On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Bob W <[email protected]> wrote:
> You may need to make a distinction here between where you put the raw files
> and where you put any 'finished' output files for distribution. If you're
> not using LR as the management system for the output files then, duh, you
> need to use something else, and that could be the operating system with its
> folder structure. If I were keeping output files though I'd give some
> serious thought to using LR, so that everything is handled the same way.
I have the input, or work in progress, imported into one catalog. This
original image file repository is stored on disk in a time-ordered
hierarchy of folders.
Example:
/photo-files/originals/2012/120704/filename[...]
/photo-files/originals/2012/120705/filename[...]
File names are in the pattern YYMMDD-{fnumber portion of original
image filename}
This minimizes potential for filename conflicts and promotes easy
partitioning and scalability.
I have the output, or finished work, imported into another catalog.
It's stored on disk in a project-ordered hierarchy of folders. Each
project folder contains, ultimately, all the output images, all the
collateral, etc, for a project. On disk these files are stored in
folders named by year, project number, and project name, e.g.:
12001-PESO_images
12002-New_Years_party
etc.
Works for me. Easy to append to and keep track of, easy to partition.
>> Everyone needs to put the image files into some sort of "meaningful"
>> directory structure.
>
> I don't.
>
> I put all the raw files in a single folder with no hierarchical organisation
> beneath it. Lightroom itself builds the date-based indexes (which may be
> implemented as folders, but that's of no concern to me), and I use a
> combination of keywords and collections to group things together and make
> them easy to find. There is no need whatsoever to devise a structure outside
> of Lightroom if you are using only Lightroom to access the raw files, which
> is my situation. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't devise such a
> structure if that suits you, but it is not a need, because LR can do
> anything that the file system can do.
Well, actually you do. You just choose to use the degenerate case of a
single file directory for an arbitrary number of files which I didn't
mention. That is still "some sort of *meaningful* directory
structure", although not a particularly informative one.
File system limitations and file naming conflicts will at some point
require that you create another folder. And the choice of this
degenerate case directory structure can also lead to file system and
naming conflicts when you go to backup, add to, or partition the
original file repository.
--
Godfrey
godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
