Skip to main content
Known Participant
July 25, 2025
Open for Voting

P: Store AI related data in seperate sidecar file (not XMP)

  • July 25, 2025
  • 4 replies
  • 257 views

As discussed in another thread, I want to propose that Lightroom (Classic) stores data for AI denoise, AI super-resolution etc. not in the XMP sidecar file but in a second sidecar (maybe .acr).

 

Only the pure setting (AI denoise/superres/... used/not-used & intensity) should be stored in the XMP file next to other editing settings. We like to have the XMP for better transportability of single photos. The goal is just to keep it efficient and lightweight.

 

Reasons are:

  • Other file formats can save 50%+ storage capacity (as they allow for more efficient binary storing of that data instead of text-encoded storing in XRM).
  • Large XMP files slow down every other action that gets stored into the XMP (as the XMP file gets re-written after adding keywords, changing descriptions, changing exposure settings etc., which takes several seconds each, if the XMP is several MBs big due to AI-data).
  • Advanced backup strategies can be used, if the ai-data (that could be re-calculated at any time) is stored seperatly from settings and metadata.

 

 

PS: I also want to highlight that there is another slightly related proposal that addresses a different issue regarding the handling of the ai-editing-data within the catalog folder.

4 replies

Known Participant
September 3, 2025

@DdeGannes 

Yes, like many other users, I activated that option to automatically also store metadata in XMP sidecar files (not only in the database).

And if one activates it, the AI-related data is stored in the XMP files, too. (By design.) Pumping its size up (from usually 16-17 kB or less then 1 MB with AI masks) to several MB each.

Additionally to the lrcat.data storage. (By design.)

And seemingly also in the lrcat storage. (As discussed in the bug report, linked in my previous comment.)

 

My request is, to only store the AI development parameters in XMP (e.g. denoise on/off & intensity-level) but to not store the AI-data in the XMP.

Instead the data could be stored in a seperate, second, more efficient binary sidecar file.

 

And the reasons why I belive this to be better can be found in my opening post and in the linked discussions.

DdeGannes
Community Expert
Community Expert
September 3, 2025

@robert36972564 , I am not sure I understand the request, LrC by default stores the data in the LrC Catalog file by default there is an option to also save to XMP but while working in LrC the app is reading and writing to the Catalog. Data for th AI functions are stored in the .lrcat.data file so there is not a necessary for the .XMP files,

Regards, Denis: iMac 27” mid-2015, macOS 11.7.10 Big Sur; 2TB SSD, 24 GB Ram, GPU 2 GB; LrC 12.5,; Lr 6.5, PS 24.7,; ACR 15.5,; (also Laptop Win 11, ver 24H2, LrC 15.0.1, PS 27.0; ) Camera Oly OM-D E-M1.
Known Participant
September 2, 2025

I just found out about another, still active bug. This idea might also be part of a solution for this issue:

https://community.adobe.com/t5/lightroom-classic-bugs/p-automatically-write-changes-to-xmp-can-t-be-used-with-denoise-on-large-numbers-of-photos/idi-p/15393188

 

It's at least related closly related and both could be considered together when working on each other.

johnrellis
Legend
July 25, 2025

"Other file formats can save 50%+ storage capacity (as they allow for more efficient binary storing of that data instead of text-encoded storing in [XMP])."

 

A minor correction that doesn't change the substance of your proposal: Binary data is encoded in XMP using Ascii85, which increases the size of the stored data by 25%, not 50%. (Ascii85 uses 5 bytes to represent 4 binary bytes.)

 

 

Inspiring
January 27, 2026

Were my posts deleted?

Anyhow ​@johnrellis answer to your question: There haven't been any other reports here of abnormal growth of the .lrcat file since LR 15.0 was released. So you may be encountering some other issue.  How many total photos are in your catalog?”

I have around 29k photos. That’s not nothing, but it’s also not much in comparison. Also, I haven’t added many new ones recently. I’ve only edited existing ones and still, the catalogue size has grown by several hundred MB just by that post LrC 15.

johnrellis
Legend
January 27, 2026

[This post contains formatting and embedded images that don't appear in email. View the post in your Web browser.] 

 

@phoerious: Were my posts deleted?

No.  Posts since November 17 are temporarily unavailable while Adobe completes the transition from the old forum platform to the new one:

They haven’t indicated how long it will take to add in the recent forum posts.