Need a simple method of organizing digital images

[Spearhead]

<p>I always import by date. It allows me to sync with my calendar - if I am looking for something specific, I know when I was there. However, I also use keywords and collections in LR to allow me to view things by parameters other than date.</p>

<p>I don't rename images, ever. Keywords and collections are fine rather than renaming.</p>

[stevenseelig]

<p>I don't know about LR, but in Aperture, I renumber the files with the schematic of yymmddxxxx so each picture has a specific number. I figure I will never shoot more than 9999 pictures on the same day. Once imported into Aperture, I relocate the masters into a folder system that looks like:<br>

2013 Pictures--January 2013, February 2013 and etc and then in each month's folder will be series of actual picture folders labeled yymmdd. All content and derivatives related to the masters are contained in the yymmdd folder. In this approach all of the pictures have a master number and are located outside of the Aperture database, just in case the database gets corrupted.<br>

With this approach all I have to remember is the day that I did the shoot which can be linked to my calendar functions.</p>

 

[stevenseelig]

<p>I should add that I do the picture renumbering upon import into Aperture.</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>I don't import. Never did.</p>

<p>I shoot to fill up a 1gig SD card which comes to 93 Raw images max but have honed down my shoots covering a single event or subject to around 25-50.</p>

<p>Copy the folder containing the image on the SC card onto my desktop, rename the folder with words that describe the subject or event and include month/year numerically.</p>

<p>Drag this folder to my "Pictures" folder in Mac OS X and begin applying custom EXIF Metadata template, culling and editing in Bridge CS3. I gave up keywording each image because it's just too time consuming and I can never get any images to show up doing a keyword search anyway. Naming the folder works fine for me for hunting up an image. I can remember events more as opposed to dates I took the photos.</p>

<p>Who the heck can remember what they shot on August 6th, 2011? I can't. But I do remember Apt-Abstract-Sunlit Blinds/Chrome Sauce Pan or Landa Park-2010 Flood Damaged Bridge as the names of folders.</p>

<p>Just a heads up on the "File Info" menu selection in Bridge AND Photoshop. I finally found out how both my emails, telephone, name/address ended up embedded in the EXIF metadata of every image I've posted on the web. It seems the "File Info" menu selection operates permanently separate in both Bridge/Photoshop from what's entered into the custom EXIF template the user creates in Bridge and applies to their images ACTIVELY with "Append Metadata Template".</p>

<p>I'm guessing how this happened is I'ld done a photo restoration job and thinking I'ld embed my personal contact info only to this set of images by entering this data through "File Info" IN PHOTOSHOP ONLY only to find that doing this applies this information to ALL images when "Appending Metadata Template". I tested this out on one of my flickr images and was able to remove the personal information by changing it in "File Info", not by editing the Metadata Template in Bridge.</p>

<p>"File Info" menu is in both Bridge and Photoshop and act as one. IOW what you enter in "File Info" in Bridge shows up in Photoshop's "File Info" and vice versa. Could it be any more complicated, Adobe?</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>Who the heck can remember what they shot on August 6th, 2011?</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

This is why there is keywording and collections in Lightroom. You don't have to remember the date. However, I shoot a lot of events that are identical except for the date. Sometimes people ask about a specific photo I took at an event and I can't find it until they give me the date. It gives multiple routes in. Lightroom is far easier for this stuff than Photoshop in my experience.</p>

[stevenseelig]

<p>I can not tell you what I shot on a particular date. But if someone asks me pictures for 'so and so wedding' or 'remember those HDR images of flowers you shot' I can usually come up with the date pretty quickly or at least close enough to find it within a few minutes. This is a slightly different problem to solve. <br>

But, having said that, you should use whatever method you can best remember.</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>It's too late for me to change my digital management workflow because I've come to find out that I've accumulated 3000 Raw images not including the jpegs I took when I first got my DSLR back in 2006.</p>

<p>Did any of you know about the way "File Info" works as I outlined? </p>

[virginia_john_mybusiness]

<p>I have lost images when backups failed. Storing you images so that they can actually be retrieved is an important part of this. Do you intend to store RAW files, digital versions along the way? Do you intend to organize by location, date, subject, or place in a single DB and retrieve using keywords? How many images will you ultimately have and how big will the DB be? How many DVDs/CDs will it take to keep an air-gapped hard copy? How many copies do you need to be safe? All drives fail as do all physical media -- eventually. My current strategy, which is far from foolproof, is to have at least three backup copies plus the original. Two digital backups on large multi terrabyte drives (memory is cheap and you don't need fast retrieval times) and at least one hardcopy on DVD. DVDs are fragile, but only a last resort for me. I also might think about different strategies for original RAW files and processed images.<br>

You also should ask yourself whether or not you should exercise a delete strategy. I delete nothing. That over exposed image may have some areas in the shadows I want to use at a later date.<br>

I'm not aware of any program that can operate at a cost hobbyists or anyone short of a corporate supported photographer can afford that is truly foolproof. <br>

Fortunately memory gets cheaper by the hour, but camera manufacturers keep installing larger sensors! This is a race that will continue into the foreseeable future. I'm not as active a photographer as I once was, but I have over 110,000 digital image files across about a dozen terrabytes of drives and I still worry.<br>

I do use LR and find it a good place to start, but you still need to set up routine backup procedures and keep to them.<br>

I think an operating rule here is that when things go bad it is only your favorite images that will get lost!</p>

 

[GBarrington]

<p>In Windows, I have 3 sub folders under the Pictures folder. </p>

<ol>

<li>Intake - This is where I import or upload photos to from my CF card. The files are grouped into subfolders broken down by year, and then by month and day taken. I know this duplicates the Calendar function of ACDSee Pro 6, but this allows me to retrieve source files even from outside my photo organizer if I have to with any photo aware file manager. Since I rarely delete anything this gets pretty large This is also where I sort, rate, apply keywords and create the order in which I want to process the Photos.</li>

<li>Work In Progress - Just what it says, when I start to work on a photo, I first copy it over to WIP. All intermediate versions get saved to this folder. Up till now, I've just been dumping stuff into thisfolder 'Willy-Nilly', but the way I work, I could be juggling 20 - 30 work in progress photos at a time. I'm thinking about adding project related subfolders with names like "Thanksgiving 2011" or "Julies Wedding" with folder names pulled from ACDSee categories. I'm still dithering about this since I COULD use the ACDSee categories as this dileineation as well. But something in me is attracted to physical separation. I need to think about this some more.</li>

<li>Done Photos - any "done" photos get placed in this folder It duplicates the folder structure of the Intake Folder structue but only includes photos that I know I won't revisit. Now there could be other versions of the same source photo still in WIP if I am exploring other options, and I could move a photo back into WIP if I decide I'm not as "done" with a photo as I think I am.</li>

</ol>

<p>I'm glad I wrote this out. By writing it out, I see where I am doing things manually that I could let ACDSee take care of for me. The question I need to resolve is, "Do I WANT ACDSee to do some of this for me?" After all, my switch from Lightroom to ACDSee was pretty painful primarily because the Lightroom database is a black hole into which meta data goes in, but comes out with great reluctance. Now ACDSee's database is much simpler, but it is proprietary rather than using a standard RDBMS, so data goes in, and it is even harder to get out if I want to switch organizers again in a few years.<br>

This has been a good exercise that I recommend to all photographers. </p>