my subscription includes PS. I don't see why I should abandon something that works like 2nd nature to me.

No of course you don't have to abandon the workflow and techniques you have developed in Photoshop. These skills take a long time to develop and it's entirely understandable that you want to stick with those. If you start to use Lightroom more then you will probably find that you can do many of the things you currently do in PS, but probably not everything. You are correct that there is no equivalent to the pen tool in LrC, for example. The masking is fairly advanced now though, with recent updates. There are many potential advantages also, but of course these would take time to take advantage of. One major one is that you don't generate huge files every time you edit an image - all that gets stored is metadata and masks.

You asked about whether you need to maintain a catalogue in Lightroom. If you want to use Lightroom for image viewing/sorting/finding/management, then yes there's no way around it. Lightroom maintains a catalogue in order to work, whether you do your editing there or not. However, what features you use is entirely up to you. If you just want to do keywording, star rating, selecting, viewing etc. then that's fine. It all gets stored in the catalogue and as long as you don't delete the catalogue file you don't have to do much to 'maintain' it.

As I said, I use LR primarily for file organization. It recognizes the keywords I had assigned thru Bridge. I don't have a catalog set up. When I need to search by keywords, I just go to the library mode and use the text containing . . . and it works.

Am I missing something?

 

[Jim B (MSP)]

And you have had some good answers so far.

My understanding is, Lightroom keeps all the edit information inside the catalog, thus, the non-destructive edit.

Yes

I do all my edit with Photoshop and save the edited version separately. I have to resync the folder to import the edited version into Lightroom.

Use LT's "Edit in" function to send the file to PS> A Save will bring it right back.

Is there any reason I need to maintain a catalog. I have been working with just the folders structure, which is identical to my HDD.

Yes.

As a starter, read

https://fstoppers.com/education/why-every-photographer-should-give-dam-163630

There is lots out there on using a DAM

--
Jim
"It's all about the light"

 

[jonby]

As I said, I use LR primarily for file organization. It recognizes the keywords I had assigned thru Bridge. I don't have a catalog set up. When I need to search by keywords, I just go to the library mode and use the text containing . . . and it works.

Am I missing something?

I assume we are talking about 'Lightroom Classic' here - not 'Lightroom', which is a different animal.

Yes, I think you are missing the fact that LrC always uses a catalogue, no matter how you use it. Anything and everything you do in LrC is stored in the catalogue file. When you import an image, LrC adds the filename, location and any metadata associated with the file to the catalogue. If you add or change any metadata, such as keywords, colour labels, star ratings, flags or location data to an image, it stores this in the catalogue.

When you install LrC (or possibly when you first run it), it creates a catalogue file in the default location for your system, and continues to use that until the user creates another one, which they may or may not do.

On a Mac, the default catalogue is stored in User/Pictures/Lightroom.
On Windows, I think it's User\My Pictures\Lightroom

If you go to the Catalog Settings in LrC, it will show you the location.

The actual catalogue file will be called 'Lightroom Catalog.lrcat'. If you were to delete that file, LrC would ask you to locate or create a catalog the next time you start it, and you would have to re-import all your images from scratch. Any keywords you added in LrC would be lost.

So 'I don't have a catalog set up' is not true if you are using LrC. You are using it every time you use the program.

You can create new catalogues if you want - as many as you like - and store them wherever you want. Many people just use a single catalogue - often in the default location.

 

[DMKAlex]

As I said, I use LR primarily for file organization. It recognizes the keywords I had assigned thru Bridge. I don't have a catalog set up. When I need to search by keywords, I just go to the library mode and use the text containing . . . and it works.

Am I missing something?

I assume we are talking about 'Lightroom Classic' here - not 'Lightroom', which is a different animal.

Yes, I think you are missing the fact that LrC always uses a catalogue, no matter how you use it. Anything and everything you do in LrC is stored in the catalogue file. When you import an image, LrC adds the filename, location and any metadata associated with the file to the catalogue. If you add or change any metadata, such as keywords, colour labels, star ratings, flags or location data to an image, it stores this in the catalogue.

When you install LrC (or possibly when you first run it), it creates a catalogue file in the default location for your system, and continues to use that until the user creates another one, which they may or may not do.

On a Mac, the default catalogue is stored in User/Pictures/Lightroom.
On Windows, I think it's User\My Pictures\Lightroom

If you go to the Catalog Settings in LrC, it will show you the location.

The actual catalogue file will be called 'Lightroom Catalog.lrcat'. If you were to delete that file, LrC would ask you to locate or create a catalog the next time you start it, and you would have to re-import all your images from scratch. Any keywords you added in LrC would be lost.

So 'I don't have a catalog set up' is not true if you are using LrC. You are using it every time you use the program.

You can create new catalogues if you want - as many as you like - and store them wherever you want. Many people just use a single catalogue - often in the default location.

Yes I found some catalog files in the Pictures folder. I think LRC set it up automatically when I imported the Pictures folder/subfolders from my HDD.

Interesting that it recognizes the keywords I assigned when I was using Bridge. And Bridge would recognize that I assigned via LRC.

Again, because I edit in PS, catalog does play as important role in managing my edited attributes.

Am I saying it right?

 

[DMKAlex]

And you have had some good answers so far.

My understanding is, Lightroom keeps all the edit information inside the catalog, thus, the non-destructive edit.

Yes

I do all my edit with Photoshop and save the edited version separately. I have to resync the folder to import the edited version into Lightroom.

Use LT's "Edit in" function to send the file to PS> A Save will bring it right back.

Yes, I use Ctrl+E to edit the original file in Photoshop. When done, I Save As a copy in the subfolder of the original. I believe I have to resync the directory to import the newly edited version into LRC. Are you saying that it should be automatically recognized?

Is there any reason I need to maintain a catalog. I have been working with just the folders structure, which is identical to my HDD.

Yes.

As a starter, read

https://fstoppers.com/education/why-every-photographer-should-give-dam-163630

There is lots out there on using a DAM

 

[DMKAlex]

My understanding is, Lightroom keeps all the edit information inside the catalog, thus, the non-destructive edit.

Correct.

I do all my edit with Photoshop and save the edited version separately. I have to resync the folder to import the edited version into Lightroom.

That's because you insist to work around using Lightroom, you make life harder for yourself because you don't use Lightroom but rather use Photoshop. Why do you use Lightroom at all if you aren't using it?

Is there any reason I need to maintain a catalog. I have been working with just the folders structure, which is identical to my HDD.

Nope. Uninstall Lightroom and use Bridge to do your image selection and management.

I would strongly advise to no longer avoid Lightroom, instead I would start looking into what Lightroom can do more easily than Photoshop (which is quite a lot by now) and if any round trips to PS remain I would initiate them from within Lightroom. That has so many benefits that trying to avoid this is a major hassle that IMHO only is justified if you don't have the time to learn how to use Lightroom.

I am in all the way for learning more. If LRC is more effective, or convenient than PS for what I do, I may not have the need to go to PS.

I have dabbled into the Develop mode and find those adjustments on the right hand panel. It's OK if I want to adjust the overall brightness, or color of the picture.

I can't figure out how to do something I routinely do in Photoshop. The following two pictures are the before and after versions. From the original, I removed the orange floating ball on the upper right. I added a bright line to the right hand side of the body of the blue huron to exaggerate the backlighting effect.

Would you tell me how I can do that in LRC?


Original


Removed orange ball from upper left. Added highlight on bird's body right.

 

[dwight3]

As I said, I use LR primarily for file organization. It recognizes the keywords I had assigned thru Bridge. I don't have a catalog set up. When I need to search by keywords, I just go to the library mode and use the text containing . . . and it works.

Am I missing something?

I assume we are talking about 'Lightroom Classic' here - not 'Lightroom', which is a different animal.

Yes, I think you are missing the fact that LrC always uses a catalogue, no matter how you use it. Anything and everything you do in LrC is stored in the catalogue file. When you import an image, LrC adds the filename, location and any metadata associated with the file to the catalogue. If you add or change any metadata, such as keywords, colour labels, star ratings, flags or location data to an image, it stores this in the catalogue.

When you install LrC (or possibly when you first run it), it creates a catalogue file in the default location for your system, and continues to use that until the user creates another one, which they may or may not do.

On a Mac, the default catalogue is stored in User/Pictures/Lightroom.
On Windows, I think it's User\My Pictures\Lightroom

If you go to the Catalog Settings in LrC, it will show you the location.

The actual catalogue file will be called 'Lightroom Catalog.lrcat'. If you were to delete that file, LrC would ask you to locate or create a catalog the next time you start it, and you would have to re-import all your images from scratch. Any keywords you added in LrC would be lost.

So 'I don't have a catalog set up' is not true if you are using LrC. You are using it every time you use the program.

You can create new catalogues if you want - as many as you like - and store them wherever you want. Many people just use a single catalogue - often in the default location.

Yes I found some catalog files in the Pictures folder. I think LRC set it up automatically when I imported the Pictures folder/subfolders from my HDD.

Interesting that it recognizes the keywords I assigned when I was using Bridge. And Bridge would recognize that I assigned via LRC.

Again, because I edit in PS, catalog does play as important role in managing my edited attributes.

Am I saying it right?

It sounds to me as if you are using LrC for the DAM and PS for the editing.

That will give you two catalog entries for each image. One from the imported image and one for the image returned from PS. You can set up the system to stack the images so that you only see the PS edited image, so that isn't a problem.

As mentioned previously, LrC is a moderately capable editor, but it doesn't have all the capability of PS. For simple edits, LrC works fine, but if your workflow is set up to use PS, there is no real need to get out of your comfort zone.

As far as managing your images, leave it to LrC. IMHO it does a better job than Bridge. Since it's a database, you can organize your photopile with collections. They will allow you to place several related images together, and any image can be included in more than one collection without duplicating files (something you can't do with a folder-based organizing system). If you re-edit an image, the edits show up in ALL the collections since they're all the same image derived from the same file.

Since Bridge is an Adobe program I am not surprised that it can recognize keywords added by LrC. I don't use Bridge so I can't offer any advice there.

 

[DMKAlex]

It sounds to me as if you are using LrC for the DAM and PS for the editing.

Yes. That's exactly what I do.

That will give you two catalog entries for each image. One from the imported image and one for the image returned from PS. You can set up the system to stack the images so that you only see the PS edited image, so that isn't a problem.

I prefer to see the finished version as well as the original version. I can compare and see what I have done and what I need to do if I have to redo it differently.

As mentioned previously, LrC is a moderately capable editor, but it doesn't have all the capability of PS. For simple edits, LrC works fine, but if your workflow is set up to use PS, there is no real need to get out of your comfort zone.

When I made the switch around 3 years ago to use LRC as my file organizer, I did some research on what LRC can do edit wise. My conclusion as drawn from many responses, is that LRC's editing is general and somewhat limited. It's good for wedding photographer shooting many pictures in the same scene that a batch edit can right the exposure or white balance. To me it's the 20% I do with PS. The other 80% involves something I don't find readily convenient in LRC. That's why I stay with PS. It's not just my comfort zone. It's that LRC cannot do what I do the other 80% of the time.

As far as managing your images, leave it to LrC. IMHO it does a better job than Bridge.

Yes, I think I may have reached the limit of Bridge. I cannot work with unreliable keyword search or sluggishness in coming up with result. I still use it because the slide show in Bridge is a lot less cumbersome than in LRC. I have a habit of using slide show to see the series of my shoot.

Since it's a database, you can organize your photopile with collections.

Database is good if you can manipulate it to get custom result. Otherwise, it's just a background overhead.

Thank you for clearing it up for me. You've been very helpful.

 

[charlyw64]

When I made the switch around 3 years ago to use LRC as my file organizer, I did some research on what LRC can do edit wise. My conclusion as drawn from many responses, is that LRC's editing is general and somewhat limited. It's good for wedding photographer shooting many pictures in the same scene that a batch edit can right the exposure or white balance.

Even then that conclusion would have been incorrect. Lightroom back then was already far advanced and you rarely needed to round trip to PS - as wildlife or landscape photographer. The only things back then that were reasons to go to PS was the need to do panorama stitching or composites. IMHO the only two current reason left is if you want to do composites or if you want to soft proof with CMYK ICC profiles.

 

[DMKAlex]

When I made the switch around 3 years ago to use LRC as my file organizer, I did some research on what LRC can do edit wise. My conclusion as drawn from many responses, is that LRC's editing is general and somewhat limited. It's good for wedding photographer shooting many pictures in the same scene that a batch edit can right the exposure or white balance.

Even then that conclusion would have been incorrect. Lightroom back then was already far advanced and you rarely needed to round trip to PS - as wildlife or landscape photographer. The only things back then that were reasons to go to PS was the need to do panorama stitching or composites. IMHO the only two current reason left is if you want to do composites or if you want to soft proof with CMYK ICC profiles.

I am a general photographer. I do a lot of panorama stitching as well as stack focus. But mostly what I do is like the example I posted: removing something without destroying the foreground object, or adding a fine line around the subject. Please tell me how you can do this in LRC. I would really appreciate it.

 

[charlyw64]

When I made the switch around 3 years ago to use LRC as my file organizer, I did some research on what LRC can do edit wise. My conclusion as drawn from many responses, is that LRC's editing is general and somewhat limited. It's good for wedding photographer shooting many pictures in the same scene that a batch edit can right the exposure or white balance.

Even then that conclusion would have been incorrect. Lightroom back then was already far advanced and you rarely needed to round trip to PS - as wildlife or landscape photographer. The only things back then that were reasons to go to PS was the need to do panorama stitching or composites. IMHO the only two current reason left is if you want to do composites or if you want to soft proof with CMYK ICC profiles.

I am a general photographer. I do a lot of panorama stitching as well as stack focus.

Panorama stitching now is better in Lightroom than in PS (it can deal with bracketed pano shots, creating a DNG with the full dynamic range). Focus stacking is still a case for PS (for landscapes), for macro photography I wouldn't bother with stacking, the resulting artefacts are too horrendous, no matter which software you use.

But mostly what I do is like the example I posted: removing something without destroying the foreground object,

That Lightroom can do quite well if there is a suitable replacement for the affected area.

or adding a fine line around the subject.

That I wouldn't do under any circumstances. A shot that requires such a strong last ditch effort to save would not make it through my initial cull, thus I don't know how to do such a thing in LR.

 

[Jim B (MSP)]

...

Yes, I use Ctrl+E to edit the original file in Photoshop. When done, I Save As a copy in the subfolder of the original. I believe I have to resync the directory to import the newly edited version into LRC. Are you saying that it should be automatically recognized?

It will automatically recognize a "Save". That is different from a "Save as", which is dependent on a number of factors.

The Save will bring a new file back with an "Edit" attached to the name.

 

[Zeee]

Yes the Catalogue is just a Database that keeps a record of your edits. Sometimes new users refer to their files as the catalogue. It has nothing to do with your actual files. Also the catalogue is typically very small. A million files could be just over 10GB of catalogue data.

I keep my catalogue on my HD and my files on an EHD. The only thing is the catalogue needs to know is where the files are. If you start using LR I encourage you to be diligent in doing so. It's like returning a book to the library, you bypass the librarian and put it on some random shelf. The librarian can't find it later. I've seen people get into a lot of trouble from years of poor management.

It is very easy to maintain your catalogue and once you get used to it you don't even think about it. I recommend to use only one catalogue as there is no known limit to it's size. When you exit LR make sure the Check Integrity and Optimize squares are selected.

I've been using it since 2011 and have never had a single issue even with catalogue upgrades. I've even used other non - destructive editors and my LrC edits were not effected. I go by year and within the year folders are named by event and date. As others have stated give LR a try. It is is like ACR in steroids.







--
FP

 

[Darryl Brooks]

As others have said, it sounds like you don't need Lightroom at all. So, on the one hand, you can find another DAM and just use PS for processing. On the other hand, you are paying for a DAM and not using it. If you never search for keywords or description and just use your folder hierarchy, then Windows Explorer or Finder is all you need.

If you don't need previews and don't back up often, the LR library is pretty small.

I abandoned LR recently, and besides finding a new DAM and raw processor, I am working on learning Affinity to replace PS and dropping the subscription entirely.

 

[charlyw64]

Darryl Brooks wrote:
I abandoned LR recently, and besides finding a new DAM and raw processor, I am working on learning Affinity to replace PS and dropping the subscription entirely.

I probably never will understand the reasoning behind such a move. You need a DAM, you need a RAW processor, you also go with a product which has seen little development in the last years because the company has moved on to different projects for quite some time already. You have just at least tripled your costs and in future will be depending on three products to continue to be available and to be serviced. This will become a major headache but everyone is his own single point of failure...