Interesting viewpoint. For me the fiddly imports (compkete with way sot rename and mvoe files to our server and to prefil the catalog with selected keywords is one of the huge benefits.
Plus about 10 for LightRoom Queen.
OTOH the LightRoom database can be read and edited by hand with any SQLite tools.You can recover the full keyword tree and more if you know where to look and it’s not impossible to figure out. I looked at how they handled complex relationships a lot when designing my AnimalTrakker® database schema.
I’ve actually been thinking of trying Lightroom Classic again. I’m retired and so should have more time to devote to the project. And it’s possible that I may have more patience than I did in the past . Also, this time I’ll have Victoria Bampton’s wonderful book, Lightroom Classic - The Missing FAQ, and her wonderfully informative website, The Lightroom Queen to guide me and to keep me on the right path.
You have described the opposing tensions well. I’ve always been uneasy with Apple Photos. Too much just a “big pile of stuff.” I like neatly organized folders, but questions like how to handle different photo formats, post processing options, and where to store exports have confounded me. I finally feel like I know enough (just barely) to commit my photos to Lightroom Classic and not immediately regret the organizational and naming decisions I have made.
Same. This almost harkens back to the old “Aperture versus Lightroom” battles. I lost count of the number of reviews and commentaries that claimed one was better than the other because of that import process. These days, we can add the presence-or-not of any import step at all.
In the end, Lightroom will let you have your photos anywhere you want and, if you desire, it’ll help you put them somewhere. Compared to Aperture, the only real difference was the default action.
The only real imposition of having an import process is you can’t just open a folder of images. I have another tool that works that way and… let’s just say it has its own whole class of issues.
Of course all these features matter for different personal preferences, use cases, and workflows.
I also strongly suggest you take a look at Peter Krogh’s the DAM book for a huge amount of useful information on how and why to set up a robust DAM system for your photos.
As to additional tools I also like A Better Finder Rename version 12 and A Better Finder Attributes version 7.
My structure is that I embed the camera (or model of iPhone) in the image filename. I have scanned images organized in resource groups like a museum does because I’ve got so many from several different photographers. I have special naming conventions for the scanned negatives and slides too. Total volume of cataloged pictures is now approaching 70,000 images. I couldn’t do it in anything but LightRoom Classic.
At least they’re not Apple, eh? But yes, their naming of the two products (in fact, the existence of both) is a constant source of confusion for so many people.
No paradox at all. You want/need the database because of what you want to get out of your documents. I’m the opposite. Couldn’t be bothered about indexing documents, but keyword my photos to within an inch of their lives.
Exactly to my point. I gather photos, hunt documents.
As one of the rabid Lightroom Classic maniacal keyword hierarchy types… wanna know how many times I have re-invented that? The one I’m on now, I think the third major approach… has some problems…
But I solved the file naming issue a long, long time ago. As soon as I started adding the keywords they became irrelevant. My camera names them; job done. I do adjust my camera to include the year in the file name prefix.
My method is to copy the images from the camera card to my Mac.
Use Photo Mechanic to rename the images using the pattern MyName_Date_FileNumber, and add basic metadata (my name, copyright and contact info, and such). (The FileNumber is just that assigned by the camera.) Thus like @zkarj the file name is largely irrelevant.
I store the images in sequentially numbered folders with the pattern ORG_#### for the originals and DRV_#### for the derivatives (the processed images). I generally create a new folder every month. In each folder are subfolders with a name such as “June Yard Pics” or “Florida Trip 2023”.
I keyword my photos, using Photo Mechanic, and it is these keywords which lets me quickly find any image. Or sets of images (i.e. all Red-cockaded Woodpeckers in Florida). I do not have a keyword hierarchy, it’s just one level of keywords.
For many years I used iView as my cataloging tool, in its multiple iterations as it moved from owner to owner, until it was sunsetted. I now use NeoFinder as my cataloging tool. I have over 100K images and can easily find any image via keywords with NeoFinders’ search tools. Which I often invoke via Alfred. And I have a job that runs every time I restart my system to automatically update my NeoFinder catalog.
The upshot is that all my images are just in folders in the Finder. I can use any tool I want to view or edit them. I do not need to “commit” then to any specific tool.
You guys got me curious about this DAM book, but $35 for a PDF? Does it really not come in an ePub? I am guessing it won’t matter that the book is 3 years old? It’s more of “why” than how a “how-to” with specific apps?
I read version 1 many years ago. And it was the why and not the how that was important. The tools have come and gone over the years. And the ‘how’ has changed accordingly (I was then using DVD’s as my backup method, now I use BackBlaze).
I think it’s cheap at that price. I actually have it in an older version as paper and the latest as PDF and Yes, IMO the concepts and discussion are timeless. You will need to do a bit of translation about backup media but the basics are how to set up a robust cataloging system and that hasn’t changed much in about a decade or more.
I’m glad Lightroom has added this feature, but it does have me a little concerned about the future of LR Classic.
Coincidentally, I am in the process of switching to Capture One for most of my photos. Final edits all live in Apple’s app, so I prefer C1’s sessions over the catalogue, and they have some features that make it much faster for me to cull and edit hundreds of shots at a time.
Ah, just wait. You may yet catch “the madness”. In my case, the information I want is naturally hierarchical and saves me a lot of time by just entering a couple of leaf keywords and getting all the branch ones above “for free”. I also use synonyms, so adding “Red-cockaded Woodpecker” would also add “Leuconotopicus borealis”. In the case of New Zealand birds, most species have English and Māori common names so I get both of those.
Interesting, because I see a fundamental difference between these two. DVDs are what I would call archives. You copy the files to DVD and there they stay, imperviously. Backblaze is a mirror of your local copy.
Years ago when I migrated from Aperture back to Lightroom, I managed to lose 3 months’ worth of photos. Except I didn’t realise it until several years later! I was fortunate to find an old hard drive on which I had backed up a drive, presumably when I was moving stuff around, and they were on that.
Since then, I have maintained multiple backups (Time Machine, Backblaze) and and archive using Backblaze B2. The latter gets updated with what I give it when I tell it to. That does not mean nothing is ever removed or replaced, but that if it is, it’s because of an explicit action on my part. It also indefinitely versions files if you do delete or replace.
. Also, this time I’ll have Victoria Bampton’s wonderful book, Lightroom Classic - The Missing FAQ, and her wonderfully informative website, 