Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Multiple Lightroom Catalogs Idea  (Read 1865 times)
malam
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


« on: February 13, 2012, 03:21:16 PM »
ReplyReply

I am trying to "optimize" my digital file setup and would like some idea on what I plan to do.
Just installed two SSDs and allocated them as follows:

SSD #1  - Windows 7 OS, Lightroom 3 and PS5
SSD#2   - 2012 Photos (Folder will hold all my digital files in 2012)
HD (2T)  - Contains all my digital files 2007-2011. Mostly dumped in folders with the 2011 more organized by dates and location)

Option 1:

I have a Lightroom Catalog file that has all the 2007-2011 digital files.  I would rename this as "OLD Catalog".  Create a new catalog (2012 Catalog)
on the SSD #2.   I am assuming that since the 2012 digital files and the 2012 Catalog are in a Solid State Drive, I might gain some processing speed.  If I need any of the older files, I can switch to the other catalog.

Option 2:

Keep the digital files where they are (Old on the HD and the 2012 files on the SSD), but keep a single Catalog on the SSD that will include the digital files on both the HD and the SSD.

Option 3:

Keep a single catalog on the SSD that will include the digital files on both the HD and the SSD.

What are the pros and cons expected from the three options?  What else I'm I overlooking ? I also think I might upgrade to LR4 when it becomes available.

Thanks for your ideas.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2012, 03:37:00 PM by malam » Logged
Anthony.Ralph
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43



« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2012, 05:23:51 PM »
ReplyReply

My vote would be for a single catalogue. The advantage is that all the keywording, collections, presets, etc. would be available across all your images.

Anthony.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9315



WWW
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2012, 05:25:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Single catalog has so many advantages.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
malam
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2012, 05:33:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Does it matter where the single catalog is kept ?  With the LR3 default location on the main drive?  Or does it matter at all ?
Thanks.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9315



WWW
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2012, 05:38:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Does it matter where the single catalog is kept ?  With the LR3 default location on the main drive?  Or does it matter at all ?

Doesn’t matter. I’d place it on a dedicated drive with all your images, presets, etc. That way you can clone that data to any number of drives quickly and easily. You could take that drive onto any machine that has the LR application and have access to all your data.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
malam
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2012, 08:41:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Doesn’t matter. I’d place it on a dedicated drive with all your images, presets, etc. That way you can clone that data to any number of drives quickly and easily. You could take that drive onto any machine that has the LR application and have access to all your data.

I've consolidated the catalog into one single master catalog located on the second SSD.  Will set the LR Backup to my HD which is on a mirror drive and is also backed up regularly.
You said "clone" rather than backup - any particular reason ??

Thanks.
Logged
Steve Weldon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1477



WWW
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2012, 11:35:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I'd go alone with everyone else on the single catalog theme to a point.  You should set a limit, maybe like you do for your closet.  If you haven't worn a piece of clothing for say three years, get rid of it.  With images, if I haven't accessed them in five years they go in my inactive archive catalog.  It's just too easy (and counterproductive) to get in the habit of keeping stuff we shouldn't.

I do think a LR user is wise to consider the speeds of the drives they keep the catalog and previews on, and the work drive the files are on, with small catalogs they can and probably should be on the same drive.  Lightroom works better with a powerful processor, lots of RAM, and speedy drives.  I'd buy the fastest highest capacity drives your budget will allow.   If your catalog is large I'd consider a separate drive just for the catalog and previews.

When I go to Ivy Bridge later this spring I will be buying an Extended ATX board for the extra PCIe slots.  I will use the latest/fastest Revo 256gb for OS/programs, and their 1tb hybrid exclusively for my LR catalog/previews, and either a third Revo or fast SATAIII 256gb for my current work drive.  Some would say this is overkill, but I've used this setup on several different workstations and the speed is awesome. 
Logged

----------------------------------------------
http://www.BangkokImages.com
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9315



WWW
« Reply #7 on: February 14, 2012, 08:52:24 AM »
ReplyReply

You said "clone" rather than backup - any particular reason ??

The application I use (SuperDuper on Mac) clones data meaning not only a bit for bit copy, but it will only copy newer data since the last clone (backup). That speeds things up considerably.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad