| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/04/2008 12:46:02 AM · #1 |
Im sure this hascome up before but a search i just did in the forum didnt show much.
I was wondering which program(s) is(are) considered best for organizing all your photos?
Im sure there are a few, just wondering what most people here use |
|
|
|
08/04/2008 12:48:52 AM · #2 |
| Lightroom! The best all in one program I have used. It takes care of 95% of all my photo needs |
|
|
|
08/04/2008 01:04:27 AM · #3 |
I suppose it depends on how you want to organize. If you like keywording and/or using metadata to organize your images, then Lightroom is "all the rage" right now.
And although I'm a big fan of Lightroom, the one thing I don't use it for is organizing my images. For one thing, because I already have an organization for my images on my hard drive (meaning, I don't need any kind of organizer, my directory structure already says it all). For another, I haven't found a program yet where I haven't had to "blow away the database" from time to time.
I primarily use ACDSee to "manage" my photos. I used to use all kinds of keywords in ACDSee and was real "big" on that whole concept. Until one day (after years and years of keywording images) the database got corrupted and I lost all of my ratings and keywording efforts. At that point, I decided I needed something more permanent, and that's when I switched to a directory structure on the hard drive. I've since then had to blow away my ACDSee database a couple of times because it seems like when it gets too full it just slows down (it takes a LOT of images before that happens, but deleting the database sure breaths a lot of life back into ACDSee).
Likewise, with Lightroom, I have found that after several thousand images have been stored in the database that it, too, begins to slow down. So I simply delete the database and go on. Nothing lost. All of my settings are in the external .XMP files. I just re-load the images into Lightroom if I ever need to work on them again.
So I happen to like the cheap/easy solution ... directory structure. But if you're into keywording and such, Lightroom, ACDSee and many others are available.
Edit to add:
I haven't been up on Lightroom 2.0 long enough to know yet, whether its database is faster/more efficient, or if it, too, will require deleting every now and then. Give me a month or so and I oughta have it pretty full again. :-)
Message edited by author 2008-08-04 01:06:54.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2008 01:26:38 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by dwterry:
because I already have an organization for my images on my hard drive (meaning, I don't need any kind of organizer, my directory structure already says it all). |
Thanks for the long informative answer.
I have a directory style system too atm.
Only problem I have with it, is that, for example:
I have a folder for 'dogs' and another 'cats' and i have a photo of a dog and a cat together.
In this case i copy the photo into both.
This isnt an ideal example, and many photos will fall into many categories, and take up 5 or times as much space as id like.
maybe you have a simpler way of doing this than me! |
|
|
|
08/04/2008 01:31:17 AM · #5 |
| I don't know about the best organizer, but I found lightroom's organizer to be a turd. I'm running the Trial of MS Expression Media right now. I'll let you know in a week or so how well it does. |
|
|
|
08/04/2008 01:31:35 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by kolasi:
I have a folder for 'dogs' and another 'cats' and i have a photo of a dog and a cat together. |
Yup, that's a perfect example of where keywording becomes important. My best answer to that, right now, is Lightroom. Just be sure to back up your database from time to time. And also use LR's database optimization if it begins to slow down.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2008 01:44:54 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by awpollard:
I don't know about the best organizer, but I found lightroom's organizer to be a turd. I'm running the Trial of MS Expression Media right now. I'll let you know in a week or so how well it does. |
I have been using iView for MANY years now and found it to work VERY well. It is now known as Expression Media (which I hate haveing Microsoft on my Mac). Keywords, inserts any metadata you can think of and ones you make up and then you can export it INTO the file, you can do minor editing with it, but I never have, and much more.
Supports drag and drop, templates, automatic updating (put new photos is watched folders and it will load them up).
|
|
|
|
08/04/2008 03:11:32 AM · #8 |
I like lightroom, but i dont like how Adobe handles NIkon NEFs. Also, I dont like how it wants to control my imports and all. Im just not big on DBs for indexing images like that.
All that being said, I use Nikon transfer to import images from CF cards. When this happens it creates a new folder named "YYYMMDD - subject". I also have it name all the images the same with ### after it. That way i can search by subject of the shoot, or the date it was taken. The only flaw is having to remember what i shot at a particular session. But for me it works well.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2008 09:39:49 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
Originally posted by awpollard:
I don't know about the best organizer, but I found lightroom's organizer to be a turd. I'm running the Trial of MS Expression Media right now. I'll let you know in a week or so how well it does. |
I have been using iView for MANY years now and found it to work VERY well. It is now known as Expression Media (which I hate haveing Microsoft on my Mac). Keywords, inserts any metadata you can think of and ones you make up and then you can export it INTO the file, you can do minor editing with it, but I never have, and much more.
Supports drag and drop, templates, automatic updating (put new photos is watched folders and it will load them up). |
Cool, (I hate having Adobe on my PC) I got trials for Capture One 4.1 (Phase One original creators of iView) and LightRoom 2.0. LR2 has to ton of fluff and cataloging has a mind of it's own. Capture One 4.1 is a nice, easy interface and they are offering it with Expression Media 2 for a hella lot less than LR2. |
|
|
|
08/04/2008 09:55:35 AM · #10 |
I also do the directory structure system, however I don't try to organize by subject. I create a folder with the date on it, and a descriptive title for the session. Within that folder I make a subfolder called "potential", and put the keepers in there. When I edit them, I put the edited files in another subfolder. I can now find the images by knowing about when I took them, and the original images are separated from the final edits. I am not a pro, however, but this system works for me and backs up or moves without fuss.
Message edited by author 2008-08-04 09:56:13. |
|
|
|
08/04/2008 10:11:14 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by dwterry:
Originally posted by kolasi:
I have a folder for 'dogs' and another 'cats' and i have a photo of a dog and a cat together. |
Yup, that's a perfect example of where keywording becomes important. My best answer to that, right now, is Lightroom. Just be sure to back up your database from time to time. And also use LR's database optimization if it begins to slow down. |
Also, you can have multiple catalogs in Lightroom, which means multiple databases. You can control performance this way. Depending on how many pictures you take, you could organize your catalogs by month or year, or any other way. I keep a master catalog, and use separate catalogs for important projects.
kolasi, file duplication is a bad idea, except for backing up. As I'm sure you know, it's very inefficient. Lightroom will solve a problem like this, as dwterry suggests. You can keep your current directory structure and import your photos into Lightroom without changing the way you organize (you can even tell it how to organize your photos the way you like when you import new ones from your memory card).
About blowing the database away -- I recognize this is a potential problem, but in my case, I think I've made the decision to stick with Lightroom for the forseeable future. I keep metadata in sidecar files with the images, so when I upgraded to Lightroom 2 and wanted to start with a fresh catalog -- which was my choice, I could have used the old catalog -- I simply imported my pictures, and the metadata files were imported as well, preserving all the changes I'd made.
Lastly, Lightroom 2.0's "Smart Collections" is worth the upgrade for me. It's the best way to quickly organize photos based on various criteria. |
|
|
|
08/04/2008 12:48:20 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by awpollard:
I got trials for Capture One 4.1 (Phase One original creators of iView) |
I think they use procolor for their colorspace on V. 5. That software is pricey but it puts the best color out I have seen out of any software (with minimal editing). |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/18/2025 06:18:39 PM EDT.
