Say I have a catalogue with 10000 images on it covering 2 years of data and the start up is slower. Scott's book says that having a smaller catalogue will speed up opening time.
So, I name a new catalogue, say 2013 files for all months this year and import the files I have so far, it doens't look like the LR4 adjustments follow the images that have been previously PP'ed with LR4 but not "burned" into the original image when exported to the Windows Explorer folder I have for all my jpegs.
My process is to leave the Raw's untouched, use DxO for first pass at PP'ing and then transfer these 100% jpegs into LR4 and if I make furthur adjustment for printing, keywording etc, save them backinto the Jpeg folder that they were put into by Dxo. So if I re-export these jpegs into another new LR catalogue, does the LR4 keywording/metadata follow them and what about the sequential numbering of the files - they will not be the same as the original numbering, or will they//
While I can't see what speed you're observing, I wouldn't recommend multiple catalogs. I have north of 60,000 images in an LR4 catalog on a 2010 21.5" iMac with no noticeable speed impact. LR is designed to handle very large catalogs and 10,000 images certainly isn't pushing it.
I may not have correctly understood your process but it would seem if you create a new empty catalog and then import your raw files then you would not capture any info contained in the LR library or sidecar files.
If you create the new catalog by exporting a new catalog from the original catalog then the settings should follow.
I use multiple catalogs myself for business, personal, photography customers etc. My personal catalog is split in two - current (last 3 years) and archives.
Thats what I thought and maybe I didn't watch carefully what I was creating from what original files, be they RAW, original JPEGs or JPEGS saved from LR files.
I'll try again. I think I'd like to keep a separate catalogue comprising separate years, like one catalogue for 2012, and one for 2013 etc. since once I'm done for the year I'll not likely go back too far again. BUt maybe not.
No I haven't. I was just going to copy/paste but I'll investigate the suggested program. At least that way it'll just update the duplicate backup automatically with the images that have been added or changed??
>No I haven't. I was just going to copy/paste but I'll >investigate the suggested program. At least that way it'll >just update the duplicate backup automatically with the images >that have been added or changed??
That's the idea. It would be difficult to do this manually. A disk syncing program is your best bet -- it automaticlly tracks every file added, deleted or revised. It can sync entire disk or one or more folders and their subfolders.
I believe there are easier syncing programs to learn than AllwaySync mentioned on these forums and there may be some good free programs.
I definitely wouldn't consider doing this just to save a few seconds from periodic backups that occur when you exit the program. As already mentioned, LR can handle far more than 10,000 images easily. Going with separate catalogs will eliminate your ability to search or filter across years, and that capability is a very useful thing. You can certainly use another tool to backup the catalog or just simply make a start on your next activity during those few seconds while the program is exiting and backing up the catalog.
I have 230K images in my catalog and what i have done is my catalog is on a separate External USD 3 HD and do not have any problems with speed. Using a PC
Now about separate catalogs, Tim Grey doesn't recommend them but many others do, so pay your money and take your choice. Also make sure in Preferences >catalog > metadata> editing that the boxes are check so that the XMP is automatically written into the file
THanks for the info. Ya, we (in-law)have a cottage near WHitney, Algonquin Park. Definetly God's country, takes us about 6 hours to drive there, and we've owned it now for about 65years (my wife's family really).