Abnormal Backup Size

[Benjamin24934186qllw]

Hallo zusammen,

ich habe mal eine Fragen, auf die ich noch keine Antwort gefunden habe.

Ich mache jedes Jahr einen neuen Lightroom-Katalog, der täglich gesichert wird. Dann erstellt LR ja jedes mal einen Backup-Ordner. Es gibt unter diesen Ordnern immer einen, der sehr sehr groß ist und der regelmäßig beschrieben oder aktualisiert wird. Mir fällt das dann auf, wenn ich von den Backup Ordnern ältere Sicherungen löschen möchte und nach Änderungsdatum sortiere. Dieser eine Ordner, der teilweise schon Monate alt ist, kommt dann zum Vorschein und hat gerne schon mal 45 GB Größe, wohingegen die aktuelleren nur auf 1 GB kommen. Was ist das für ein Backup? Darf ich das überhaupt löschen? 

Vielen Dank!

Vielen Dank!

[Sean McCormack]

That sounds odd. What size is your original catalog? Zipped backups are smaller than the size of the original. You can always open the zip to check. 45GB is more like the size of a previews package. 

[Benjamin24934186qllw]

Yes, I also find that very strange. And for now, I'm only concerned with the backup folders, not the zip files.
I have attached two pictures of the backups from 2021 and 2020. You can see that the backup size decreases over time. And as I said before, LR seems to do something with the big folder, because it is at the top after the "date modified" sorting. Why is that? I have also not yet realized what that is supposed to. Especially since I fill the catalogs of course gradually with images.

[Sean McCormack]

Are you using a lot of masking lately? The masks are stored as part of the catalog structure and take up space. 

[Benjamin24934186qllw]

Yes, in the meantime, but these are backups from 2020, where I haven't done that yet. But does LR save masking only in this one backup? I have not quite understood it yet.
This large backup I have now had year.

[Sean McCormack]

Okay, that doesn't explain the old ones. You'd need to look in the folder to see the difference compared to the smaller ones. 

Because it was the most recent one in the list, I thought additional masking might be it, but I honestly hadn't looked at the backup date-distracted by the date on the PNG name. But yes, masking does add to the catalog size, or more specifically the .lrcat-data file backed up with the main .lrcat file. 

[Benjamin24934186qllw]

So there is a backup that was saved pretty much at the beginning of a new catalog, where also later other editing steps (maskings) are saved? But why this difference in size. Sure, with the time one deletes pictures, 1:1 previews are discarded etc.! But I still can not quite understand this... It's not even the first backup...

It actually never happens that I have to work on the images again extremely after a year, which is why I can't see any difference to the newer backups. I was just always worried that I would delete something. Whereby also that is nonsense, because I usually do not need it anymore.

[Sean McCormack]

If you don't look in the folder for comparion to the others, there's no way to know. 

In terms of what to keep, most people only keep the last 3 or so backups. You may prefer more. 

[Benjamin24934186qllw]

So, I just took a look at your folder and can't find anything that explains the amount of data. Unfortunately I don't have all backups anymore. What I remembered is that when I deleted the big backup and started Lightroom, it couldn't find the catalog anymore. So "this" backup must have some essential task. But it can't be just me, can it? Why does LR still write to this backup even though it makes a new one after each exit? I will continue to monitor this in the new catalog 2023.

[Sean McCormack]

The backups should have no effect whatsoever on the main catalog. The Backup process normally checks integrity, optimises (if selected), then copies, verifies and zips the copy. 

[GoldingD]

Are you using LrC to create the backups upon closure. Or are you using a backup application to create the backups/

[Benjamin24934186qllw]

Yes, I use only LrC! No more applications!