frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

No eventual obsolescence worries, either.

But is this really true?.. Ever had a windows program stop running another program, I've not had it happen but I wonder how far backward explorer will go, before it stops recognizing certain file types. I think sooner or later everything becomes extinct or unsupportable.........

Jack 13088 Loc: Central NY

I like your style for learning and evaluating a new tool. I am more of a dark chocolate and Classic CocaCola guy which I suddenly realized is safer in the wood shop. I took immediately to LR’s database since it very close to what I would have built if I had the necessary skill set. I was the guy that wrote the requirements for systems not the software folks that had to make it work. I did, however, set out to find all of the settings and options for the catalog and develop modules. I was annotating a screen shot of settings noting my selection and why. I even right clicked everywhere and found countless drop down menus. Tried alt click or command click and found so neat useful functions. After more than two dozen pages I ODed on aforementioned chocolate and quit. Then I started on the task of forgetting much I found. BTW Adobe changes these menus with updates...

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

My method is a bit more simple dating back to 2000. Standard naming convention for folder.
Date: 01 April 2021 Event: A Fools Folly It looks like this 01Apr2021-A Fools Folly
Two or Three Sub-Folders: JPG, RAW(NEF), PP(Post Processed-Finalversion) and sometimes a 4th entitled WEB (for web posts which are usually resized to website requirement).

In folders I often have photos with key words or tags for searching. I have never had a problem finding the thousands of photos I have taken. Most photos backed up on DVD and I have an array of external hard drives in different physical locations for safety. I back up everything after any significant shoot.

If found that some of the catalog programs create additional disk space issues by ghosting copies or leaving crumbs. For what that is worth.

PS - I agree that a Word document or excel spreadsheet or comparable software for logging photos is important. Photos are useless for future generations if there is no name, date, location or other important event details. I recently posted a couple of photos about a 1914 family photo hunt.

mjp

Hi Art,

I use Smugmug as one of my disaster recovery tools. I save my best pictures and pictures I want to share with family there as full resolution JPEG's. I currently have 20,000 pictures. Their pricing is reasonable for an unlimited number of pictures. I also have pictures from the 50's there that I copied from my father's stereo slides. The were very cool viewed through stereo viewer.

Hi Jack,

"Going forward I would import them into a year/month/date/file name based on the date shot and then add images to collections based on whatever structures you find useful."

I gather you are suggesting importing files into a separate Lightroom catalog for whatever date segment (year, month, or day) works best for the user, in Art's case day. Then adding adding that catalog to a Virtual Collection(s) (global and or topic based).

I use this approach and like it though my busy retirement hasn't allowed me to finish adding all my catalogs into a collection. I keep my images in Windows folders under \Pictures\Lightroom\year (which is automatically backed-up to OneDrive) with names like 20201112_Dogs. Having spent decades in I/T, I never use spaces or special characters other than "_" and "-" in file or folder names.

I create the folder first then create the new catalog in LR, using the same name and located in that directory, which results in the LR files (database, previews, backup, etc.) being in a subdirectory below the raw files \Pictures\Lightroom\20201112_Dogs\20201112_Dogs.

I started doing this because like Art I didn't want to be totally dependent on Lightroom to find files. This way I can pull an old folder from external drives or the cloud and the LR catalog is with the raw files.

Jim

akamerica

Exactly my point. Similar methods in keeping track of what there is. Having all the bother of the Adobe Catalog and all the indexing is similar to doing an alphabet index of your kitchen pantry. For my part I do not see the value. Happy that others do find the time and the inclination to do so.

Tote1940 Loc: Dallas

After 20 years finished scanning family photos 5Tb including videos
Main problem who is this?
Shoebox after shoebox of negatives and prints without date or description
Sure they did not have metadata but did have pencils a note in back of print would help
Lesson for the future
Hopefully metadata will be readable 100 years from now and my Word document useful

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Trader Joe's sells a 100% cocoa bar with cocoa nibs in it. It doesn't get any darker than that.

I also did system design, but hated coding. Yes, LR is a very richly featured program, and after a good night's sleep and a couple of aspirin the next morning, I still liked it and have been using it ever since. I also use Capture One, On1 Raw, DXO PhotoLab Elite, and ACR/Bridge - but I catalog everything in LR just because it is thorough, easy to use, and there is nothing like it out there that can organize my image and video files as well as it does. I don't like spending time in front of a computer screen - I much prefer to shoot, which is another reason I like it so much -

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Again, Bridge is a very powerful file Browser that reads every file format in Adobe's Portfolio, and as you mentioned, other formats as well. But your understanding of Lightroom's catalog suggests you don't really know what it is. And though it is limited in file types to video and image files, it is far better at organizing those files. I've been using Bridge since it was introduced with Photoshop CS6 in 2005, so I am very familiar with it.

This explains the difference between a catalog/database image management system and a file browser.

https://www.slrlounge.com/adobe-camera-raw-vs-lightroom/

Though they seem to do similar things on some levels, that does not make them equivalent. And that is the reason I use both.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Bridge is even better because it's even easier, it catalogs all files not just image and video files, and it NEVER loses a file or catalog like LR is prone to do.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

I'm been working with and on computers since 1976 as a senior in college. I'm well aware of differences in programs, as are my many clients whom I have helped over the decades.

I have been using Elements since its release, Lightroom since its release, Photoshop since its release, and Bridge since its release. Not only that, but I go to Adobe conventions to learn more about the products. That's where I learned from a non-Adobe software engineer how awesome Bridge is as a catalog/database management system not just for images. A few people told me behind the scenes that Adobe doesn't publicize Bridge because it comes free with many of their high-cost programs.

Your understanding of Bridge suggests you don't really know what it can do, but I understand one's reluctance to learn new things, especially if one is satisfied with what one already has. I was not satisfied because my employees and I do a lot of editing outside of Lightroom, causing Lightroom to lose track of things. We can edit in any program until the cows come home, and Bridge NEVER loses track of any of my files.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

You described 'best of breed' maybe up until the 2006, but the modern tools of 2021 make all this effort redundant when you move into image management catalog system based on relational database software technology.

Rather than descriptively naming your folders, put that effort into your keywords and virtual collections. Rather than descriptively naming your images, put all that effort into your keywords. There are not 'ghosts' or copies of copies in these modern software tools, as a single original file on disk is referenced from the database software and all other 'copies' are created virtually inside the database. And the external notes, spreadsheets, and similar, also know as 'metadata', that is all ingested directly from the EXIF data of the images and completely and instantaneously searchable inside the database.

Yes, you need to purchase the commercial software (or subscribe) to obtain the benefits of these modern solutions. My LR catalog says this afternoon I have 91,887 images under software-based digital asset management, every single image instantaneously accessible via metadata searches and / or keywords. When I want a version, I just select the Export preset to create the as-needed output format (pixel size for web, or full-size printing, or different watermarks, so forth). My overall disk store is minimized, storing only the original permanently, outputting other formats only when needed and discarding that output format when done.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Show me where anyone from Adobe suggests that Bridge is a catalog-based file management program. It isn't, any more than Finder or Windows Explorer is a catalog. In Adobe's universe, the Lightroom catalog is a fully relational database - not a flat file - and that is the difference. It's a great management tool, but it is not catalog-based. Lightroom has two main "catalog" files - lrcat and lrpreview - which makes it very fast and efficient at managing image and video files. But these have to be identified (added) to the catalog, otherwise LR can't help manage them. Someone with your extensive background and experience should understand the difference.

https://www.adobe.com/products/bridge.html - Nowhere does Adobe call it a "catalog".

In contrast, Adobe's own help page, calls Lightroom's Library a catalog.

https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-classic/help/library-module-basic-workflow.html#:~:text=The%20Library%20module%20is%20where,importing%20them%20into%20Lightroom%20Classic.

Don't take my word for any of this. But also keep an open mind. This way you won't make the foolish mistake of calling Adobe Bridge a catalog. Because it isn't.

https://photographylife.com/lightroom-catalogs-explained

However, if you can find any evidence that Bridge is a catalog, I will publicly apologize.

I was working with C/PM, Fortran, C++ and Whatfiv back in the early and mid 70s, and later with SQL databases myself. So I am not completely clueless here. And I do fully understand just how powerful a file management tool Bridge is - you will get no argument from me here. But it is not a catalog.

I think this discussion, however lively it has been is over. However,if you really want to continue to beat the dead horse - be my guest. I am moving on.

Noctilucent

Hiya Jim,
I hope you scanned both sides of your stereo pairs.
There seem to be viewing systems that will bring out their 3-D charm.
Nothing like it!

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

My experience is just as extensive as your experience, so I'm not completely clueless here either.

Bridge is much more than just a catalog. That's what makes it so powerful. Any cataloging function that can be done in Lightroom can be done in Bridge, and more!

I think there are two reasons why Adobe doesn't call Bridge a catalog. First, it's so much more than a catalog. Second, they have Lightroom, which costs money, so they want to sell that. But if one chooses to learn Bridge, it certainly can be used as a very extensive cataloging system.

I was a huge Lightroom fan until going to the Adobe convention several years ago in Las Vegas. I went because I hated Lightroom constantly losing track of files, folders, and catalogs. I was open to something new (which you apparently are not; that's okay, though). I also learned that anything I can do in my word processing and desktop publishing programs, I can do in Photoshop.

Everything's only gotten better since I dedicated myself to learning the extensive power of Bridge and Photoshop. Coupled together, nothing beats them.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/catalog