Re: Enablement: LR4
on 2012-10-21 3:45 Bob W wrote But next year you go on holiday to Sandy Bay, Jamaica, and the year after that to Sandy Bay, Devon. You now have 3 different places all called Sandy Bay, each of them belongs in a different hierarchy. What should you do about it? for the most part i wouldn't advise using keywords for places; i recommend doing this with the separate location tags; either geolocate or use the location, city, state/province and country tags; not only does it avoid ambiguity but it provides the base data for automating things like producing a map of where your photos have been taken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
How is what you are suggesting not using keywords for places? On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 11:49 PM, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: on 2012-10-21 3:45 Bob W wrote But next year you go on holiday to Sandy Bay, Jamaica, and the year after that to Sandy Bay, Devon. You now have 3 different places all called Sandy Bay, each of them belongs in a different hierarchy. What should you do about it? for the most part i wouldn't advise using keywords for places; i recommend doing this with the separate location tags; either geolocate or use the location, city, state/province and country tags; not only does it avoid ambiguity but it provides the base data for automating things like producing a map of where your photos have been taken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- David Parsons Photography http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com Aloha Photographer Photoblog http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Enablement: LR4
Lightroom will differ between identical keywords in different contexts. You can see this when looking at the panel for recently applied keywords, for example. Those beaches, for example, will show up as: Jamaica - Sandy Bay Devon - Sandy Bay And so on. I can see your reason to worry, but in practice I find that I'm very happy with the way Lightroom deals with this issue. Jostein Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne In my humble opinion it is not a good idea in the long run to use descriptive terms like family album in folder names. That's what keywords are for in the first place. I think it better to use the folder names to establish chronology only. Hierarchical keywords is a blessing. :-) Jostein I agree with you, expect that I'm not convinced that hierarchical keywords are a blessing. They suffer from the same problem as any other hierarchy. For example, suppose in 2011 you went on holiday to Sandy Bay, Gibraltar and labelled your photos with the keyword Sandy Bay, which you placed beneath Gibraltar in your hierarchy. This seems like a reasonable thing to do. But next year you go on holiday to Sandy Bay, Jamaica, and the year after that to Sandy Bay, Devon. You now have 3 different places all called Sandy Bay, each of them belongs in a different hierarchy. What should you do about it? This is in some ways even worse than the hierarchical folder structure. With the folder structure the hierarchy is, in essence, part of the name: pictures.holidays.jamaica.sandy bay, *.gibraltar.sandy bay, *.england.devon.sandy bay. But not so with LR keywords! Of course, pictures.holidays.jamaica, pictures.holidays.gibraltar and so on are not strictly hierarchies since the relation which links the levels is not the same all the way up, but in the real world this is the way people tend to label things, even Boris, who's an IT person and should know better, and in any case even with a true hierarchy the problem still exists. B Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Chiming in with a bit (*) of delay... I see there were a storage strategy discussion here. I should point out the obvious - there is no reason of not using very helpful features of LR such as keywords and there is no sense in overdoing it either. Namely, if you try to come up with all possible keywords for each photo, chances are you won't be consistent from day to day or from month to month and hence the outcome will be a mess. Here is a suggestion for you. I have two hierarchies. One is on disk file system like so: \basic category\sub category\date-time based sub-structure. Real life examples: * \Family Album\2010\2010-08 - and therein are all photos that I've taken on that month of that year where family members can be seen. * \Travel\Jerusalem\2012\2012-03-10 - probably self-explanatory already * \International Travel\Rachel Sullivan in Israel\Galia\2011-05-10 - I have decided that the guests from abroad equal us going there but I may split \International Travel to \International Travel and \International Guests. Here we have photos made by Galia on a given date when Rachel came for a visit. Anyway, the classification is basic and always ends with date-time based sub-structure so that given a date, I can quite easily find what I need. Additionally, LR has wonderful feature where you can browse your collection by virtually any data item that your photos have - date, time, aperture, camera, lens, rating, flag status - you name it, LR has it. Obviously there are photos that answer more than one criteria - e.g. my girls while traveling abroad. Here come keywords. 99% of my keywords denote persons and places. The remaining 1% is wherever photos were uploaded, given to someone or chosen for publication. I organize my keywords in tree-like structure (it is really very easy, you either drag and drop or indicate the upper level keyword, when you create a new one (**) ). Unfortunately I started with that system having shot several tens of thousands photos hence I still have a good chunk of assigning keywords to do. Still, I am offering this as a possible answer to your question, Walt. Hope it helps. (*) I think it is more like 128 bit of delay... :-) (**) Whenever I create a new keyword, I immediately go to the Keywords List screen (on the right hand side in Gallery module) and find a proper way in the keyword tree for the new keyword. On 9/26/2012 12:38 AM, Walt wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that
Re: Enablement: LR4
We both know that any software may reach its expiry date before we expect it to. If you don't do so already, you should definately look into how to make LR write your keywords into the file system as well as in the database, so that you get the redundancy you argue for. Most other archiving software on the market are already capable of reading those data, so when switching you can actually transfer nearly all the metadata from LR without even consulting its database. The thing I don't like about your folder logic is how you put descriptors like family and placemames first, and dates at the end. The way I see it you will inevitably end up in the fix that Bob W. raised for hierarchical keywords, but without any intrinsic context awareness to lean on. By sticking to dates as the single organising structure, you avoid such ambiguities. And with keywords stored inside the files or in XMP sidecars, even the indexer in Windows can search through your files if you abandon LR. :-) But at the end of the day the folder structure is just a sorting system, so it is to be expected that we differ in preferences. :-) Jostein Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Two points, Jostein: 1. I'd like to be able to backup my photos to separate external HDDs and I'd like to backup logical units. To that end, Family Album and/or International Travel are both good candidates. 2. I don't want to bet my life on LR or Adobe. Thus minimal basic hierarchy is in folder structure. Call that a skeleton if you will. Boris On 10/21/2012 11:12 AM, AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne wrote: In my humble opinion it is not a good idea in the long run to use descriptive terms like family album in folder names. That's what keywords are for in the first place. I think it better to use the folder names to establish chronology only. Hierarchical keywords is a blessing. :-) Jostein Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Chiming in with a bit (*) of delay... I see there were a storage strategy discussion here. I should point out the obvious - there is no reason of not using very helpful features of LR such as keywords and there is no sense in overdoing it either. Namely, if you try to come up with all possible keywords for each photo, chances are you won't be consistent from day to day or from month to month and hence the outcome will be a mess. Here is a suggestion for you. I have two hierarchies. One is on disk file system like so: \basic category\sub category\date-time based sub-structure. Real life examples: * \Family Album\2010\2010-08 - and therein are all photos that I've taken on that month of that year where family members can be seen. * \Travel\Jerusalem\2012\2012-03-10 - probably self-explanatory already * \International Travel\Rachel Sullivan in Israel\Galia\2011-05-10 - I have decided that the guests from abroad equal us going there but I may split \International Travel to \International Travel and \International Guests. Here we have photos made by Galia on a given date when Rachel came for a visit. Anyway, the classification is basic and always ends with date-time based sub-structure so that given a date, I can quite easily find what I need. Additionally, LR has wonderful feature where you can browse your collection by virtually any data item that your photos have - date, time, aperture, camera, lens, rating, flag status - you name it, LR has it. Obviously there are photos that answer more than one criteria - e.g. my girls while traveling abroad. Here come keywords. 99% of my keywords denote persons and places. The remaining 1% is wherever photos were uploaded, given to someone or chosen for publication. I organize my keywords in tree-like structure (it is really very easy, you either drag and drop or indicate the upper level keyword, when you create a new one (**) ). Unfortunately I started with that system having shot several tens of thousands photos hence I still have a good chunk of assigning keywords to do. Still, I am offering this as a possible answer to your question, Walt. Hope it helps. (*) I think it is more like 128 bit of delay... :-) (**) Whenever I create a new keyword, I immediately go to the Keywords List screen (on the right hand side in Gallery module) and find a proper way in the keyword tree for the new keyword. On 9/26/2012 12:38 AM, Walt wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please
Re: Enablement: LR4
I don't know that any particular method is objectively better for everyone. Each person needs to do what works in their own situtation. When several people need to share a common structure, things become more difficult. gs George Sinos gsi...@gmail.com www.georgesphotos.net plus.georgesinos.com On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 2:20 AM, AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne p...@alunfoto.no wrote: We both know that any software may reach its expiry date before we expect it to. If you don't do so already, you should definately look into how to make LR write your keywords into the file system as well as in the database, so that you get the redundancy you argue for. Most other archiving software on the market are already capable of reading those data, so when switching you can actually transfer nearly all the metadata from LR without even consulting its database. The thing I don't like about your folder logic is how you put descriptors like family and placemames first, and dates at the end. The way I see it you will inevitably end up in the fix that Bob W. raised for hierarchical keywords, but without any intrinsic context awareness to lean on. By sticking to dates as the single organising structure, you avoid such ambiguities. And with keywords stored inside the files or in XMP sidecars, even the indexer in Windows can search through your files if you abandon LR. :-) But at the end of the day the folder structure is just a sorting system, so it is to be expected that we differ in preferences. :-) Jostein Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Two points, Jostein: 1. I'd like to be able to backup my photos to separate external HDDs and I'd like to backup logical units. To that end, Family Album and/or International Travel are both good candidates. 2. I don't want to bet my life on LR or Adobe. Thus minimal basic hierarchy is in folder structure. Call that a skeleton if you will. Boris On 10/21/2012 11:12 AM, AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne wrote: In my humble opinion it is not a good idea in the long run to use descriptive terms like family album in folder names. That's what keywords are for in the first place. I think it better to use the folder names to establish chronology only. Hierarchical keywords is a blessing. :-) Jostein Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Chiming in with a bit (*) of delay... I see there were a storage strategy discussion here. I should point out the obvious - there is no reason of not using very helpful features of LR such as keywords and there is no sense in overdoing it either. Namely, if you try to come up with all possible keywords for each photo, chances are you won't be consistent from day to day or from month to month and hence the outcome will be a mess. Here is a suggestion for you. I have two hierarchies. One is on disk file system like so: \basic category\sub category\date-time based sub-structure. Real life examples: * \Family Album\2010\2010-08 - and therein are all photos that I've taken on that month of that year where family members can be seen. * \Travel\Jerusalem\2012\2012-03-10 - probably self-explanatory already * \International Travel\Rachel Sullivan in Israel\Galia\2011-05-10 - I have decided that the guests from abroad equal us going there but I may split \International Travel to \International Travel and \International Guests. Here we have photos made by Galia on a given date when Rachel came for a visit. Anyway, the classification is basic and always ends with date-time based sub-structure so that given a date, I can quite easily find what I need. Additionally, LR has wonderful feature where you can browse your collection by virtually any data item that your photos have - date, time, aperture, camera, lens, rating, flag status - you name it, LR has it. Obviously there are photos that answer more than one criteria - e.g. my girls while traveling abroad. Here come keywords. 99% of my keywords denote persons and places. The remaining 1% is wherever photos were uploaded, given to someone or chosen for publication. I organize my keywords in tree-like structure (it is really very easy, you either drag and drop or indicate the upper level keyword, when you create a new one (**) ). Unfortunately I started with that system having shot several tens of thousands photos hence I still have a good chunk of assigning keywords to do. Still, I am offering this as a possible answer to your question, Walt. Hope it helps. (*) I think it is more like 128 bit of delay... :-) (**) Whenever I create a new keyword, I immediately go to the Keywords List screen (on the right hand side in Gallery module) and find a proper way in the keyword tree for the new keyword. On 9/26/2012 12:38 AM, Walt wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my
Re: Enablement: LR4
Reply interspersed. On 10/22/2012 9:20 AM, AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne wrote: We both know that any software may reach its expiry date before we expect it to. Oh, certainly. If you don't do so already, you should definately look into how to make LR write your keywords into the file system as well as in the database, so that you get the redundancy you argue for. Most other archiving software on the market are already capable of reading those data, so when switching you can actually transfer nearly all the metadata from LR without even consulting its database. Presently I notice that my DNG files get changed (so that if I remove them from the catalog and re-import, the come in already edited). Although not clearest, I find this convenient. Other files (PEFs, NEFs, etc) get sidecar XMP files. Additionally I did notice that the keywords are shown in Picasa or XNViewer. So you're right, but I much rather I did not have to double the number of files I have to deal with. The thing I don't like about your folder logic is how you put descriptors like family and placemames first, and dates at the end. The way I see it you will inevitably end up in the fix that Bob W. raised for hierarchical keywords, but without any intrinsic context awareness to lean on. By sticking to dates as the single organising structure, you avoid such ambiguities. And with keywords stored inside the files or in XMP sidecars, even the indexer in Windows can search through your files if you abandon LR. :-) You're right. If I have a shot in family album section that was taken in Jerusalem, I can only copy the file in one folder (well, I might duplicate it, but then soon enough I will be looking for psychiatric help) hence I will have to choose. I make my choices rather arbitrarily: - anything shot locally gets split - that is, I would put the shot with my family in it to family album section - anything shot abroad does not get split - that is, it will be stored together It is not perfect, but it suits me and I am very much used to it so that I hope the possibility that I will get lost in my own tree is very low. But at the end of the day the folder structure is just a sorting system, so it is to be expected that we differ in preferences. :-) Yes. My criterion here is how do I want to manage the files. I suspect that rather sooner than later I will have to split my photo collection in some volume structure for easier multi-volume backup. Indeed, I may be mixing up things here as backup should follow the archival structure and not the other way around, but so far I am feeling comfortable with my system. Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
On 10/22/2012 9:20 AM, AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne wrote: We both know that any software may reach its expiry date before we expect it to. ... Oh, and to get things straight - I don't pretend that my system is perfect and everyone should adopt it. I merely presented it as one of the great many possible options. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
In my humble opinion it is not a good idea in the long run to use descriptive terms like family album in folder names. That's what keywords are for in the first place. I think it better to use the folder names to establish chronology only. Hierarchical keywords is a blessing. :-) Jostein Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Chiming in with a bit (*) of delay... I see there were a storage strategy discussion here. I should point out the obvious - there is no reason of not using very helpful features of LR such as keywords and there is no sense in overdoing it either. Namely, if you try to come up with all possible keywords for each photo, chances are you won't be consistent from day to day or from month to month and hence the outcome will be a mess. Here is a suggestion for you. I have two hierarchies. One is on disk file system like so: \basic category\sub category\date-time based sub-structure. Real life examples: * \Family Album\2010\2010-08 - and therein are all photos that I've taken on that month of that year where family members can be seen. * \Travel\Jerusalem\2012\2012-03-10 - probably self-explanatory already * \International Travel\Rachel Sullivan in Israel\Galia\2011-05-10 - I have decided that the guests from abroad equal us going there but I may split \International Travel to \International Travel and \International Guests. Here we have photos made by Galia on a given date when Rachel came for a visit. Anyway, the classification is basic and always ends with date-time based sub-structure so that given a date, I can quite easily find what I need. Additionally, LR has wonderful feature where you can browse your collection by virtually any data item that your photos have - date, time, aperture, camera, lens, rating, flag status - you name it, LR has it. Obviously there are photos that answer more than one criteria - e.g. my girls while traveling abroad. Here come keywords. 99% of my keywords denote persons and places. The remaining 1% is wherever photos were uploaded, given to someone or chosen for publication. I organize my keywords in tree-like structure (it is really very easy, you either drag and drop or indicate the upper level keyword, when you create a new one (**) ). Unfortunately I started with that system having shot several tens of thousands photos hence I still have a good chunk of assigning keywords to do. Still, I am offering this as a possible answer to your question, Walt. Hope it helps. (*) I think it is more like 128 bit of delay... :-) (**) Whenever I create a new keyword, I immediately go to the Keywords List screen (on the right hand side in Gallery module) and find a proper way in the keyword tree for the new keyword. On 9/26/2012 12:38 AM, Walt wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Enablement: LR4
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne In my humble opinion it is not a good idea in the long run to use descriptive terms like family album in folder names. That's what keywords are for in the first place. I think it better to use the folder names to establish chronology only. Hierarchical keywords is a blessing. :-) Jostein I agree with you, expect that I'm not convinced that hierarchical keywords are a blessing. They suffer from the same problem as any other hierarchy. For example, suppose in 2011 you went on holiday to Sandy Bay, Gibraltar and labelled your photos with the keyword Sandy Bay, which you placed beneath Gibraltar in your hierarchy. This seems like a reasonable thing to do. But next year you go on holiday to Sandy Bay, Jamaica, and the year after that to Sandy Bay, Devon. You now have 3 different places all called Sandy Bay, each of them belongs in a different hierarchy. What should you do about it? This is in some ways even worse than the hierarchical folder structure. With the folder structure the hierarchy is, in essence, part of the name: pictures.holidays.jamaica.sandy bay, *.gibraltar.sandy bay, *.england.devon.sandy bay. But not so with LR keywords! Of course, pictures.holidays.jamaica, pictures.holidays.gibraltar and so on are not strictly hierarchies since the relation which links the levels is not the same all the way up, but in the real world this is the way people tend to label things, even Boris, who's an IT person and should know better, and in any case even with a true hierarchy the problem still exists. B Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Chiming in with a bit (*) of delay... I see there were a storage strategy discussion here. I should point out the obvious - there is no reason of not using very helpful features of LR such as keywords and there is no sense in overdoing it either. Namely, if you try to come up with all possible keywords for each photo, chances are you won't be consistent from day to day or from month to month and hence the outcome will be a mess. Here is a suggestion for you. I have two hierarchies. One is on disk file system like so: \basic category\sub category\date-time based sub-structure. Real life examples: * \Family Album\2010\2010-08 - and therein are all photos that I've taken on that month of that year where family members can be seen. * \Travel\Jerusalem\2012\2012-03-10 - probably self-explanatory already * \International Travel\Rachel Sullivan in Israel\Galia\2011-05-10 - I have decided that the guests from abroad equal us going there but I may split \International Travel to \International Travel and \International Guests. Here we have photos made by Galia on a given date when Rachel came for a visit. Anyway, the classification is basic and always ends with date-time based sub-structure so that given a date, I can quite easily find what I need. Additionally, LR has wonderful feature where you can browse your collection by virtually any data item that your photos have - date, time, aperture, camera, lens, rating, flag status - you name it, LR has it. Obviously there are photos that answer more than one criteria - e.g. my girls while traveling abroad. Here come keywords. 99% of my keywords denote persons and places. The remaining 1% is wherever photos were uploaded, given to someone or chosen for publication. I organize my keywords in tree-like structure (it is really very easy, you either drag and drop or indicate the upper level keyword, when you create a new one (**) ). Unfortunately I started with that system having shot several tens of thousands photos hence I still have a good chunk of assigning keywords to do. Still, I am offering this as a possible answer to your question, Walt. Hope it helps. (*) I think it is more like 128 bit of delay... :-) (**) Whenever I create a new keyword, I immediately go to the Keywords List screen (on the right hand side in Gallery module) and find a proper way in the keyword tree for the new keyword. On 9/26/2012 12:38 AM, Walt wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss
Re: Enablement: LR4
There isn't a problem because if you can't remember that you went to Sandy Beach in three different places, no amount of organization is going to help. You assign to the appropriate Sandy Beach keyword as needed. The tags are hierarchical, so it's not like you will get confused about which one you are assigning to. On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 5:45 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: For example, suppose in 2011 you went on holiday to Sandy Bay, Gibraltar and labelled your photos with the keyword Sandy Bay, which you placed beneath Gibraltar in your hierarchy. This seems like a reasonable thing to do. But next year you go on holiday to Sandy Bay, Jamaica, and the year after that to Sandy Bay, Devon. You now have 3 different places all called Sandy Bay, each of them belongs in a different hierarchy. What should you do about it? This is in some ways even worse than the hierarchical folder structure. With the folder structure the hierarchy is, in essence, part of the name: pictures.holidays.jamaica.sandy bay, *.gibraltar.sandy bay, *.england.devon.sandy bay. But not so with LR keywords! Of course, pictures.holidays.jamaica, pictures.holidays.gibraltar and so on are not strictly hierarchies since the relation which links the levels is not the same all the way up, but in the real world this is the way people tend to label things, even Boris, who's an IT person and should know better, and in any case even with a true hierarchy the problem still exists. B Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Chiming in with a bit (*) of delay... I see there were a storage strategy discussion here. I should point out the obvious - there is no reason of not using very helpful features of LR such as keywords and there is no sense in overdoing it either. Namely, if you try to come up with all possible keywords for each photo, chances are you won't be consistent from day to day or from month to month and hence the outcome will be a mess. Here is a suggestion for you. I have two hierarchies. One is on disk file system like so: \basic category\sub category\date-time based sub-structure. Real life examples: * \Family Album\2010\2010-08 - and therein are all photos that I've taken on that month of that year where family members can be seen. * \Travel\Jerusalem\2012\2012-03-10 - probably self-explanatory already * \International Travel\Rachel Sullivan in Israel\Galia\2011-05-10 - I have decided that the guests from abroad equal us going there but I may split \International Travel to \International Travel and \International Guests. Here we have photos made by Galia on a given date when Rachel came for a visit. Anyway, the classification is basic and always ends with date-time based sub-structure so that given a date, I can quite easily find what I need. Additionally, LR has wonderful feature where you can browse your collection by virtually any data item that your photos have - date, time, aperture, camera, lens, rating, flag status - you name it, LR has it. Obviously there are photos that answer more than one criteria - e.g. my girls while traveling abroad. Here come keywords. 99% of my keywords denote persons and places. The remaining 1% is wherever photos were uploaded, given to someone or chosen for publication. I organize my keywords in tree-like structure (it is really very easy, you either drag and drop or indicate the upper level keyword, when you create a new one (**) ). Unfortunately I started with that system having shot several tens of thousands photos hence I still have a good chunk of assigning keywords to do. Still, I am offering this as a possible answer to your question, Walt. Hope it helps. (*) I think it is more like 128 bit of delay... :-) (**) Whenever I create a new keyword, I immediately go to the Keywords List screen (on the right hand side in Gallery module) and find a proper way in the keyword tree for the new keyword. On 9/26/2012 12:38 AM, Walt wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
RE: Enablement: LR4
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of David Parsons There isn't a problem because if you can't remember that you went to Sandy Beach in three different places, no amount of organization is going to help. You assign to the appropriate Sandy Beach keyword as needed. The tags are hierarchical, so it's not like you will get confused about which one you are assigning to. There is only one Sandy Beach keyword, but 3 Sandy Beaches. The Sandy Beach keyword must therefore be part of at least 3 hierarchies (assuming the system allows a keyword to be part of more than one hierarchy). This does not reflect the real world, since the same Sandy Beach is not in all 3 places. While this may not be important for the example given, in general it is a very bad situation for someone to be in if they are trying to identify and catalogue things, and will certainly lead to serious problems. For example, if you follow the Jamaica hierarchy - which should only identify places in Jamaica - you will eventually come to pictures of Sandy Beach, but they will be all the Sandy Beaches you've ever been to, so the hierarchical search has failed utterly. It's even worse if you've also confused things further up the hierarchy. If you've been to Jamaica, WI and to Jamaica, Ethiopia then when you follow the Ethiopia hierarchy you'll eventually come to lots of pictures of different Sandy Beaches, and there ain't no Sandy Beach in Ethiopia. If you wish to distinguish between the 3 Sandy Beaches - and you almost certainly do, otherwise you wouldn't be cataloguing them - you have to invent a different identifying scheme. Typically this will mean using additional keywords, such as Jamaica, Gibraltar, and Devon. So you now have those terms used as keywords and in the hierarchy. They are now redundant in the hierarchy, so you might as well delete them. And if you know that this problem arises, then you don't bother with the hierarchy in the first place. B On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 5:45 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: For example, suppose in 2011 you went on holiday to Sandy Bay, Gibraltar and labelled your photos with the keyword Sandy Bay, which you placed beneath Gibraltar in your hierarchy. This seems like a reasonable thing to do. But next year you go on holiday to Sandy Bay, Jamaica, and the year after that to Sandy Bay, Devon. You now have 3 different places all called Sandy Bay, each of them belongs in a different hierarchy. What should you do about it? This is in some ways even worse than the hierarchical folder structure. With the folder structure the hierarchy is, in essence, part of the name: pictures.holidays.jamaica.sandy bay, *.gibraltar.sandy bay, *.england.devon.sandy bay. But not so with LR keywords! Of course, pictures.holidays.jamaica, pictures.holidays.gibraltar and so on are not strictly hierarchies since the relation which links the levels is not the same all the way up, but in the real world this is the way people tend to label things, even Boris, who's an IT person and should know better, and in any case even with a true hierarchy the problem still exists. B Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Chiming in with a bit (*) of delay... I see there were a storage strategy discussion here. I should point out the obvious - there is no reason of not using very helpful features of LR such as keywords and there is no sense in overdoing it either. Namely, if you try to come up with all possible keywords for each photo, chances are you won't be consistent from day to day or from month to month and hence the outcome will be a mess. Here is a suggestion for you. I have two hierarchies. One is on disk file system like so: \basic category\sub category\date-time based sub-structure. Real life examples: * \Family Album\2010\2010-08 - and therein are all photos that I've taken on that month of that year where family members can be seen. * \Travel\Jerusalem\2012\2012-03-10 - probably self-explanatory already * \International Travel\Rachel Sullivan in Israel\Galia\2011-05-10 - I have decided that the guests from abroad equal us going there but I may split \International Travel to \International Travel and \International Guests. Here we have photos made by Galia on a given date when Rachel came for a visit. Anyway, the classification is basic and always ends with date-time based sub-structure so that given a date, I can quite easily find what I need. Additionally, LR has wonderful feature where you can browse your collection by virtually any data item that your photos have - date, time, aperture, camera, lens, rating, flag status - you name it, LR has it. Obviously there are photos that answer more than one criteria - e.g. my girls while traveling abroad. Here come keywords. 99% of my keywords denote persons and places. The remaining 1% is
Re: Enablement: LR4
That's not how tags work in LR. They are most definitely hierarchical and Sandy Beach in Jamaica is different than Sandy Beach in Gibraltar. If you are assigning keywords at import, then you can run into problems, but that is the only time that the same keyword name is an issue. You should know your catalog well enough to know when you can run into problems assigning keywords on import. On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of David Parsons There isn't a problem because if you can't remember that you went to Sandy Beach in three different places, no amount of organization is going to help. You assign to the appropriate Sandy Beach keyword as needed. The tags are hierarchical, so it's not like you will get confused about which one you are assigning to. There is only one Sandy Beach keyword, but 3 Sandy Beaches. The Sandy Beach keyword must therefore be part of at least 3 hierarchies (assuming the system allows a keyword to be part of more than one hierarchy). This does not reflect the real world, since the same Sandy Beach is not in all 3 places. While this may not be important for the example given, in general it is a very bad situation for someone to be in if they are trying to identify and catalogue things, and will certainly lead to serious problems. For example, if you follow the Jamaica hierarchy - which should only identify places in Jamaica - you will eventually come to pictures of Sandy Beach, but they will be all the Sandy Beaches you've ever been to, so the hierarchical search has failed utterly. It's even worse if you've also confused things further up the hierarchy. If you've been to Jamaica, WI and to Jamaica, Ethiopia then when you follow the Ethiopia hierarchy you'll eventually come to lots of pictures of different Sandy Beaches, and there ain't no Sandy Beach in Ethiopia. If you wish to distinguish between the 3 Sandy Beaches - and you almost certainly do, otherwise you wouldn't be cataloguing them - you have to invent a different identifying scheme. Typically this will mean using additional keywords, such as Jamaica, Gibraltar, and Devon. So you now have those terms used as keywords and in the hierarchy. They are now redundant in the hierarchy, so you might as well delete them. And if you know that this problem arises, then you don't bother with the hierarchy in the first place. B On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 5:45 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: For example, suppose in 2011 you went on holiday to Sandy Bay, Gibraltar and labelled your photos with the keyword Sandy Bay, which you placed beneath Gibraltar in your hierarchy. This seems like a reasonable thing to do. But next year you go on holiday to Sandy Bay, Jamaica, and the year after that to Sandy Bay, Devon. You now have 3 different places all called Sandy Bay, each of them belongs in a different hierarchy. What should you do about it? This is in some ways even worse than the hierarchical folder structure. With the folder structure the hierarchy is, in essence, part of the name: pictures.holidays.jamaica.sandy bay, *.gibraltar.sandy bay, *.england.devon.sandy bay. But not so with LR keywords! Of course, pictures.holidays.jamaica, pictures.holidays.gibraltar and so on are not strictly hierarchies since the relation which links the levels is not the same all the way up, but in the real world this is the way people tend to label things, even Boris, who's an IT person and should know better, and in any case even with a true hierarchy the problem still exists. B Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Chiming in with a bit (*) of delay... I see there were a storage strategy discussion here. I should point out the obvious - there is no reason of not using very helpful features of LR such as keywords and there is no sense in overdoing it either. Namely, if you try to come up with all possible keywords for each photo, chances are you won't be consistent from day to day or from month to month and hence the outcome will be a mess. Here is a suggestion for you. I have two hierarchies. One is on disk file system like so: \basic category\sub category\date-time based sub-structure. Real life examples: * \Family Album\2010\2010-08 - and therein are all photos that I've taken on that month of that year where family members can be seen. * \Travel\Jerusalem\2012\2012-03-10 - probably self-explanatory already * \International Travel\Rachel Sullivan in Israel\Galia\2011-05-10 - I have decided that the guests from abroad equal us going there but I may split \International Travel to \International Travel and \International Guests. Here we have photos made by Galia on a given date when Rachel came for a visit. Anyway, the classification is basic and always ends with date-time based sub-structure so
Re: Enablement: LR4
Two points, Jostein: 1. I'd like to be able to backup my photos to separate external HDDs and I'd like to backup logical units. To that end, Family Album and/or International Travel are both good candidates. 2. I don't want to bet my life on LR or Adobe. Thus minimal basic hierarchy is in folder structure. Call that a skeleton if you will. Boris On 10/21/2012 11:12 AM, AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne wrote: In my humble opinion it is not a good idea in the long run to use descriptive terms like family album in folder names. That's what keywords are for in the first place. I think it better to use the folder names to establish chronology only. Hierarchical keywords is a blessing. :-) Jostein Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Chiming in with a bit (*) of delay... I see there were a storage strategy discussion here. I should point out the obvious - there is no reason of not using very helpful features of LR such as keywords and there is no sense in overdoing it either. Namely, if you try to come up with all possible keywords for each photo, chances are you won't be consistent from day to day or from month to month and hence the outcome will be a mess. Here is a suggestion for you. I have two hierarchies. One is on disk file system like so: \basic category\sub category\date-time based sub-structure. Real life examples: * \Family Album\2010\2010-08 - and therein are all photos that I've taken on that month of that year where family members can be seen. * \Travel\Jerusalem\2012\2012-03-10 - probably self-explanatory already * \International Travel\Rachel Sullivan in Israel\Galia\2011-05-10 - I have decided that the guests from abroad equal us going there but I may split \International Travel to \International Travel and \International Guests. Here we have photos made by Galia on a given date when Rachel came for a visit. Anyway, the classification is basic and always ends with date-time based sub-structure so that given a date, I can quite easily find what I need. Additionally, LR has wonderful feature where you can browse your collection by virtually any data item that your photos have - date, time, aperture, camera, lens, rating, flag status - you name it, LR has it. Obviously there are photos that answer more than one criteria - e.g. my girls while traveling abroad. Here come keywords. 99% of my keywords denote persons and places. The remaining 1% is wherever photos were uploaded, given to someone or chosen for publication. I organize my keywords in tree-like structure (it is really very easy, you either drag and drop or indicate the upper level keyword, when you create a new one (**) ). Unfortunately I started with that system having shot several tens of thousands photos hence I still have a good chunk of assigning keywords to do. Still, I am offering this as a possible answer to your question, Walt. Hope it helps. (*) I think it is more like 128 bit of delay... :-) (**) Whenever I create a new keyword, I immediately go to the Keywords List screen (on the right hand side in Gallery module) and find a proper way in the keyword tree for the new keyword. On 9/26/2012 12:38 AM, Walt wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
Chiming in with a bit (*) of delay... I see there were a storage strategy discussion here. I should point out the obvious - there is no reason of not using very helpful features of LR such as keywords and there is no sense in overdoing it either. Namely, if you try to come up with all possible keywords for each photo, chances are you won't be consistent from day to day or from month to month and hence the outcome will be a mess. Here is a suggestion for you. I have two hierarchies. One is on disk file system like so: \basic category\sub category\date-time based sub-structure. Real life examples: * \Family Album\2010\2010-08 - and therein are all photos that I've taken on that month of that year where family members can be seen. * \Travel\Jerusalem\2012\2012-03-10 - probably self-explanatory already * \International Travel\Rachel Sullivan in Israel\Galia\2011-05-10 - I have decided that the guests from abroad equal us going there but I may split \International Travel to \International Travel and \International Guests. Here we have photos made by Galia on a given date when Rachel came for a visit. Anyway, the classification is basic and always ends with date-time based sub-structure so that given a date, I can quite easily find what I need. Additionally, LR has wonderful feature where you can browse your collection by virtually any data item that your photos have - date, time, aperture, camera, lens, rating, flag status - you name it, LR has it. Obviously there are photos that answer more than one criteria - e.g. my girls while traveling abroad. Here come keywords. 99% of my keywords denote persons and places. The remaining 1% is wherever photos were uploaded, given to someone or chosen for publication. I organize my keywords in tree-like structure (it is really very easy, you either drag and drop or indicate the upper level keyword, when you create a new one (**) ). Unfortunately I started with that system having shot several tens of thousands photos hence I still have a good chunk of assigning keywords to do. Still, I am offering this as a possible answer to your question, Walt. Hope it helps. (*) I think it is more like 128 bit of delay... :-) (**) Whenever I create a new keyword, I immediately go to the Keywords List screen (on the right hand side in Gallery module) and find a proper way in the keyword tree for the new keyword. On 9/26/2012 12:38 AM, Walt wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
on 2012-09-26 19:46 Tim Bray wrote I have a folder named “Current” on my small fast SSD boot disk. I have a hierarchy /-MM on a big slow old-fashioned disk drive. i'm surprised Tim, because i long ago (before i joined PDML) noticed how your blog's permalinks are organized: decade/year/month/day -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
on 2012-09-26 13:36 John Sessoms wrote Someone mentioned the tyranny of physical hierarchies, which I think gets it just backwards. The physical hierarchies allow me to be the boss over the software. My photos are where I want them to be; where I told the computer to put them. as has been noted, the file system is not physical, it's just a different kind of database; yes, a little less likely to blow up, but also much more limiting i see the key question as one of interchange — if LR blows up, or Adobe becomes owned by Robert Mugabe's successors, or if something really great comes along that i'd much rather use, how to do i transfer my organizational info out of Lightroom? i'd like to think the answer is in exif/iptc/sidecar files, but i haven't followed through fully yet; i do know i've outlived one cataloging system where i stored a lot of metadata (iView Media Pro) so i think it's likely i'll outlive another -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Enablement: LR4
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walt I'll be sure to keep in mind the keyword stuff. But, sadly, I'm just horrible about doing stuff like that -- it's a procrastination thing, I guess. Thankfully, I don't have many older photos, so it won't be a huge deal -- at least until I put off adding keywords to my newer images for so long that it gets to be too much of an ordeal to mess with. ;) If you do the basic keywords (who, what, where, why) at the time you import the pictures you can avoid the procrastination problem. The keyword entry box is on the right hand panel of the import dialog. Keywords are more helpful and more flexible than deriving a folder structure, and it doesn't take any longer to use them. For example, if your folder structure is say \Holidays\Paris\Cafe de Rostand\Fifi\, just enter the keywords holidays, paris, Café de Rostand and fifi instead (I would make café a separate keyword). You're liberated from the tyranny of the fixed structure, and the problem of what to do with something that belongs in more than one folder, For example if Fifi also belongs in Family\Nieces\Pretend\ and in Mistresses\No longer\ you just include as keywords family, nieces, etc. You can search on any equal or proper subset of the keywords, in any order, rather than having to find your way through all the levels of a folder structure that you will lose track of. You can put keywords themselves in hierarchies if you want, although I stopped doing that a long time ago. For example, Europe France Paris, Europe France Lyon, Europe Germany Neuschwanstein. If you then keyword something as Neuschwanstein it will turn up in searches for Europe, without you having to put Europe as a keyword against the picture, and any search for France will include both Paris and Lyon. The problem, for me, is maintaining the hierarchies and also making sure that what you are doing is a real, genuine, hierarchy, and that's not always obvious until it's too late. A keyword can belong to more than one hierarchy, I think, so it's slightly better than a folder structure in (most) hierarchical file systems. B B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Enablement: LR4
Y'all act as if you have to choose between key wording hierarchical folders. From: Bob W From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walt I'll be sure to keep in mind the keyword stuff. But, sadly, I'm just horrible about doing stuff like that -- it's a procrastination thing, I guess. Thankfully, I don't have many older photos, so it won't be a huge deal -- at least until I put off adding keywords to my newer images for so long that it gets to be too much of an ordeal to mess with. ;) If you do the basic keywords (who, what, where, why) at the time you import the pictures you can avoid the procrastination problem. The keyword entry box is on the right hand panel of the import dialog. Keywords are more helpful and more flexible than deriving a folder structure, and it doesn't take any longer to use them. For example, if your folder structure is say \Holidays\Paris\Cafe de Rostand\Fifi\, just enter the keywords holidays, paris, Caf? de Rostand and fifi instead (I would make caf? a separate keyword). You're liberated from the tyranny of the fixed structure, and the problem of what to do with something that belongs in more than one folder, For example if Fifi also belongs in Family\Nieces\Pretend\ and in Mistresses\No longer\ you just include as keywords family, nieces, etc. You can search on any equal or proper subset of the keywords, in any order, rather than having to find your way through all the levels of a folder structure that you will lose track of. You can put keywords themselves in hierarchies if you want, although I stopped doing that a long time ago. For example, Europe France Paris, Europe France Lyon, Europe Germany Neuschwanstein. If you then keyword something as Neuschwanstein it will turn up in searches for Europe, without you having to put Europe as a keyword against the picture, and any search for France will include both Paris and Lyon. The problem, for me, is maintaining the hierarchies and also making sure that what you are doing is a real, genuine, hierarchy, and that's not always obvious until it's too late. A keyword can belong to more than one hierarchy, I think, so it's slightly better than a folder structure in (most) hierarchical file systems. B B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
I just don't think there's any point to maintaining hierarchical folders beyond what Lr does for you itself. If you need to find the original files, locate the image(s) in Lr, right-click and select Show in Finder. Bingo! I basically keyword all shots using something like Bob's Who/What/Where system, along with some extras like Issues (soft, oof, under/over-exposed). I do maintain hierarchical tags, but make sure they don't export meaningless parent tags so the EXIF isn't cluttered. These automatically show up in Flickr when uploaded and help folks find my shots in searches. On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: Y'all act as if you have to choose between key wording hierarchical folders. From: Bob W From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walt I'll be sure to keep in mind the keyword stuff. But, sadly, I'm just horrible about doing stuff like that -- it's a procrastination thing, I guess. Thankfully, I don't have many older photos, so it won't be a huge deal -- at least until I put off adding keywords to my newer images for so long that it gets to be too much of an ordeal to mess with. ;) If you do the basic keywords (who, what, where, why) at the time you import the pictures you can avoid the procrastination problem. The keyword entry box is on the right hand panel of the import dialog. Keywords are more helpful and more flexible than deriving a folder structure, and it doesn't take any longer to use them. For example, if your folder structure is say \Holidays\Paris\Cafe de Rostand\Fifi\, just enter the keywords holidays, paris, Caf? de Rostand and fifi instead (I would make caf? a separate keyword). You're liberated from the tyranny of the fixed structure, and the problem of what to do with something that belongs in more than one folder, For example if Fifi also belongs in Family\Nieces\Pretend\ and in Mistresses\No longer\ you just include as keywords family, nieces, etc. You can search on any equal or proper subset of the keywords, in any order, rather than having to find your way through all the levels of a folder structure that you will lose track of. You can put keywords themselves in hierarchies if you want, although I stopped doing that a long time ago. For example, Europe France Paris, Europe France Lyon, Europe Germany Neuschwanstein. If you then keyword something as Neuschwanstein it will turn up in searches for Europe, without you having to put Europe as a keyword against the picture, and any search for France will include both Paris and Lyon. The problem, for me, is maintaining the hierarchies and also making sure that what you are doing is a real, genuine, hierarchy, and that's not always obvious until it's too late. A keyword can belong to more than one hierarchy, I think, so it's slightly better than a folder structure in (most) hierarchical file systems. B B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Walt ldott...@gmail.com wrote: It's a pretty clunky naming convention, but it helps me to identify which camera I shot with (my K-x is just the straight camera-assigned number, my K20D as WJG prepended to the camera file name, and the K100D photos I can usually identify fairly easily by the file size), but I've somehow always managed to make it work. Lr lets you search by EXIF meta, Walt. You don't need to create naming conventions or even add tags for things like camera or lens. Left-hand side, under Catalog, select All Photographs; Middle, in the Library Filters strip, click Metadata; You'll see a column called Camera and all the cameras you used should appear there. Click one of them and all the shots taken with that camera will appear in the thumbnails area. Similarly you can see all shots you took with specific lenses, and the count. I just let all my K100D and K20D shots intermingle in the db. I can sort them out anytime. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
Not having a folder structure sounds like a tempting idea, but in the rapid changing world of technology it can lead to a huge mess. I like Lightroom and take advantage of it's organizational features, but my fundamental organization is still contained in the folder structure, file naming and exif data. If, for some currently unforeseeable reason, I decide to use something other than Lightroom. Or, should Adobe go away, get bought, or otherwise stop supporting lightroom, I don't want to re-organize everything from a zero starting point. Don't get caught thinking Adobe is big and won't go away. Think about Kodak, Polaroid and several other companies that we thought would be around till the end of time. GS George Sinos gsi...@gmail.com www.georgesphotos.net plus.georgesinos.com On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Walt ldott...@gmail.com wrote: It's a pretty clunky naming convention, but it helps me to identify which camera I shot with (my K-x is just the straight camera-assigned number, my K20D as WJG prepended to the camera file name, and the K100D photos I can usually identify fairly easily by the file size), but I've somehow always managed to make it work. Lr lets you search by EXIF meta, Walt. You don't need to create naming conventions or even add tags for things like camera or lens. Left-hand side, under Catalog, select All Photographs; Middle, in the Library Filters strip, click Metadata; You'll see a column called Camera and all the cameras you used should appear there. Click one of them and all the shots taken with that camera will appear in the thumbnails area. Similarly you can see all shots you took with specific lenses, and the count. I just let all my K100D and K20D shots intermingle in the db. I can sort them out anytime. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Walt ldott...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the advice, Larry! I've always imported my RAW files into directories with a -MM-DD naming convention, See that was my problem. My file would be 9-8-12-wedding and subfolders of NEF and JPG. When i imported the folder i would juts ask for nefs to be lodaed, not realizing until just recently, that that was the folder now, nef ,not 9-8-12-wedding, nef Live and learn Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Enablement: LR4
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of George Sinos Not having a folder structure sounds like a tempting idea, but in the rapid changing world of technology it can lead to a huge mess. I like Lightroom and take advantage of it's organizational features, but my fundamental organization is still contained in the folder structure, file naming and exif data. If, for some currently unforeseeable reason, I decide to use something other than Lightroom. Or, should Adobe go away, get bought, or otherwise stop supporting lightroom, I don't want to re-organize everything from a zero starting point. You wouldn't have to. The data is in the catalogue, which is a SQL database and therefore readily queryable. Even if you couldn't do it yourself, and market would quickly spring up of products which could do it for you. B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Enablement: LR4
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Sessoms Y'all act as if you have to choose between key wording hierarchical folders. Not at all - people can do both if they want to. John of Occam wouldn't though, and nor do I. B From: Bob W From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walt I'll be sure to keep in mind the keyword stuff. But, sadly, I'm just horrible about doing stuff like that -- it's a procrastination thing, I guess. Thankfully, I don't have many older photos, so it won't be a huge deal -- at least until I put off adding keywords to my newer images for so long that it gets to be too much of an ordeal to mess with. ;) If you do the basic keywords (who, what, where, why) at the time you import the pictures you can avoid the procrastination problem. The keyword entry box is on the right hand panel of the import dialog. Keywords are more helpful and more flexible than deriving a folder structure, and it doesn't take any longer to use them. For example, if your folder structure is say \Holidays\Paris\Cafe de Rostand\Fifi\, just enter the keywords holidays, paris, Caf? de Rostand and fifi instead (I would make caf? a separate keyword). You're liberated from the tyranny of the fixed structure, and the problem of what to do with something that belongs in more than one folder, For example if Fifi also belongs in Family\Nieces\Pretend\ and in Mistresses\No longer\ you just include as keywords family, nieces, etc. You can search on any equal or proper subset of the keywords, in any order, rather than having to find your way through all the levels of a folder structure that you will lose track of. You can put keywords themselves in hierarchies if you want, although I stopped doing that a long time ago. For example, Europe France Paris, Europe France Lyon, Europe Germany Neuschwanstein. If you then keyword something as Neuschwanstein it will turn up in searches for Europe, without you having to put Europe as a keyword against the picture, and any search for France will include both Paris and Lyon. The problem, for me, is maintaining the hierarchies and also making sure that what you are doing is a real, genuine, hierarchy, and that's not always obvious until it's too late. A keyword can belong to more than one hierarchy, I think, so it's slightly better than a folder structure in (most) hierarchical file systems. B B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
My current inclination is to go ahead and stick with both, as there are times when I like to access my images with applications other than Lightroom (Picasa, IrfanView, etc.) simply because they perform some tasks a little more handily than LR appears to (at least at first blush): Cropping, resizing, accessing some of the old .8BF filters that I still like using, et. al. I find that I regularly use Windows Explorer's thumbnail view to find specific photos and use the context menu to open them in those other applications. Keeping my old hierarchical directories would keep that process fairly simple, and adopting the keywording aspect in LR would simplify the process within LR itself. It may be a tad more cumbersome than necessary, but as a matter of keeping old habits to make things more convenient across the board with regard to my already established workflow, it strikes me that I probably shouldn't completely abandon my old ways. At least not until I've gotten more comfortable with and reliant on LR. -- Walt On 9/26/2012 1:50 PM, Bob W wrote: From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Sessoms Y'all act as if you have to choose between key wording hierarchical folders. Not at all - people can do both if they want to. John of Occam wouldn't though, and nor do I. B From: Bob W From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walt I'll be sure to keep in mind the keyword stuff. But, sadly, I'm just horrible about doing stuff like that -- it's a procrastination thing, I guess. Thankfully, I don't have many older photos, so it won't be a huge deal -- at least until I put off adding keywords to my newer images for so long that it gets to be too much of an ordeal to mess with. ;) If you do the basic keywords (who, what, where, why) at the time you import the pictures you can avoid the procrastination problem. The keyword entry box is on the right hand panel of the import dialog. Keywords are more helpful and more flexible than deriving a folder structure, and it doesn't take any longer to use them. For example, if your folder structure is say \Holidays\Paris\Cafe de Rostand\Fifi\, just enter the keywords holidays, paris, Caf? de Rostand and fifi instead (I would make caf? a separate keyword). You're liberated from the tyranny of the fixed structure, and the problem of what to do with something that belongs in more than one folder, For example if Fifi also belongs in Family\Nieces\Pretend\ and in Mistresses\No longer\ you just include as keywords family, nieces, etc. You can search on any equal or proper subset of the keywords, in any order, rather than having to find your way through all the levels of a folder structure that you will lose track of. You can put keywords themselves in hierarchies if you want, although I stopped doing that a long time ago. For example, Europe France Paris, Europe France Lyon, Europe Germany Neuschwanstein. If you then keyword something as Neuschwanstein it will turn up in searches for Europe, without you having to put Europe as a keyword against the picture, and any search for France will include both Paris and Lyon. The problem, for me, is maintaining the hierarchies and also making sure that what you are doing is a real, genuine, hierarchy, and that's not always obvious until it's too late. A keyword can belong to more than one hierarchy, I think, so it's slightly better than a folder structure in (most) hierarchical file systems. B B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Enablement: LR4
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walt My current inclination is to go ahead and stick with both, as there are times when I like to access my images with applications other than Lightroom (Picasa, IrfanView, etc.) simply because they perform some tasks a little more handily than LR appears to (at least at first blush): Cropping, resizing, accessing some of the old .8BF filters that I still like using, et. al. that makes sense, but bear in mind that LR doesn't make any changes to the original file. When you use it to crop, all it's doing is, in effect, putting a mask over the original and enlarging it. And resizing isn't really a LR concept - size is only applied when you export a jpg, tiff or whatever, or build a web page or book. Again, the original isn't changed. So if you changed something in LR, then worked on the original in another application you probably wouldn't see the changes you'd made in LR. If you then went back into LR the changes you'd made before using the external application would be applied over a different baseline, and I'd guess 'the result is undefined' as programming manuals used to say. So if you'll be working with external apps then you'll probably need to export from LR and work on a copy. If you don't re-import it in LR afterwards then you'll need to use a different filing system. B I find that I regularly use Windows Explorer's thumbnail view to find specific photos and use the context menu to open them in those other applications. Keeping my old hierarchical directories would keep that process fairly simple, and adopting the keywording aspect in LR would simplify the process within LR itself. It may be a tad more cumbersome than necessary, but as a matter of keeping old habits to make things more convenient across the board with regard to my already established workflow, it strikes me that I probably shouldn't completely abandon my old ways. At least not until I've gotten more comfortable with and reliant on LR. -- Walt On 9/26/2012 1:50 PM, Bob W wrote: From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Sessoms Y'all act as if you have to choose between key wording hierarchical folders. Not at all - people can do both if they want to. John of Occam wouldn't though, and nor do I. B From: Bob W From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walt I'll be sure to keep in mind the keyword stuff. But, sadly, I'm just horrible about doing stuff like that -- it's a procrastination thing, I guess. Thankfully, I don't have many older photos, so it won't be a huge deal -- at least until I put off adding keywords to my newer images for so long that it gets to be too much of an ordeal to mess with. ;) If you do the basic keywords (who, what, where, why) at the time you import the pictures you can avoid the procrastination problem. The keyword entry box is on the right hand panel of the import dialog. Keywords are more helpful and more flexible than deriving a folder structure, and it doesn't take any longer to use them. For example, if your folder structure is say \Holidays\Paris\Cafe de Rostand\Fifi\, just enter the keywords holidays, paris, Caf? de Rostand and fifi instead (I would make caf? a separate keyword). You're liberated from the tyranny of the fixed structure, and the problem of what to do with something that belongs in more than one folder, For example if Fifi also belongs in Family\Nieces\Pretend\ and in Mistresses\No longer\ you just include as keywords family, nieces, etc. You can search on any equal or proper subset of the keywords, in any order, rather than having to find your way through all the levels of a folder structure that you will lose track of. You can put keywords themselves in hierarchies if you want, although I stopped doing that a long time ago. For example, Europe France Paris, Europe France Lyon, Europe Germany Neuschwanstein. If you then keyword something as Neuschwanstein it will turn up in searches for Europe, without you having to put Europe as a keyword against the picture, and any search for France will include both Paris and Lyon. The problem, for me, is maintaining the hierarchies and also making sure that what you are doing is a real, genuine, hierarchy, and that's not always obvious until it's too late. A keyword can belong to more than one hierarchy, I think, so it's slightly better than a folder structure in (most) hierarchical file systems. B B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please
Re: Enablement: LR4
On 9/26/2012 2:19 PM, Bob W wrote: From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walt My current inclination is to go ahead and stick with both, as there are times when I like to access my images with applications other than Lightroom (Picasa, IrfanView, etc.) simply because they perform some tasks a little more handily than LR appears to (at least at first blush): Cropping, resizing, accessing some of the old .8BF filters that I still like using, et. al. that makes sense, but bear in mind that LR doesn't make any changes to the original file. When you use it to crop, all it's doing is, in effect, putting a mask over the original and enlarging it. And resizing isn't really a LR concept - size is only applied when you export a jpg, tiff or whatever, or build a web page or book. Again, the original isn't changed. So if you changed something in LR, then worked on the original in another application you probably wouldn't see the changes you'd made in LR. If you then went back into LR the changes you'd made before using the external application would be applied over a different baseline, and I'd guess 'the result is undefined' as programming manuals used to say. So if you'll be working with external apps then you'll probably need to export from LR and work on a copy. If you don't re-import it in LR afterwards then you'll need to use a different filing system. B Picasa does essentially the same thing unless you do a Save from within its interface -- and even then, it'll make a backup copy of the original image (which is nice, and has saved me on more than one occasion after some ham-handed editing). I used to do my RAW editing in Picasa, then export a full-sized jpg into a different Picasa Exports directory, which opens on the desktop when the export completes, and from there I could do the work with the old .8BF filters in IrfanView. Right now, the biggest advantage I see in LR is the 16-bit/channel color, which I've never had before. The one complaint I have with LR, though, is that the slider controls seem a tad balky -- likely due to the fact that I only have 4 GB RAM. Beyond that, it's pretty wonderful, I have to say. I find that I regularly use Windows Explorer's thumbnail view to find specific photos and use the context menu to open them in those other applications. Keeping my old hierarchical directories would keep that process fairly simple, and adopting the keywording aspect in LR would simplify the process within LR itself. It may be a tad more cumbersome than necessary, but as a matter of keeping old habits to make things more convenient across the board with regard to my already established workflow, it strikes me that I probably shouldn't completely abandon my old ways. At least not until I've gotten more comfortable with and reliant on LR. -- Walt On 9/26/2012 1:50 PM, Bob W wrote: From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Sessoms Y'all act as if you have to choose between key wording hierarchical folders. Not at all - people can do both if they want to. John of Occam wouldn't though, and nor do I. B From: Bob W From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walt I'll be sure to keep in mind the keyword stuff. But, sadly, I'm just horrible about doing stuff like that -- it's a procrastination thing, I guess. Thankfully, I don't have many older photos, so it won't be a huge deal -- at least until I put off adding keywords to my newer images for so long that it gets to be too much of an ordeal to mess with. ;) If you do the basic keywords (who, what, where, why) at the time you import the pictures you can avoid the procrastination problem. The keyword entry box is on the right hand panel of the import dialog. Keywords are more helpful and more flexible than deriving a folder structure, and it doesn't take any longer to use them. For example, if your folder structure is say \Holidays\Paris\Cafe de Rostand\Fifi\, just enter the keywords holidays, paris, Caf? de Rostand and fifi instead (I would make caf? a separate keyword). You're liberated from the tyranny of the fixed structure, and the problem of what to do with something that belongs in more than one folder, For example if Fifi also belongs in Family\Nieces\Pretend\ and in Mistresses\No longer\ you just include as keywords family, nieces, etc. You can search on any equal or proper subset of the keywords, in any order, rather than having to find your way through all the levels of a folder structure that you will lose track of. You can put keywords themselves in hierarchies if you want, although I stopped doing that a long time ago. For example, Europe France Paris, Europe France Lyon, Europe Germany Neuschwanstein. If you then keyword something as Neuschwanstein it will turn up in searches for Europe, without you having to put Europe as a keyword against the picture, and any search for France
Re: Enablement: LR4
From: David J Brooks On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Walt ldott...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the advice, Larry! I've always imported my RAW files into directories with a -MM-DD naming convention, See that was my problem. My file would be 9-8-12-wedding and subfolders of NEF and JPG. When i imported the folder i would juts ask for nefs to be lodaed, not realizing until just recently, that that was the folder now, nef ,not 9-8-12-wedding, nef Live and learn Dave You should still have the original folders. AFAIK, LR doesn't actually move anything, it just makes a database of virtual folders and points to where the photos physically reside. Just re-import them and make LightRoom use an appropriate naming/keywording/organizing convention. Someone mentioned the tyranny of physical hierarchies, which I think gets it just backwards. The physical hierarchies allow me to be the boss over the software. My photos are where I want them to be; where I told the computer to put them. It's LightRoom that's being tyrannical with its demand that everything be organized by keywords. Keyword the hell out of everything, but leave the folder structure the way that makes sense to you. That way, when LightRoom crashes burns, you'll still know where your photos are. LightRoom's utility is directly proportional to how easily it allows me to organize photos the way *I* want them organized. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 3:36 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: It's LightRoom that's being tyrannical with its demand that everything be organized by keywords. Keyword the hell out of everything, but leave the folder structure the way that makes sense to you. That way, when LightRoom crashes burns, you'll still know where your photos are. LightRoom's utility is directly proportional to how easily it allows me to organize photos the way *I* want them organized. At worst, Lightroom makes in no harder to put your files where you want them on disk. (Put them where you want them, then add them to the catalog in place.) At best, it makes it easier, by letting you import them in a systematic way (e.g. /MM/shootname, if a system like that works for you.) I don't understand the implication that Lightroom somehow prevents you from organizing files on disk however you'd like. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Enablement: LR4
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Sessoms Someone mentioned the tyranny of physical hierarchies, which I think gets it just backwards. that would be me. The physical hierarchies allow me to be the boss over the software. My photos are where I want them to be; where I told the computer to put them. No they're not. The system decides where they go. The catalogue in the file system is just a way of labelling them in a way that humans can read - the folder structure is essentially part of the name, like william\jefferson\clinton - and a very inflexible way since you have to know how to navigate through the hierarchy to get at something. Windows only provides one label, which is even more inflexible. Some file systems provide a means of assigning a file to several hierarchies (ie, giving it several names), which is a bit more flexible. It's LightRoom that's being tyrannical with its demand that everything be organized by keywords. it doesn't demand anything of the sort. There's absolutely no requirement whatsoever to use keywords. As you mentioned above, if you want to organise your pictures in a folder structure outside of LR you can do so, and LR handles it with ease. Keyword the hell out of everything, but leave the folder structure the way that makes sense to you. That way, when LightRoom crashes burns, you'll still know where your photos are. LightRoom's utility is directly proportional to how easily it allows me to organize photos the way *I* want them organized. You can use it to organise them anyway you like, or not organise them at all. It's up to you. B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
On Sep 26, 2012, at 3:36 PM, John Sessoms wrote: From: David J Brooks On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Walt ldott...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the advice, Larry! I've always imported my RAW files into directories with a -MM-DD naming convention, See that was my problem. My file would be 9-8-12-wedding and subfolders of NEF and JPG. When i imported the folder i would juts ask for nefs to be lodaed, not realizing until just recently, that that was the folder now, nef ,not 9-8-12-wedding, nef Live and learn Dave You should still have the original folders. AFAIK, LR doesn't actually move anything, it just makes a database of virtual folders and points to where the photos physically reside. John, as Bob W. pointed out, all folders are virtual. File names, folder names, directory names, sub-directory names - they are all just part of an addressing scheme that allows the OS to find the address header in a file. Said file potentially residing in many little pieces scattered across your drive, with each fragment ending in a pointer to the next fragment. Most often, a given file is contiguous, but with an older drive that has experienced many writes/rewrites/deletions, stuff gets fragmented. Hence the need for utilities that defrag hard drives. LR works with the resident OS. If you rename a folder or file in LR, the folder or file is renamed. The OS knows that and if you do a directory sort, for example, you will see your folder or file under its new name. Or should I say it's new name? Yes, LR keeps track of file locations in its data base, just as the OS does. Different algorithms and heuristics possibly, but the same function. In a restaurant with bilingual staff, you can order your food in either language and get the same food. On your computer you can use LR or the OS to find/move/rename your files and you get the same result. Use whichever language you are more comfortable with, or, if you are bilingual, use whichever happens to be more appropriate for the task at hand. stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
From: Matthew Hunt It's LightRoom that's being tyrannical with its demand that everything be organized by keywords. Keyword the hell out of everything, but leave the folder structure the way that makes sense to you. That way, when LightRoom crashes burns, you'll still know where your photos are. LightRoom's utility is directly proportional to how easily it allows me to organize photos the way *I* want them organized. At worst, Lightroom makes in no harder to put your files where you want them on disk. (Put them where you want them, then add them to the catalog in place.) At best, it makes it easier, by letting you import them in a systematic way (e.g. /MM/shootname, if a system like that works for you.) I don't understand the implication that Lightroom somehow prevents you from organizing files on disk however you'd like. I was responding to the suggestion that it is wrong-headed to insist on organizing files rather than just relying on LightRoom's keywording. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:46 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: See that was my problem. My file would be 9-8-12-wedding and subfolders of NEF and JPG. When i imported the folder i would juts ask for nefs to be lodaed, not realizing until just recently, that that was the folder now, nef ,not 9-8-12-wedding, nef I think what you may want is: In the Lightroom Library module, find the nef folder under Folders on the left side of the screen. Right-click on nef and pick Show Parent Folder. Repeat until you're happy with the number of levels shown. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
If you presume that you'll always be using LR, and that the catalog structure will be able to be read by any future software that you may end up using, then it's true that you don't need to organize on disk. I prefer to future proof and organize files on the disk. On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Sessoms Y'all act as if you have to choose between key wording hierarchical folders. Not at all - people can do both if they want to. John of Occam wouldn't though, and nor do I. B From: Bob W From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Walt I'll be sure to keep in mind the keyword stuff. But, sadly, I'm just horrible about doing stuff like that -- it's a procrastination thing, I guess. Thankfully, I don't have many older photos, so it won't be a huge deal -- at least until I put off adding keywords to my newer images for so long that it gets to be too much of an ordeal to mess with. ;) If you do the basic keywords (who, what, where, why) at the time you import the pictures you can avoid the procrastination problem. The keyword entry box is on the right hand panel of the import dialog. Keywords are more helpful and more flexible than deriving a folder structure, and it doesn't take any longer to use them. For example, if your folder structure is say \Holidays\Paris\Cafe de Rostand\Fifi\, just enter the keywords holidays, paris, Caf? de Rostand and fifi instead (I would make caf? a separate keyword). You're liberated from the tyranny of the fixed structure, and the problem of what to do with something that belongs in more than one folder, For example if Fifi also belongs in Family\Nieces\Pretend\ and in Mistresses\No longer\ you just include as keywords family, nieces, etc. You can search on any equal or proper subset of the keywords, in any order, rather than having to find your way through all the levels of a folder structure that you will lose track of. You can put keywords themselves in hierarchies if you want, although I stopped doing that a long time ago. For example, Europe France Paris, Europe France Lyon, Europe Germany Neuschwanstein. If you then keyword something as Neuschwanstein it will turn up in searches for Europe, without you having to put Europe as a keyword against the picture, and any search for France will include both Paris and Lyon. The problem, for me, is maintaining the hierarchies and also making sure that what you are doing is a real, genuine, hierarchy, and that's not always obvious until it's too late. A keyword can belong to more than one hierarchy, I think, so it's slightly better than a folder structure in (most) hierarchical file systems. B B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- David Parsons Photography http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com Aloha Photographer Photoblog http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:43 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: I was responding to the suggestion that it is wrong-headed to insist on organizing files rather than just relying on LightRoom's keywording. But you turned that into an attack on the product: It's LightRoom that's being tyrannical with its demand that everything be organized by keywords. Lightroom does not require any particular organization on disk. Lightroom does not require you to use keywords at all. There is no tyrrany. I'm tired of seeing people scared away from from quality product because they read false claims that it makes you work in some particular way. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Matthew Hunt m...@pobox.com wrote: On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:46 PM, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: See that was my problem. My file would be 9-8-12-wedding and subfolders of NEF and JPG. When i imported the folder i would juts ask for nefs to be lodaed, not realizing until just recently, that that was the folder now, nef ,not 9-8-12-wedding, nef I think what you may want is: In the Lightroom Library module, find the nef folder under Folders on the left side of the screen. Right-click on nef and pick Show Parent Folder. Repeat until you're happy with the number of levels shown. I'll try that thanks Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
O boy O boy, a chance to talk about storage strategies. Thanks to those who outlined theirs, there was some thought-provoking stuff in there. Here’s mine. I have a folder named “Current” on my small fast SSD boot disk. I have a hierarchy /-MM on a big slow old-fashioned disk drive. I always import into Current on the small fast boot disk. That’s where they live while I’m actually working on them, discarding duds, etc. When there are several months worth of photos built up there, I run through the oldest couple of months, do a quick keywording pass, and move them (with Lightroom, so it can keep the catalog pointers right) into the appropriate /-MM. Keywording is definitely faster when you do a few hundred in a row, the Lr keyword picker remembers what you’ve been using. Not claiming it’d work for anyone else, but it sure is easy to understand and remember. -T On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Walt ldott...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Enablement: LR4
Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Walt ldott...@gmail.com wrote: Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Don't doi what i did and ignore things like key words and other such things. Its making life a tad difficult with my older photos:-) Its a great program and i find a lot of stuff on youtube, but Godders is my go to guy:-) Dave Thanks! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
On 9/25/2012 5:40 PM, David J Brooks wrote: Don't doi what i did and ignore things like key words and other such things. Its making life a tad difficult with my older photos:-) Its a great program and i find a lot of stuff on youtube, but Godders is my go to guy:-) Dave Thanks, Dave. I'll be sure to keep in mind the keyword stuff. But, sadly, I'm just horrible about doing stuff like that -- it's a procrastination thing, I guess. Thankfully, I don't have many older photos, so it won't be a huge deal -- at least until I put off adding keywords to my newer images for so long that it gets to be too much of an ordeal to mess with. ;) Thanks again! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
Also i made some file and subfile naming mistakes which are now haunting me, since i deleted the hard drive files but are backed up. I have a number of files in LR that are just called NEF, not thinking to give them unique names, that i cannot retrieve as i don't know which ones re which. Dave On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Walt ldott...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/25/2012 5:40 PM, David J Brooks wrote: Don't doi what i did and ignore things like key words and other such things. Its making life a tad difficult with my older photos:-) Its a great program and i find a lot of stuff on youtube, but Godders is my go to guy:-) Dave Thanks, Dave. I'll be sure to keep in mind the keyword stuff. But, sadly, I'm just horrible about doing stuff like that -- it's a procrastination thing, I guess. Thankfully, I don't have many older photos, so it won't be a huge deal -- at least until I put off adding keywords to my newer images for so long that it gets to be too much of an ordeal to mess with. ;) Thanks again! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
Congratulations. See if you can pick up an inexpensive used copy of Scott Kelby's LR book. His humor gets a little tiresome at times, but it's a good basic primer. People who only work in lightroom like to let its database keep track of everything. I disagree with that approach because sometimes I need to find files from outside of lightroom, and sometimes I want to generate jpegs in a logical tree format. I store files into each directory in the hierarchy: Year month shoot subdirs based on the shoot. When I read the raw files into lightroom I actually load them under the year, and when I'm done processing them, I move the shoot directory inot the month. This way I can easily see which shoots I still need to process photos from. I also actually split the years up into Jan-June and July through August. So, for example, the files I'm uploading right now will go into: /Volumes /activedrive/photo/2012b/120925_felton when I'm done processing them I'll have /Volumes /activedrive/photo/2012b/1209/120925_felton/farmers_market /Volumes /activedrive/photo/2012b/1209/120925_felton/ford_pickup If you bracket shots, it's good to tag them as such, in case you ever go back to HDR process them. I also find that I like to do a multi-pass rating system on my photos. I have on several occasions wished that I'd done a better job of tagging my photos, but I at least try to get a high level tag by subject: musicians, flowers, aikido, landscape etc. So by having a rough idea of date and subject I greatly narrow down my search. Even if I don't have each musician in the band tagged in all of their photos, I can usually find the proper directory within a few minutes. On Sep 25, 2012, at 3:38 PM, Walt wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
If you are willing to spend a little ($25, I think) I recommend signing up at lynda.com for a month of access to their tutorials. They have a pretty good series of videos, that go over just about everything LR, soup to nuts. You could probably cobble together the same info by surfing adobe and YouTube and googling the rest, but these are pretty comprehensive, and you can follow a curriculum, instead of jumping from one topic to the next. Good luck, you will really enjoy using Lightroom, I think! :) -c On Sep 25, 2012, at 6:38 PM, Walt ldott...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
Thanks for the advice, Larry! I've always imported my RAW files into directories with a -MM-DD naming convention, and can usually find what I'm looking for fairly quickly by narrowing down the date. Of course, it helps that the majority of my shots are nature photography, or are usually taken at events of some kind, where I have a pretty good idea of when they were taken at the outset. From there, I do my basic editing and then export them into a separate EXPORTS directory with sub-directories following the same naming convention so that I can find them quickly once I've determined which file I'm looking for once I've identified the original RAW file. I've always left the original file names as-is out of the camera and appended a number to it to give each exported file a unique name (-001 then -002 then -003 for each different edit I do to the file) and then stick an RS800 or RS1024, etc. onto the end for the various resized versions I might create for web posting purposes. It's a pretty clunky naming convention, but it helps me to identify which camera I shot with (my K-x is just the straight camera-assigned number, my K20D as WJG prepended to the camera file name, and the K100D photos I can usually identify fairly easily by the file size), but I've somehow always managed to make it work. I figure using the Keywording will help me to narrow down my searches fairly quickly. Of course, my library isn't anywhere nearly as large as those of other PDML'ers, since I haven't been shooting nearly as long and tend not to shoot quite as often as others, and I tend to hit the shutter button a lot less frequently than I used to. A typical photowalk usually produces 100-150 shots altogether. The biker rally I attended last month ended up giving me about 200 shots over the two nights I attended. I'll probably need to do things differently in the future, if I start putting in a lot more time with the camera than I have over the past year, which has been relatively paltry, unfortunately. Thanks again. I'll give some thought to how I might better organize my work with a different directory structure and/or file naming convention. -- Walt On 9/25/2012 7:33 PM, Larry Colen wrote: Congratulations. See if you can pick up an inexpensive used copy of Scott Kelby's LR book. His humor gets a little tiresome at times, but it's a good basic primer. People who only work in lightroom like to let its database keep track of everything. I disagree with that approach because sometimes I need to find files from outside of lightroom, and sometimes I want to generate jpegs in a logical tree format. I store files into each directory in the hierarchy: Year month shoot subdirs based on the shoot. When I read the raw files into lightroom I actually load them under the year, and when I'm done processing them, I move the shoot directory inot the month. This way I can easily see which shoots I still need to process photos from. I also actually split the years up into Jan-June and July through August. So, for example, the files I'm uploading right now will go into: /Volumes /activedrive/photo/2012b/120925_felton when I'm done processing them I'll have /Volumes /activedrive/photo/2012b/1209/120925_felton/farmers_market /Volumes /activedrive/photo/2012b/1209/120925_felton/ford_pickup If you bracket shots, it's good to tag them as such, in case you ever go back to HDR process them. I also find that I like to do a multi-pass rating system on my photos. I have on several occasions wished that I'd done a better job of tagging my photos, but I at least try to get a high level tag by subject: musicians, flowers, aikido, landscape etc. So by having a rough idea of date and subject I greatly narrow down my search. Even if I don't have each musician in the band tagged in all of their photos, I can usually find the proper directory within a few minutes. On Sep 25, 2012, at 3:38 PM, Walt wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
Thank you, Christine. I've watched a few of the lynda.com already via Adobe's web site and found them pretty informative, so I'll look into joining up for a month, or so. So far, I do like Lightroom quite a bit as it has a lot of the functions I used in both Picasa and IrfanView (with old 8BF Photoshop plugins). I've still got some familiarizing to do, obviously. But, so far, it seems pretty intuitive. Thanks again! -- Walt On 9/25/2012 7:51 PM, Christine Nielsen wrote: If you are willing to spend a little ($25, I think) I recommend signing up at lynda.com for a month of access to their tutorials. They have a pretty good series of videos, that go over just about everything LR, soup to nuts. You could probably cobble together the same info by surfing adobe and YouTube and googling the rest, but these are pretty comprehensive, and you can follow a curriculum, instead of jumping from one topic to the next. Good luck, you will really enjoy using Lightroom, I think! :) -c On Sep 25, 2012, at 6:38 PM, Walt ldott...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all! Finally, after years of using Picasa, IrfanView and a few Photoshop plugins, I finally decided to break down and get some decent image editing software for my new setup. It's definitely going to take a while to get comfortable with it. I've checked out a few of the tutorial videos at the Adobe website, which were reasonably helpful, and wonder if anyone can suggest some others that would be worth taking a look at. Any suggestions, tips, and/or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! -- Walt -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Enablement: LR4
Walt, keywording can be a pain for those who don't have inclinations toward obsessive compulsive behavior. But one of the beauties of LR is that you can keyword on import. So you have 100 or 500 or 1000 images of a biker rally. On import, assign keywords to those images, something creative like Biker, Rally, Outback KN, etc. If/when you need to find something, this will at least help narrow the search. Also, when you are going through those images that evening, presumably you are going to assign a rating to each image, like my system e.g. with 0=not worth rating, 1= maybe I'll work on this one a bit, 2=looks good right out of the camera, 3=looks very good right out of the camera. 4 and 5 I reserve for the ones I've worked on that I may want to print, display, or otherwise share. Figure out a rating system that works for you. It is quick and easy to rate as you do your quick pass through. Then select only the subset that have at least a 1 rating, and spend any effort doing detailed keywording only on those selected images. YMMV, you'll develop your own processing approach, but LR supports this sort of workflow that leaves few excuses for not being able to tag and retrieve images. stan On Sep 25, 2012, at 10:36 PM, Walt wrote: Thanks for the advice, Larry! I've always imported my RAW files into directories with a -MM-DD naming convention, and can usually find what I'm looking for fairly quickly by narrowing down the date. Of course, it helps that the majority of my shots are nature photography, or are usually taken at events of some kind, where I have a pretty good idea of when they were taken at the outset. From there, I do my basic editing and then export them into a separate EXPORTS directory with sub-directories following the same naming convention so that I can find them quickly once I've determined which file I'm looking for once I've identified the original RAW file. I've always left the original file names as-is out of the camera and appended a number to it to give each exported file a unique name (-001 then -002 then -003 for each different edit I do to the file) and then stick an RS800 or RS1024, etc. onto the end for the various resized versions I might create for web posting purposes. It's a pretty clunky naming convention, but it helps me to identify which camera I shot with (my K-x is just the straight camera-assigned number, my K20D as WJG prepended to the camera file name, and the K100D photos I can usually identify fairly easily by the file size), but I've somehow always managed to make it work. I figure using the Keywording will help me to narrow down my searches fairly quickly. Of course, my library isn't anywhere nearly as large as those of other PDML'ers, since I haven't been shooting nearly as long and tend not to shoot quite as often as others, and I tend to hit the shutter button a lot less frequently than I used to. A typical photowalk usually produces 100-150 shots altogether. The biker rally I attended last month ended up giving me about 200 shots over the two nights I attended. I'll probably need to do things differently in the future, if I start putting in a lot more time with the camera than I have over the past year, which has been relatively paltry, unfortunately. Thanks again. I'll give some thought to how I might better organize my work with a different directory structure and/or file naming convention. -- Walt On 9/25/2012 7:33 PM, Larry Colen wrote: Congratulations. See if you can pick up an inexpensive used copy of Scott Kelby's LR book. His humor gets a little tiresome at times, but it's a good basic primer. People who only work in lightroom like to let its database keep track of everything. I disagree with that approach because sometimes I need to find files from outside of lightroom, and sometimes I want to generate jpegs in a logical tree format. I store files into each directory in the hierarchy: Year month shoot subdirs based on the shoot. When I read the raw files into lightroom I actually load them under the year, and when I'm done processing them, I move the shoot directory inot the month. This way I can easily see which shoots I still need to process photos from. I also actually split the years up into Jan-June and July through August. So, for example, the files I'm uploading right now will go into: /Volumes /activedrive/photo/2012b/120925_felton when I'm done processing them I'll have /Volumes /activedrive/photo/2012b/1209/120925_felton/farmers_market /Volumes /activedrive/photo/2012b/1209/120925_felton/ford_pickup If you bracket shots, it's good to tag them as such, in case you ever go back to HDR process them. I also find that I like to do a multi-pass rating system on my photos. I have on several occasions wished that I'd done a better job of tagging my photos, but I at least try to
