Catalogs vs. Folders

[KED]

I've searched the forum on this, but remain confused. I am generally content right now with having one catalog and a folder/subfolder hierarchy inside of that. Integrity checks and backups are taking longer and longer, but that's to be expected and is tolerable. The question is this: When and in what circumstances are multiple catalogs preferable to a master catalog with a hierarchical folder structure underneath?

 

[JBtheLD]

I import each new photo shoot into a new empty catalog.
Then I process the photos in that catalog.
Then I import that catalog into my Master catalog.

Benefit 1: LR is always only processing small catalogs and so works quickly.

Benefit 2: If I need to process the shoot on my laptop or away from home I don't need my Master catalog with me, so I don't have the bother of exporting, importing or synchronising my massive Master Catalog between my main PC and my laptop.

Benefit 3: I know that all the images in my Master catalog have been processed as I only add processed images to it. So even if I have a quick sequence of photo shoots I can be sure that I won't ever end up with several partially processed shoots in my Master catalog.

This system also works well for second shooters (eg for weddings) as they can process their own shoots before submitting their catalog to their studio for inclusion in the Master catalog.

John

 

[jimburgess]

Depending on your hardware configuration, LR performance might be affected as catalogs grow to tens of thousands of images, so that might be a factor in using multiple catalogs. But my key criteria for multiple catalogs is whether or not I need to search across catalogs. For example, I will never need to search dance photos for images related to sports, and vice-versa. So I break up my dance images into one catalog, and my sports images into another catalog, etc. This helps to minimize the potential performance issue as the catalogs grow. The only hassle is specifying which catalog to open when LR starts, but that's really a minor nuisance.

 

[Victoria Bampton]

John Beardy will no doubt be along shortly for a rant about multiple catalogs.... See John, I said we need it in Tips and Tricks!!!

There are a few things to weigh up. Off the top of my head:

1. Do you use keywords? If so, it can be tricky to keep the keywords list the same in both catalogs.

2. Do you ever search for images? If so, having to open lots of little catalogs to search for an image could be a pain, depending on your filing system.

3. How do you usually work? Do you need to do as John is suggesting, with a new catalog for each job, or would, perhaps, a small 'working' catalog of current files plus a huge (and slightly slower) 'archive' catalog of all finished files for easy searching work for you?

I'd guess a bit more information about the kind of photography you do, and the volume, would help us to give more specific suggestions.

 

[KED]

Already from what I have seen here, I think I'm on the right track keeping everything in the main catalog. I shoot 9'% sports, and just organize by school, date and event. I don't do anything in the field, so that's not an issue.

I'm not a highly technical person, but I do have intuition about hierarchical structure, and at the end of the day there needs to be a "root". For now I'm sticking with one root unless I find a reason not to.

Thanks everyone!