Folders

[peter37592852jgru]

I am totally new to Lr Classic.  Is it best to create Folders on the computer Hard Drive and Import the Folders into Lr Classic, or best to create Folders on Lr Classic and import seperate Images to the Folders ?

[dj_paige]

It really doesn't matter.

But as advice on the bigger issue of using folders, I would advise you to keep your folder structure simple, such as capture date; and use keywords and other metadata to help you find the photos you want, rather than using folders to find your photos. (EXCEPTION: If you already have metadata in your folder names, like "Trip to Boston" as a folder name, keep those and then add a keyword(s) for all photos in this folder, with the eventual goal of having keywords for all of your photos, and all newly taken photos go into folders by capture date with appropriate keywords).

YOu might want to consider reading The DAM Book  (even though it says it is for Lightroom 5, the methods still apply)

[peter37592852jgru]

Thank you for your guidance!

[richardplondon]

You can either copy newly taken images images into the computer yourself, in the course of that manually creating and directing picture files (camera JPGs or camera Raw) into whatever folders and subfolders you think best - or else you can have Lightroom Classic take over the task for you and save yourself a lot of that work.

If working manually, you can implement whatever folder scheme you want but must then micromanage which photos go into what folder. After that you still have a further separate operation to identify which of those folders should or should not have their contents brought into the LrC Catalog's image library, and then use an "ADD" import which keeps everything where you've put it without any subsequent moving or copying.

For LrC to take over the task, depends on using some consistent import folder scheme which LrC can implement all by itself, such as most commonly an auto capture date based scheme.

This is what I have done for many years: a designated location on disk contains Year subfolders, inside each Month subfolders, inside each Day folders, each that has been created automatically as required, and then each incoming photo is automatically filed under the appropriate Year and Month and Day. So I see one consistent dated folder structure inside the Catalog which LrC has accumulated over many years. This has happend.with zero input from me except telling LrC to Copy and Import new photos off the card reader when needed. No settings were individualised by me each time, except for batch keywording. That has been the long and the short of my file and folder management.during all this time.

Consequence: automatically filed images are not going to be characterised so far as their folders names, unless you then  optionally go in and rename the automatically made folder name to add some descriptive words. I don't bother doing so since I think it is more important to characterise the photos themselves (by adding bulk keywording during import). Descriptive text within the folder name is only ever seen in practice when you are looking at these photos in the context of the Catalog. Metadata added to the individual photos follows them into exported copies - including to some other folder, or when exported directly to the web. The source file's folder location is purely a local management matter, and functionally limited anyway IMO compared with the more flexible and productive forms of virtual image management that a Catalog makes possible.

IOW: Folders are a necessary technicality of storing images, that you can safely subcontract out to LrC to implement - but that do not HAVE to then serve as your primary, nor even as a secondary, means of management so far as your image library. 

[Lumigraphics]

I have two different workflows- one at work and one at home.

For work, I almost never have images coming off a memory card. I shoot products with a tethered camera, process in Bridge/Camera RAW, and move to my production workstation. My folders are organized by product type. Filenames are overloaded to use the product part number. Dates are mostly irrelevant, that data is stored in a spreadsheet (ad hoc flat file database.) Metadata is king here, I extensively keyword, and I have numerous scripts to manipulate metadata. Searchability is huge.

For my freelance hobby/business at home, I use Lightroom (RIP Aperture) and copy images from memory card to folders using the Finder and card reader. I organize RAW files by date (year folders, then each individual shoot by date.) Finished photos are organized by location for landscape/travel work, subject name for models and portrait clients, and job indentifier for client work. I don't use keywords and just find things by location or name. Searching isn't very important.

[richardplondon]

just to comment, the LrC automated Copy import method can still be used to file images shoot by shoot even if not interested in a strictly date based scheme. It can do those parts of the work that it can do. Several ways to proceed.

For example, pehaps one uses a different card or else begins a new folder on the card, per separate shoot when multiple shoots occur on a given day. Or, perhaps everything from a given day is considered as one. So the filing scheme might consist of a fairly flat date based scheme of YYYY / YYYYMMDD inside a constant destination and then one renames the YYYYMMDD subfolder once imported, inside LrC, to characterise the shoot differently. And then one moves on to the next one. Or in the case where one manages multiple shoot folders on the same card, one might select YYYY as the destination (changing that as each new year comes along) and then inside that, have LrC subdivide according to the original folders on the camera card. Then rename each of those after import and before moving on to the next card.

If the images are mixed on the card and not in folders there, and all coming from the same day, one can do a selective import then rename the folder then do another selective import and rename the folder and so on. 

IOW it is not a cut-and-dried dichotomy between the fully manual option, and a completely hands-free and neutral import method. But my goodness it is so liberating and pleasant and pilot-error-free, if one possibly can do the latter!

[peter37592852jgru]

Thank you for all the replies - once I have digested all this info I hope to be able make sense for my filing in Lr Classicetc.

One more question: If I wish to edit an image in Ps is it best to open Ps from within Lr to edit the image , rather than open Ps directly to edit?

Thank you

[richardplondon]

In my opinion, you have bought LrC so that its Catalog can serve as the front-end to an image library. So it is the Catalog that you would already be using to find / organise and thus to view the image that you are considering editing in PS. So it makes sense to invoke the external edit from that same place, and by doing it this way you then get the results of your editing reimported back to the Catalog and presented alongside the starting image. You can then do further stuff inside the Catalog using that new image version, including applying further Lightroom edits nondestructively over the top.

There's more: in Lightroom there is not necessarily an exact 1 to 1 correspondence of files, and images. A particular file (for example a camera original file - JPG or Raw - but could equally well be a PS edited version saved to TIFF or PSD) can show as multiple thumbnails, each one independently adjustable and croppable and organisable using Lightroom's own tools. These additional versions referring to the same file in common, are called Virtual Copies. And any of those can be sent out to PS for further work if you want, if you do that from inside the Catalog. These additional virtual copies have no existence outside of the Catalog though, therefore there is nothing there that it would even be possible to open into Photoshop directly. Lightroom must be involved. I

t may sound perhaps counter-intuitive, but in practice this sort of thing is IMO what's great about the Catalog system. Tasks can be (at least to some degree) un-tethered from usual physical limitations, when they are carried out in a more virtual way. And that allows you to just work visually based on what you see, rather then getting involved in lots of technical steps. 

So, see an image inside LrC, send a copy of it out to PS, Save and close PS when you are finished and you see the edited image. You did not tell PS where to find the image it opened, you did not set where the new file should be saved or what it should be called, you did not tell LrC to import the result and where to find that. And if one image is Raw based and the other is PSD based you can just operate on them and do stuff with them just the same, including making virtual variants for one or another purpose (maybe cropped differently, or adjusted differently., or grouped together in a virtual Collection). 

[peter37592852jgru]

Thank you Richard, (think that's your name) I understand now that it makes sense to access Ps from within Lr. As you will have surmised, I am completely new to Lr and all digital work flow for that matter, so getting started with a good foundation is important.

Appreciate your comments