pecohen Loc: Central Maine

Well, not really. The catalog seems to be pretty integral to the software - but it is useful. LR is efficient at doing rudimentary editing that is often sufficient. But it seems about half the time I find myself going to another editor to finish up. Were it not for what the catalog provides, I probably would go back to just using Paintshop Pro.

I can't call myself an expert on LR. I started using it about a month ago and before then I was probably about where you are now - wondering how disruptive LR would be to my habits. I like to manage files myself, using folders and my experience with software that tries to take over in this respect has not been good. Lightroom seems to be an exception, however. For one thing it does let you maintain the folder structure however you are accustomed to using it.

A lot of what I had read about LR promoted it's file management capabilities. That is true, but my interpretation of that advice was that it was mostly a program to keeping track of old images - maybe it would give me a way to track down that shot of a street vendor somewhere in Kansas (or was it Nebraska or maybe Iowa) I shot ten or fifteen years ago. LR can probably do that if you started using it fifteen years ago and have consistently added key-words etc., but to me, a hobbyist, that seemed a lot of extra work without benefits that were particularly important.

But another interpretation of "file management" did not occur to me then but now seems quite significant. Right now I am going through several hundred images from a vacation I took on Martha's Vineyard. There are a lot of near-duplicates and quite a few images that make me wonder why I took them. There are some that are out of focus and there are some with motion blur. I need to go through them all to toss out the obviously bad ones and sort them into piles for different places and perhaps different times. It's a big job and after processing I need to go through another final review to pick out the best of them. To me, this seems to be what LR file management in LR is really all about.

Before I used LR, I made multiple copies of the images and moved them around to different folders. That meant having multiple copies of the same image and that added to the confusion inherent in a project like this. With LR, you do not have to make multiple copies of images so as to have them in different piles - LR manages this in the Catalog, without creating multiple copies of the image files. It is a tool that seems very good for managing this common problem we probably all have.

Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida

WOW! Who woulda thought such a simple question would prompt such a wealth of competent and thorough explanation. UHH members are surely great!

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

Love the heron avatar, btw. I share your experience, only I had arrived at the realization in 2013, when I started using LR3. I was completely confounded the first two or three times I tried to use it - not being able to figure out where things went. So it sat on my computer as a project for idle time. I continued to use Capture One - a somewhat similar workflow raw converter/file browser, but it was project based.

I had digital images that dated back to 1999. And for the life of me I could not figure out how LR would deal with them. Luckily I had all my images in folders that were named as follows:

mm.xx - verbose description of shoot/job/trip/subjects - dd-mm-yy. The xx is a sequential shoot number in a given month. For instance 12.09 would represent the ninth time I used the camera in December.

These folders were aggregated by year, and each year was under the parent folder "my pics". I organized this, including the sequence number prefix, to enable me to have somewhat of a chance of finding an old image. Using raw shooter initially, and later Capture One, I was able to keep the folder structure as I had originally designed it. Adding keywords to the metadata helped a lot, and when I finally decided to plunge into LR3, I locked myself in my office, unplugged the phone, turned off the cell, grabbed an unopened bottle of single malt (no glass), and was determined to leave after either I had figured out how LR worked, or the bottle was empty. Well, I didn't have to empty the bottle. I hardly had more than a quick sip. I discovered the "ADD" option when importing files into the catalog, and how importing into the catalog was not necessarily the same as importing from a card or a camera, which explained how the other options for importing worked. I realized that I had an incredibly flexible tool in front of me, and that I could continue to work, using my existing file naming and folder structure, without missing a beat. The rest is history. I now have over 250,000 images in two catalogs - one that covers from the beginning of time to 2015, and another that I started last January. The nice thing is that even though I did not keyword any of my old images, I could still search for images shot during a specific occasion or containing a specific subject, just by opening the library module, going to the top level folder (my pics) and doing ctrl-F to open a search field and typing in a partial character string, like "eagle" to find all of my eagle shots. The filter is instantaneous - and in the tiled view, I can see all of my images. I use a dual screen setup, so when I highlight an image on my LR desktop, I see the full screen version on the second screen. The 100s, maybe 1000s of hours I have saved since 2013 were clearly worth the effort that one Saturday morning when I decided it was do or die with LR.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

Absolutely!! My Lightroom imports ALL of my photos to a folder on my D: drive (4tb drive set aside for photos only). The main folder is called "Photos". Under that folder, Lighroom creates a folder called 2016 (or what ever the year date is on the image taken AND NOT the date it was imported). Under the year it creates a folder named 2016-01-01. Under that folder it places all of the images taken on that date in the order they were taken.
If the card has images from 3 different dates, Lightroom imports those images into appropriate folders under those dates. If the folder already exists, the it adds the additional images to that folder.
HOWEVER: I make a habit of formatting each card AFTER I have imported the photos and verified that they are good. If I am traveling, I do the same thing with my laptop (and lightroom) but the storage device is a USB external drive. Once the images are imported and cataloged onto the external drive (and verified), I then upload the photos to my WD Cloud back home so that when I return I can import them to my main machine and catalog. (this gives me redundancy when on the road).
This system works for me and has become automatic. It may not work for anyone else but it serves 2 purposes. 1. I can see immediately the images but I do NOT work any unless I just see something special. 2. IT get a backup copy back home incase something happens to my USB drive, my laptop or anything else while on the road. As they say, "your mileage may vary."

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

I am not a LR user -- not yet -- but I suspect the Library Module is simply a database structure within LR, and I know a little bit about databases. Maybe it would be helpful to other non-LR-users to describe in general terms how I think LR manages files and workflow.

An analogy: think of an image file on the hard drive as the root of a tree whose branches represent all of the activity within LR (edits, albums, keywords, etc). During "import" LR starts growing the tree by setting the main trunk on top of that root, and any branches that are subsequently grown related to that root image are connected to that trunk. Moving the image file outside of LR to a new hard drive location is like cutting the tree at the base and transplanting only the root, leaving LR with a tree of branches but nowhere for the trunk to sit... so the tree dies. Moving the image file from within LR still moves that root to the same new location on the hard drive but without severing the connection between the trunk and the root; LR knows where the root is located and it moves the trunk and all the branches accordingly... and the tree lives.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Processing will not be a problem. Just Import and then Develop. It's when you want to go back and look at them or process again, that the catalog will come into play. Until you follow LR's rules about using the catalog, it can be a nuisance. As others have said, do all of your moving and deleting from within LR. You can also right-click on a folder on the left and select Synchronize. That will straighten things out.

RonBoyd

My analogy has been the old fashioned (and proven) card file system used by Libraries. The Card File contains the information about the book, including its location. You use the Card to retrieve the book (its location) and/or any data about the book, i.e., author, copyright, etc. The Book, of course, is not altered by the Card File. Lightroom's Catalog serves the same function. As in a Library, one could (given the time) browse the shelves looking for a file. However, it is more efficient to use the Catalog (Card File)... unless someone has moved the book to the Janitor's Closet (or another Folder) without noting the change in the Card File.

jimvanells Loc: Augusta, GA

I have used Lightroom for years and I must admit, not too well. I now have 6 catalogs and will spend a lot of time getting all my photos (11k) into one catalog. Tim Grey is correct, use ONE catalog; only one. Follow the KISS principle and you will be just fine. If you have older photos, just import them into the catalog.

pecohen Loc: Central Maine

Maybe it is fortunate that I have not yet learned any reason why I might want a second catalog - so I only have one.

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

You are correct. Adobe uses the SQLLite database engine for Lightroom. I've used that same engine in software development projects in the past, and it is rock-solid.

lloydl2 Loc: Gilbert, AZ

I am an avid Lightroom user and have become very proficient at it! Since no one else seemed to ask (maybe I missed it while reading through the various replies)... Why do you want to use Lightroom without the catalogue?

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

As others have said, no, you must import them into the catalog, but you don't have to use the catalog for anything else if you don't want. You can set it up so that when you edit your raw files that a sidecar file is created and then the file can be opened and retain the editing you've done it LR if you open it in Photoshop. The file will open in Photoshop Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) and still have all the edits. But if you don't want to use the Organizer, you don't have to.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

Yes. I do it frequently when I am "experimenting" with someone else's image.

1. I put the image in a dedicated folder called "Temporary"
2. I open Lightroom in the Library module, select the "Temporary Folder", right click and select Synchronize Folder.
3. Lightroom initializes the Import sequence, I check to make sure it is the image I want and tap the Import button.
4. The image will be highlighted as the only one in a selection of "recently imported' so tapping on the Develop module selection opens all the best tools that Lightroom has.
5. I work on the image.
6. When happy, I save what I've done with a right click to Export where I can keep a new and final copy in a chosen format.
7. While still in the Develop module, another right click to select Remove Photo. I can choose to get it out of the catalog or deleted from the computer.

There is no reason you can't have a one photo at a time system in Lightroom. There is a slightly more complex procedure where you can same you Develop module work with the original if you want to ignore the Lightroom cataloging system.

DanCulleton

Well said!

Kuzano

The best, correctest, smartest answer is YES!

Otherwise, I wouldn't touch Lightroom for anything else it offers per organization!!!!

I use the same folder structure I developed in the Windows O/S years ago and enhance it by the functions Microsoft has added to "file and folder management"

I have tags, stacks, folders at any level I want, much more, and it's all mine, according to my own structure.

I only use LightRoom for it's processing functions, and when I want layers and other functions of photoshop, I stilll work from my own organizations. And, I'm always on the lookout for other editors, so that I am not TRAPPED by adobe. Editing concepts for the most part are often the same. The organizers F_c_ you up and trap you into products.

Adobe is by far, best at setting the traps.