Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Where to Store PSD and TIFF Files Created from DNG? - DAM  (Read 3684 times)
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2670



WWW
« Reply #20 on: December 03, 2013, 08:48:28 AM »
ReplyReply

No, nothing can go wrong there, can it?
Logged

JeanMichel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 225


« Reply #21 on: December 03, 2013, 09:18:54 AM »
ReplyReply

There is a segment in the "Where the *** are my pictures" video by Seth Resnick and Michael that addresses the backups issues. Worth listening to. I pretty much use that setup, except that I do not have a Drobo system as a final backup. These backup strategies work fine in the short term and medium term but they are all technology-dependent and doomed to obsolescence. An article by Joseph E. LaBarca, Pixel Preservation International, identifies a number of digital preservation issues. These include: media formats, file formats, data integrity, and technology advances. I have a box of obsolete Syquest cartridges that are useless since the drive died, and, even if i found a working one, it needs a SCSI connection, and who knows if my current OS would run the drivers. For true long-term preservation we need a technology-independent system. A human-readable system such as a family album or shoe-box of photos will outlast any machine-readable system. So, if it is important, print it.

As for the OP's question, I keep all my files together, same name except for the extension. With LR, there is little need to export files into TIF's or PSD's unless you need to do additional editing in PS.

Jean-Michel


Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1274


« Reply #22 on: December 03, 2013, 12:39:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Having a friend/neighbour that you can leave stored data with is another option.
http://crashplan.com has a software that does offline (full/incremental) backup (encrypted if you want to) to your family/friends/whatever free (unlike paid plan to backup to their own data storage)... and you do not need to worry about catalog structure on some obsolete DVDs or BluRays...
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1274


« Reply #23 on: December 03, 2013, 12:43:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Sure, I wonder why the high volume shooters I know are still using DVD rather than blu-ray, but they do so. After all, high tech methods have a nasty way of going out of date (or never catching on) before more primitive methods, and even Apple aren't so stupid that they no longer make DVD readers.
blue rays are still low capacity hassle... HDDs and offline clouds (you can backup to 2 different providers to be even more safe).
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1274


« Reply #24 on: December 03, 2013, 12:45:05 PM »
ReplyReply

No, nothing can go wrong there, can it?
sure, but nobody is forcing you to use just one cloud back service... use 2-3 different at once.
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2670



WWW
« Reply #25 on: December 03, 2013, 01:42:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Why stick to just two or three? There's a whole industry that needs our support.
Logged

JeanMichel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 225


« Reply #26 on: December 03, 2013, 02:32:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Cloud. Eventually, they evaporate, sometimes rather suddenly and violently.
Jean-Michel
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1274


« Reply #27 on: December 03, 2013, 02:50:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Why stick to just two or three? There's a whole industry that needs our support.
no need to be sour... it is working and cheap, plus - you can backup to your own location(s) elsewhere, to your relatives, etc for free... way better than to juggle with plastic discs
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2670



WWW
« Reply #28 on: December 03, 2013, 02:55:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Yawn.
Logged

phcorrigan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34


WWW
« Reply #29 on: December 03, 2013, 02:56:27 PM »
ReplyReply

For me, any file that might have further editing applied is kept in Lightroom. Lightroom makes this easy with the Edit In Photoshop function, since those images are automatically put into the catalog and in the same folder as the originals. Images that are exported in final form for specific purposes, such as web, print publication, etc., no matter if they are JPEG, TIFF or other, are kept in separate "Export" folder structure.
Logged

Patrick Corrigan
Author, Data Protection for Photographers, now available (http://rockynook.com/book/0/259/data-protection-for-photographers.html)
Website/blog: http://dpworkflow.com
Phil Indeblanc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1104


« Reply #30 on: December 04, 2013, 10:37:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I would never allow Lightroom or any one type of software "manage" my file structure. I think JohnBeardy's bucket system if I understand it is what I do.  Make a file with client name, then project based folders. I then have the RAW/Finals(usually flat TIF's/ JPEGS. Simple as that. If you want to use Bridge, CaptureOne, Acdsee, or Windows Explorer or Finder, things are at the OS level searchable. It is a marketing talk for the sheep to be guided into a proprietary means of structuring your files. :-P

Yes the catalog gives you an overlay of functions to search your images. Can be very powerful. But not seeing the folder level content without being part of the catalog is very inconvenient.

On  the backup note, while I often do dump files ontot a DVD for a project, HArddrives are so cheap, you just fill it up alphabetically(a couple year or older files) and disconnect and secure it someplace. Off site preferred.
Forget clouds. If you LOVE the idea, make your own to a remote computer YOU manage. end of story.

This thread should be in the DAM catagory under Equipment and Techniques
« Last Edit: January 08, 2014, 11:30:30 AM by Phil Indeblanc » Logged

If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2046


« Reply #31 on: December 05, 2013, 12:12:57 AM »
ReplyReply

I would never allow Lightroom or any one type of software "manage" my file structure ... It is a marketing talk for the sheep to be guided into a proprietary means of structuring your files.

I have to strongly disagree with these statements.
There is NOTHING proprietary in the way Lightroom does it file structure.
In fact that structure is entirely within the control of the operator.
One can create, delete, rename, and re-organize folders and files in the same way that the OS does.
The only difference is one does it in Lightroom so that the Lightroom database (read Catalog) can keep track of what is done.

I am not a Lightroom or Adobe apologist but the statements from Phil are just plain wrong.

Tony Jay
Logged
jrsforums
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 722


« Reply #32 on: December 05, 2013, 07:25:51 AM »
ReplyReply

I have to strongly disagree with these statements.
There is NOTHING proprietary in the way Lightroom does it file structure.
In fact that structure is entirely within the control of the operator.
One can create, delete, rename, and re-organize folders and files in the same way that the OS does.
The only difference is one does it in Lightroom so that the Lightroom database (read Catalog) can keep track of what is done.

I am not a Lightroom or Adobe apologist but the statements from Phil are just plain wrong.

Tony Jay

Absolutely agree with Tony Jay.

My file naming and folder structure is unique (sort of, similar to many others) and "tuned" to what I like and the way I think or remember when/where things were done.

While I use one catalog, the file structure is not contained in one place.  For example, I have one drive with current pictures and another with older, archived pictures.  I include the 'iCloud Photo' folder (imported automatically with Jeffrey Friedl's 'Folder Watch'), so have easy access to images taken on any of my iDevices.  I have separate access to a folder of greeting card templates and messages I have created.  All of these are under the one catalog.

John
Logged

John
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3239



WWW
« Reply #33 on: December 05, 2013, 08:20:44 AM »
ReplyReply

no need to be sour... it is working and cheap, plus - you can backup to your own location(s) elsewhere, to your relatives, etc for free... way better than to juggle with plastic discs
It's never been workable as far as my or many professional's needs go. The amount of data I accumulate always tends to outpace the ability to upload and that doesn't take into account my archive. They are fine for people with not much data, but once you get into multi TB amounts……
Oh and I have the fastest connection you can get in the UK [and have had it for many years now] and upload speeds are still pathetic. A colleague can upload faster via his phone it seems!
One company did offer to send you a drive to seed your back up to get it started, but only in the US and the drive was way too small anyway.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3239



WWW
« Reply #34 on: December 05, 2013, 08:24:40 AM »
ReplyReply

I would never allow Lightroom or any one type of software "manage" my file structure. I think JohnBeardy's bucket system if I understand it is what I do.  Make a file with client name, then project based folders. I then have the RAW/Finals(usually flat TIF's/ JPEGS. Simple as that. If you want to use Bridge, CaptureOne, Acdsee, or Windows Explorer or Finder, things are at the OS level searchable. It is a marketing talk for the sheep to be guided into a proprietary means of structuring your files.
Good grief, people still believe this myth!
Using LR has made zero difference to my file structure setup or ability to access files via OS/Finder/Explorer/Bridge etc. It has however made it much, much easier to find photos.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Scott Hargis
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 191



WWW
« Reply #35 on: December 05, 2013, 10:56:20 AM »
ReplyReply

First to the OP's question: I use the "bucket system" per Peter Krogh and any and all files associated with a specific project or shoot are dumped into that one bucket. Since I'm doing interiors/architecture, every shoot I do has a mailing address, so that's how I name the folder....and there are no sub-folders.

Can't help chiming in on the backup discussion. I think using DVD or other removable media is a bit like converting your music collection over to 8-track tapes. I'm down to a single device that even has a cd/dvd drive, and it's arguably past the end of it's useful service life. I'll be replacing it this winter and cd/dvd will no longer exist in my studio. I can understand not rushing to adopt the "bleeding-edge" technology, but using 20+ year-old technology seems equally silly.

As I import images into my archive, they're automatically backed up to 2 separate drives in addition to the "working" drive. As the backup drives fill up (I use 500GB externals), one goes into a desk drawer, and the other is shipped to a friend a couple of states away. She's got a Pelican case in her furnace closet full of my backup HDs. My Lightroom catalog still knows which files are where, so if something were to disappear off of my working drive, I'd know which external drive to look on. If my desktop computer melts or gets infected or whatever, I've got a desk drawer with everything, and if my house burns down, it's (almost) all in my friends closet, a FedEx box away.
Logged

<a href="http://www.scotthargisphoto.com">Website</a>
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2670



WWW
« Reply #36 on: December 05, 2013, 12:09:08 PM »
ReplyReply

It's not at all like 8 track tapes - you can write over them. The point of DVD etc is to use them as write-once media. 
Logged

Phil Indeblanc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1104


« Reply #37 on: December 12, 2013, 09:30:34 PM »
ReplyReply

My Lightroom catalog still knows which files are where, so if something were to disappear off of my working drive, I'd know which external drive to look on

What do you do when your not using Lightroom any longer? Lets say 5 or so years from now ther is another cataloging standard? I know of a few applications that can replace LR, and the only reason I use it in conjunction with other DAMS is due to its Raw developer. But I also use other developers that have better quality is certain files and subject matters such as C1 on some files.

For me it would be short sighted to use LR as a organizer/Catalog as it doesn't openly allow other DAM's to replicate its database structure/conventions. So why would I not manage it myself?  I also find the folder structure (older version of his book/bucket system) to be fast and most importantly not dependent on LR.  If you already have a folder structure that is even just OK to manage. Stick with it , rather than try and manage with LR.

 If you don't and you think you will die before LR is replaced, and your after life legacy manager will also be using LR, then go ahead and lock yourself in, and manage with LR, and its multiple collections and its sluggish workflow concept of Library mode vs Develop mode. Its a bit dinosaur like approach, but I don't see them breaking out of it just yet.
Logged

If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3239



WWW
« Reply #38 on: February 22, 2014, 05:12:37 PM »
ReplyReply

What do you do when your not using Lightroom any longer? Lets say 5 or so years from now ther is another cataloging standard? I know of a few applications that can replace LR, and the only reason I use it in conjunction with other DAMS is due to its Raw developer. But I also use other developers that have better quality is certain files and subject matters such as C1 on some files.

For me it would be short sighted to use LR as a organizer/Catalog as it doesn't openly allow other DAM's to replicate its database structure/conventions. So why would I not manage it myself?  I also find the folder structure (older version of his book/bucket system) to be fast and most importantly not dependent on LR.  If you already have a folder structure that is even just OK to manage. Stick with it , rather than try and manage with LR.
Do you even know how to use LR? LR does not, as mentioned several times above organise your work, you do. I am using the identical folder structure within LR that I used before LR even existed. Plus LR can import images into that structure quicker for me than when I had to do it manually. Any other DAM programme can parse my basic file structure, with no issues. If you use smart collections you can easily replicate them in other software that also does smart collections. And if the software does not do smart collections then frankly it's a rather useless.

 
Quote
If you don't and you think you will die before LR is replaced, and your after life legacy manager will also be using LR, then go ahead and lock yourself in, and manage with LR, and its multiple collections and its sluggish workflow concept of Library mode vs Develop mode. Its a bit dinosaur like approach, but I don't see them breaking out of it just yet.
If by dinosaur you meant old and out of date, then separating your cataloguing from your working on your images is the antiquated and sluggish method of working. With LR, there's no pointless exporting of one's organised work just so another programme can then utilise images and then having to re-save work, thus ending up with unnecessary copies and duplicates.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2014, 07:57:02 PM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
BrianWJH
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 166


« Reply #39 on: February 22, 2014, 06:03:31 PM »
ReplyReply

For me it would be short sighted to use LR as a organizer/Catalog as it doesn't openly allow other DAM's to replicate its database structure/conventions.

Hi Phil, while that statement is true in the strict sense, LR does use an open source SQL database widely used by application developers so like any SQL database it's not very difficult to write DDL script or in the case of someone without that experience to use a Database administrator application (many are opensource also) to export table data as text which can be imported into another applications' database.

Brian,
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad