Key Words in Lightroom (Page 4): Jerry, In the current Adobe MAX online conference, a speaker was just recently discussing Lightroom features and spent a lot of time on organizing...

Daryls Loc: Waco, TX

jerryc41 wrote:

I just watched a video about key words by Ben Wilmore. He certainly makes a no-brainer case for using them, but I don't do much with them.

Every now and then, I go back and work on key words in LR. I get the idea behind them, but it seems like a huge time killer. I think one of my problems is having too many words. I could probably apply a dozen ones to some images.

Comments welcome.

Jerry,

In the current Adobe MAX online conference, a speaker was just recently discussing Lightroom features and spent a lot of time on organizing photos. The new features in Lightroom allow for searching of photos without using keywords. The algorithm automatically produces various key features directly from each photograph. It will search for dates, camera used, lenses used, people, and objects within the photo. He showed us how easy it is to search for a specific photo of his daughter on the water, in a kayak, in Alameda without having recorded any keywords for the photos. The search feature is fast and accurate. Try it out yourself. You may decide that developing and inserting keywords into your photos is no longer necessary for organizing your photo collections.

Daryl

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

Dngallagher wrote:

I would love to read what Scott said - it seems odd, but maybe there is more to what he is saying.

[i]Lightroom Classic[i/] by Scott Kelby Copyright 2020, Page 32. It should be available at your local library. Here is a partial quote: ...I don't recommend working in the folders panel at all. It's too risky--make a mistake and it's forever...." I'll take his word for it and only work in Collections and besides, if I set up my collections right I have no need to go into the folders panel.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

via the lens wrote:

I do know that Scott Kelby is a big fan of using collections and never using folders, although I could not understand this as it seemed much too complicated for me. I always try to work fast and efficient without duplication as much as possible. I also try to keep my LrC catalog neat and tidy so as to avoid any problems that cause me hours of senseless time being used up. It could be that the poster was/is a bit confused about what Kelby recommended.

I just watched a SK video about collections - he does explain what they are of course, and makes a case for ease of use, but what confuses things is that he does not explain that the actual images are located in a specific folder and that the collection is just a set of pointers - I can see where it can get confusing.

Catalog management is a good thing!

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

[quote=Curmudgeon][i]Lightroom Classic[i/] by Scott Kelby Copyright 2020, Page 32. It should be available at your local library. Here is a partial quote: ...I don't recommend working in the folders panel at all. It's too risky--make a mistake and it's forever...." I'll take his word for it and only work in Collections and besides, if I set up my collections right I have no need to go into the folders panel.[/quote]

Sounds confusing... if you delete an image from a folder it is gone... yes... delete it from a collection and it is also gone....

Prove to yourself that the image in any collection is actually the original in a folder.... right click on any image in any collection and choose go to folder in library - Lightroom will switch to the folder panel and select the image from the collection.... not a copy.

One of the most basic things about Lightroom is to know where your images are for backup and access. Collections have no bearing on where the images are located on disk.

BTW - I might agree with SK about working in folders panel... but it depends on the context....perhaps what he was saying was , if you delete a photo from the folders panel it is gone forever, if you are in a collection you have no option to delete, you can only remove from a collection, which does not delete the original.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

via the lens wrote:

I do know that Scott Kelby is a big fan of using collections and never using folders, although I could not understand this as it seemed much too complicated for me. I always try to work fast and efficient without duplication as much as possible. I also try to keep my LrC catalog neat and tidy so as to avoid any problems that cause me hours of senseless time being used up. It could be that the poster was/is a bit confused about what Kelby recommended.

Confused? I'm always confused but in this case I gave you the citation and a partial quote and I'm not going to type the whole page for you. Don't take my word for it though, you have a couple of options options: Go on with how you have been doing it, the process works for you and ignore me as being confused; beg, borrow or ... a copy of the book or go to your local library and and read the section I cited. If nothing else it may give you more ammunition to support your "confused" theory. I'm not saying Kelby is right but he has a system he is comfortable enough to publish.

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

Curmudgeon wrote:

Confused? I'm always confused but in this case I g... (show quote)

I have no idea why you have said what you did? Now, I am confused, but not about LrC, but about what you are saying....what does this mean, "If nothing else it may give you more ammunition to support your "confused" theory."

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

via the lens wrote:

I do know that Scott Kelby is a big fan of using collections and never using folders...

I have not read Kelby so I don't know his reasoning, but I use both keywords and folders and here is my reasoning:

The keywords are for me. They help me find things quickly and easily.

The folders are for my family. None of them knows how to use LR so the keywords are of no use to them. If I want my images to be passed down to my family I have to be sure they can access them.

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

Daryls wrote:

Jerry, br br In the current Adobe MAX online conf... (show quote)

Can you give me more information on this, I am in Adobe Max right now listening to a presentation but I could not locate anything that seemed like it would be what you were referring to. Thanks.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

via the lens wrote:

I have no idea why you have said what you did? Now, I am confused, but not about LrC, but about what you are saying....what does this mean, "If nothing else it may give you more ammunition to support your "confused" theory."

It could be that the poster was/is a bit confused about what Kelby recommended.

Daryls Loc: Waco, TX

via the lens wrote:

Can you give me more information on this, I am in Adobe Max right now listening to a presentation but I could not locate anything that seemed like it would be what you were referring to. Thanks.

Via the Lens,

It was during the Beginner Lightroom Part 1 session at 1400 CDT.

Daryl

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

via the lens wrote:

I like to say that LrC is a multifaceted, multifunctional software application that contains a database. After all, it is more than just a simple database, as the application contains seven modules that result in different products or uses. Yes, a database is certainly part of the application, but it is so much more than just that...just my take on the software.

You are right Connie. I was trying to be very simple. Link's may be a better word. Some people understand database easier. For me links and data base combined is ready to understand..... But...... Point being...... The original is not changed.

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

Daryls wrote:

Via the Lens,

It was during the Beginner Lightroom Part 1 session at 1400 CDT.

Daryl

Thanks, Daryl, I'll check it out. Going to watch a PS session at 3pm, California time. I think that might only be for Lightroom, not LrC the classic version but I'll check it out. A lot of confusion between the versions!

Daryls Loc: Waco, TX

via the lens wrote:

Thanks, Daryl, I'll check it out. Going to watch a PS session at 3pm, California time. I think that might only be for Lightroom, not LrC the classic version but I'll check it out. A lot of confusion between the versions!

For sure. Some of the sessions cover multiple versions of a program, while others only cover a single version. In addition, many of the sessions cover the same techniques, just with a different speaker and different examples. Still, I found the downloadable workbooks to be useful for testing the new techniques when I have the time available.

Daryl

rcurrie Loc: Kingsport, TN

I use keywords and find them very helpful when trying to find images even after years. I have only 10 categories with many sub-categories nested under them. They cover most everything. They are Animals, Events, Flowers, Insects, Outdoors, Other, People, Places, Plants, and Structures.

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

jerryc41 wrote:

I just watched a video about key words by Ben Wilmore. He certainly makes a no-brainer case for using them, but I don't do much with them.

Every now and then, I go back and work on key words in LR. I get the idea behind them, but it seems like a huge time killer. I think one of my problems is having too many words. I could probably apply a dozen ones to some images.

Comments welcome.

You must have some memory or an infinite number of directory names that let you dial in quickly reading directory names. The number of keywords is up to you. I have at most three. LR default directory names are dates. Personally I found that useless and one would have to use keywords unless they know what they photographed June 3 2006.