Reading mode: Light Dark

Organizing your photos - software used, best methods and categories

Go to last post
Jeff said:
Jeff wrote:

Well, in this thread I've attempted to explain my own views in a number of posts, tried to be helpful to the OP, tried to constructively extend the conversation by posing some typical (at least for me) use cases, and tried to explain why some (including me) would take issue with your blanket dismissal of the DAM book.
Click to expand...
I'm dismissing the recommendation in that book that the folders are nothing but places to store your files, and that their names shouldn't have meaning. The DAM book essentially recommends against doing what every library does - organize first by categorical hierarchy.

What possible reason could there be to dismiss doing what most libraries do, just because the media is digital rather than physical?

I've found using the path names as the categorical hierarchy to be reliable, useful, and fast.

I have no problem supplementing that with additional forms of organization, and keywording would be my first choice before things like the Lightroom Collections system (though, I'd prefer region-specific keywording). Still, even with keywording, why not start with a rational categorical hierarchy in the path names just as Libraries do? If keywording fails, at least you have that fall back, and further it gives a good place to start even if you do have further means of organization.
 
I'm impressed that you're so smart that you can actually remember which photos have attributes that lie outside your basic file folder structure. Not only WHICH photos have the desired attributes, but where they are stored. It must be wonderful to be so brilliant. Personally I have to rely on memory aids.
 
Beachcomber Joe said:
Beachcomber Joe wrote:

I use Lightroom to manage my images including importing, creating a backup, keywording, and rating. My file structure, which started with scans in my film days, is year, month and event. I frequently use collections within Lightroom when working on specific projects. My LR catalog backs up every time I exit the application and is also backed up to external drives as part of my normal backup routine.

Like most pros these days, I can't imagine not using Lightroom for image management and initial processing of RAW images.
Click to expand...
Most pros. Right. All the anonymous pros.

denniswilliams
 
photogizmo said:
photogizmo wrote:

What tools are you using to organise your photos? ie. lightroom, bridge, etc.
Click to expand...
i'm using LR5
photogizmo said:
Is there a particular method or system that you are using to help maintain being organised? ie. place all files once I check them in a category folder.
Click to expand...
as I import my pictures, I let LR renaming them with the data and a sequence number (_20130622_001.orf etc..) and LR automatically creates folders and subfolders by dates : 2013/06/22 (you can customize what you want).

When I made a special trips over several days I can create an intermedate folder to encompass several days, fr instance 2013/06/Tuscany/22 and then the next days i'd create other daily folders, but they would all go into the Tuscany folder.

I don't use categories for folders. With LR and other assets management programs you add keywords to each pictures and that is how you find them, provided you are rigorous and attribute the keywords regularly As you lad your pictures.
photogizmo said:
What categories are you using? ie. people, nature, etc.
Click to expand...
i wish that a thesaurus was available !
photogizmo said:
How do you manage images that you post process in your whole file structure so that it is easy to retrieve? ie. do you change the file names, etc.
Click to expand...
i import jpegs and raws as single files, so they get the same name. I tweak the raws in undestructive way (keep the orf or cr2 files and don't export them unless I need a web version. In those cases I add an s (for small) at the end of the name and put them in the same folder as the original, but in a subfolder named "small". If I export to a tiff, I make a tiff sub folder etc. Since Adobe has decided to apply the monthly fee, I'm rethinking this. May be that I should export each postprocessed file to a lossless format ? I have not yet decided what to make..
photogizmo said:
Any other advise to help people make the right choice about how to go about organising their photos so that it is easy to manage, retrieve, process, etc.
Click to expand...
The easiest way is to use a folder structure following the year/month/day structure and to add keywords just after importation. I rename my files by dates because it is the easiest way to avoid duplicated names (which can be a pain in a database like LR etc.)

I wish I could find a good thesaurus somewhere... My keywords are a mix of English and french, which isn't too pretty ..
 
Osvaldo Cristo said:
Osvaldo Cristo wrote:

It looks the story I learned on 1980 at the university: For the space program Americans spent millions of dollars to develop a pen to write in zero gravity and space vacuum. Russians used a pencil.
Click to expand...
This fable has no basis in reality whatsoever. Don't repeat it.

http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp

"Status: FALSE"

I suggest you read the rest, as it's got a few pretty interesting tidbits. In fact, several of those tidbits share a remarkable similarity to the Lightroom development story:

http://photoshopnews.com/2006/01/09/the-shadowlandlightroom-development-story/

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
Last edited:
I have my photos organized by LR5 now but, I don't trust so much on LR to give him total free of choice when I catalogue my photos. Today I have LR, tomorrow I don't know.

I use a simple and effective method to me: Main photos folder on/or External Drive / Folder by year / Folder by date extended and subject(s), simple.

Example, PHOTOS ARCHIVE / 2013 / 2013-06-24 - SUBJECT / done...

Before the Date+subject you can have a Month folder and insert specific folders by month.

After this let the LR catalog the images in this order.

Then, by LR or "manually" through direct access to external drive looking your files is easy.
 
Last edited:
Glen Barrington said:
Glen Barrington wrote:

I'm impressed that you're so smart that you can actually remember which photos have attributes that lie outside your basic file folder structure. Not only WHICH photos have the desired attributes, but where they are stored. It must be wonderful to be so brilliant. Personally I have to rely on memory aids.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
DenWil said:
DenWil wrote:
DenWil said:
Beachcomber Joe wrote:

I use Lightroom to manage my images including importing, creating a backup, keywording, and rating. My file structure, which started with scans in my film days, is year, month and event. I frequently use collections within Lightroom when working on specific projects. My LR catalog backs up every time I exit the application and is also backed up to external drives as part of my normal backup routine.

Like most pros these days, I can't imagine not using Lightroom for image management and initial processing of RAW images.
Click to expand...
Most pros. Right. All the anonymous pros.

denniswilliams
Click to expand...
Lightroom has been made a part of the workflow of over 2/3rds of the members of our local and Florida state PPA chapters, working professionals in a variety of fields. Three years ago almost none of them used the application. I think this speaks well for the usefulness of the application. It saves them time, making them more productive. We also have a number of amateur photography clubs in the area that I visit from time to time. Amongst their members, Lightroom is not as common, perhaps 20% share at most.
 
hotdog321 said:
hotdog321 wrote:

As you see there are no "right" answers. I'm a photojournalist with thousands of assignments, hundreds of thousands of images. But I can find any image/assignment in about 60 seconds using my PCs "Search" function. For each assignment, vacation, etc. I create a new file with client/date/subject. For instance:

bloomberg 06-12-12 enron

chron 07-04-13 star of hope

vacation 06-25-13 yosemite

Everything goes into each file: RAW, jpegs, .xmp,, video, sound clips, even assignment and caption information.

I don't use Lightroom, so I can't comment beyond saying that I have read a fair number of threads from folks who have lost their catalog for one reason or another. It seems to work great--until it doesn't.
Click to expand...
Hi Hotdog, I do exactly the same and it works great.

I import to more or less the same folder name with more or less the same file number (Event_130623_frame#) and search with standard Windows search (e.g. 'event focallength:>200 ISO:<1600'): extremely fast - milliseconds if searching an indexed path, which it always is. Sometimes I tag, sometimes I don't. If anybody wants an image, all they have to tell me is the frame#. With today's search facilities, why anyone would want to give up control to closed-end, autocratic, single database file systems is beyond me. I have three computers and use them interchangeably all the time with no problems ;-)
 
Digitall #107280 said:
Digitall wrote:

I have my photos organized by LR5 now but, I don't trust so much on LR to give him total free of choice when I catalogue my photos. Today I have LR, tomorrow I don't know.

I use a simple and effective method to me: Main photos folder on/or External Drive / Folder by year / Folder by date extended and subject(s), simple.

Example, PHOTOS ARCHIVE / 2013 / 2013-06-24 - SUBJECT / done...

Before the Date+subject you can have a Month folder and insert specific folders by month.

After this let the LR catalog the images in this order.

Then, by LR or "manually" through direct access to external drive looking your files is easy.
Click to expand...
This is what I am doing as well. I am using ACD See pro 6. Recently my server crash and I was need to reinstall most of the applications. My files was on external RAID drive. So I just reattached drive back after reinstalling server. What is good about ACD See that it was ready to use in a few seconds. All keyword, metadata was available right away (it stored in xml files in the same folder as a RAW files). I am not using ACD see database for any categories, everything built in file structure already. Also what I like about organizing in a file structure, that I do not depend of any vendor. I am switching time to time between different photo editing software, and I do not need to rely on any proprietary database to find and access my files.
 
Jack Hogan said:
Jack Hogan wrote:
Jack Hogan said:
hotdog321 wrote:

As you see there are no "right" answers. I'm a photojournalist with thousands of assignments, hundreds of thousands of images. But I can find any image/assignment in about 60 seconds using my PCs "Search" function. For each assignment, vacation, etc. I create a new file with client/date/subject. For instance:

bloomberg 06-12-12 enron

chron 07-04-13 star of hope

vacation 06-25-13 yosemite

Everything goes into each file: RAW, jpegs, .xmp,, video, sound clips, even assignment and caption information.

I don't use Lightroom, so I can't comment beyond saying that I have read a fair number of threads from folks who have lost their catalog for one reason or another. It seems to work great--until it doesn't.
Click to expand...
Hi Hotdog, I do exactly the same and it works great.

I import to more or less the same folder name with more or less the same file number (Event_130623_frame#) and search with standard Windows search (e.g. 'event focallength:>200 ISO:<1600'): extremely fast - milliseconds if searching an indexed path, which it always is. Sometimes I tag, sometimes I don't. If anybody wants an image, all they have to tell me is the frame#. With today's search facilities, why anyone would want to give up control to closed-end, autocratic, single database file systems is beyond me. I have three computers and use them interchangeably all the time with no problems ;-)
Click to expand...
Yeah, that sounds good. I've read so many threads about databases that become corrupted for some reason. I've been shooting digital since 2000 and can find anything in about 60 seconds with this bulletproof system. I'm surprised more folks don't do this.

Frequently people wanting reprints can tell me the rough date of the assignment or the name of the guy in the photo and I can nail it every time using plain old Windows search, often while they are still on the phone.
 
Create Dont Imitate said:
Create Dont Imitate wrote:

Exactly...

Amazing so many are so gullible.

Maybe they need software to tell them when to eat?
Click to expand...
Maybe you should learn what you can do with the software - things you may never have even thought of.
 
Lee Jay said:
ljfinger wrote:
Lee Jay said:
Create Dont Imitate wrote:

Exactly...

Amazing so many are so gullible.

Maybe they need software to tell them when to eat?
Click to expand...
Maybe you should learn what you can do with the software - things you may never have even thought of.
Click to expand...
 
Jack Hogan said:
Jack Hogan wrote:
Jack Hogan said:
hotdog321 wrote:

As you see there are no "right" answers. I'm a photojournalist with thousands of assignments, hundreds of thousands of images. But I can find any image/assignment in about 60 seconds using my PCs "Search" function. For each assignment, vacation, etc. I create a new file with client/date/subject. For instance:

bloomberg 06-12-12 enron

chron 07-04-13 star of hope

vacation 06-25-13 yosemite

Everything goes into each file: RAW, jpegs, .xmp,, video, sound clips, even assignment and caption information.

I don't use Lightroom, so I can't comment beyond saying that I have read a fair number of threads from folks who have lost their catalog for one reason or another. It seems to work great--until it doesn't.
Click to expand...
Hi Hotdog, I do exactly the same and it works great.

I import to more or less the same folder name with more or less the same file number (Event_130623_frame#) and search with standard Windows search (e.g. 'event focallength:>200 ISO:<1600'): extremely fast - milliseconds if searching an indexed path, which it always is. Sometimes I tag, sometimes I don't. If anybody wants an image, all they have to tell me is the frame#. With today's search facilities, why anyone would want to give up control to closed-end, autocratic, single database file systems is beyond me. I have three computers and use them interchangeably all the time with no problems ;-)
Click to expand...
Someone gives you a frame number and you look it up. Not exactly the toughest use case, is it?
 
happypoppeye said:
happypoppeye wrote:
happypoppeye said:
Glen Barrington wrote:

I'm impressed that you're so smart that you can actually remember which photos have attributes that lie outside your basic file folder structure. Not only WHICH photos have the desired attributes, but where they are stored. It must be wonderful to be so brilliant. Personally I have to rely on memory aids.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Barry Margolius said:
Barry Margolius wrote:
Barry Margolius said:
happypoppeye wrote:
Barry Margolius said:
Glen Barrington wrote:

I'm impressed that you're so smart that you can actually remember which photos have attributes that lie outside your basic file folder structure. Not only WHICH photos have the desired attributes, but where they are stored. It must be wonderful to be so brilliant. Personally I have to rely on memory aids.

--
I still like soup. . .
Now that you've judged the quality of my typing, take a look at my photos. . .
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7267302@N03/
Click to expand...
Thank you. Not brilliance, just memory and common sense. Other than that, they are all stored in folders in the same place. Try it sometime, it works for me.
Click to expand...
What do you do when "Cousin Bobby" graduates from college, and you want to present his parents with a folio of the best (say) 25 pictures, out of the hundreds you've taken over his last 22 years. Do you really remember where each of those pictures is: in which folder(s) in which years?
Click to expand...
I raised this same scenario several times on this thread, and the silence has been deafening.

Here's a Flickr set that I posted last year for extended family upon the passing of a favorite uncle. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jck_photos/sets/72157629481440049/ ). Nothing more than family snapshots, but I can't tell you how much this meant to the family. The images were scans from slides that my grandfather and dad, and a few others of my own from recent years. I'm so glad that I was able to do this in an hour or so just by using a very simple keywording I had set up for family names.

I shoot for personal and family reasons, and being able to do stuff like this and your example is one of the most rewarding aspects.

--
Jeff
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jck_photos/sets/
 
Last edited:
Jeff said:
Jeff wrote:
Jeff said:
Jack Hogan wrote:

Hi Hotdog, I do exactly the same and it works great.

I import to more or less the same folder name with more or less the same file number (Event_130623_frame#) and search with standard Windows search (e.g. 'event focallength:>200 ISO:<1600'): extremely fast - milliseconds if searching an indexed path, which it always is. Sometimes I tag, sometimes I don't. If anybody wants an image, all they have to tell me is the frame#. With today's search facilities, why anyone would want to give up control to closed-end, autocratic, single database file systems is beyond me. I have three computers and use them interchangeably all the time with no problems
Click to expand...
Someone gives you a frame number and you look it up. Not exactly the toughest use case, is it?
Click to expand...
Hey Jeff,

Windows search (in my case aided byFastPictureViewer's Codec Pack, but MS's or Nikon's free ones will do ) will find a file by whatever exif/xmp parameter as per the example above, so I generally do not tag unless it's unusual stuff - easy to do in VNX2 anyways. That's for my uses - and I can typically find a file in seconds. The frame number is there mostly for 'clients' of the 'Can I have a copy of #1234?' sort. In my case that's generally friends and family and it works very well for zeroing in on THE one they are looking at ;-)

But I am open to learning and changing if it's worth it. What can the system you are recommending do better?

Jack
 
Last edited:
I organize my photos in folders and sub-folders by year, month, and date. If a subfolder has a special topic, title, etc., then I rename that sub-folder by adding at the end of the date the information.

I transfer the photos from my cards to hard drive using QImage Ultra. This automatically adds a year, month, and date to the photo and retains camera model and shot number. Qimage provides flexibility in labeling each file.

Then I use FastStone to view my photos. I can also reorganize files and folders using FastStone. I can create folders, copy images to new folder to PP images and leave the originals in tact. FastStone provides a lot of flexibility.

I also back up the files to external hard drives.

I should add that I partitioned my C: drive and the new partition is reserved for photos only.

I could provide a ScreenShot of organization via FastStone or of the Drive.

I will add, that there is much good information in this thread on organization: both on preferred programs and on hard drive folder structure.

I learned a long time ago not to use PSElements Organizer and disable it totally because it is unnecessary overhead and slows everything down. I also learned not to depend on Lightroom because I lost folders. If I had only a few photos, then these solutions might be useful.

One more item: Organizing scanned film is another story because the images are created differently and so they are organized by topics in folders and sub-folders.

Best,
 
Jeff said:
Jeff wrote:
Jeff said:
Barry Margolius wrote:
Jeff said:
happypoppeye wrote:
Jeff said:
Glen Barrington wrote:

I'm impressed that you're so smart that you can actually remember which photos have attributes that lie outside your basic file folder structure. Not only WHICH photos have the desired attributes, but where they are stored. It must be wonderful to be so brilliant. Personally I have to rely on memory aids.

--
I still like soup. . .
Now that you've judged the quality of my typing, take a look at my photos. . .
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7267302@N03/
Click to expand...
Thank you. Not brilliance, just memory and common sense. Other than that, they are all stored in folders in the same place. Try it sometime, it works for me.
Click to expand...
What do you do when "Cousin Bobby" graduates from college, and you want to present his parents with a folio of the best (say) 25 pictures, out of the hundreds you've taken over his last 22 years. Do you really remember where each of those pictures is: in which folder(s) in which years?
Click to expand...
I raised this same scenario several times on this thread, and the silence has been deafening.
Click to expand...
Of course if that's what you need to do tagging really helps, I agree. But that's just good practice that can be implemented on virtually any system, should one have the need, inclination, discipline and time - including effortlessly and freely on plain old vanilla Windows7+

Folder structure: YYYY(\Client)\Event
File structure: (Cllient\)Event_YYMMDD(SS)_frame#.NEF

both set automatically on import (I omit the Client and SS part). Tagging optional for special occasions or if one is keen :-)

Jack
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top