Save all LR photos w/ edits and folder structure to external drive

[kerryn60621049]

I'm using LR Classic 9.1 and Catalina 10.15.

For a long time, have imported images to an external drive (Drive 1), but have backed up LR catalog to my laptop hard drive.  Occasionally I will copy the LR backup and Drive 1 images to a second backup drive (Drive 2).  

My catalog covers about 30,000 images at the moment, most of them family photos.  This system works fine for me, but someday I'll be gone, and when that happens, I want to be sure that other family members  (who may not have LR or an interest in getting and learning it) to be able to access the edited photos conveniently.

Is there a way to periodically export ALL my LR photos (including edits) to an external drive AND preserve the folder organization, so that that others can have a reasonable chance to find and access the edited photos they may be looking for?  

IBasically, I'm looking to periodically backup or copy all my edited JPEGs in an organized fashion so that others can access them even if they don't have LR.

Perhaps Export as a Catalog will do this, but I'm not sure.  Everything I've ready about that function seems to describe exporting a few selected images as a catalog.  And I haven't seen anything about preserving folder organization if you're exporting images from different folders.

Any advice is appreciated.

[richardplondon]

For this purpose - maybe consider using a Publish method. This in effect provides a single "update" button which, on demand, automatically evaluates which qualifying images have been added or changed since the last time you used it (if ever) - and exports (or, re-exports) whatever images are required to bring things up to date within a destination folder on disk (you can also Publish into an online location, such as a Flickr account).

Publish can refer to a special Publish Collection, or else it can follow a Smart Publish Collection method drawing from your entire library (whereby you can set up rules for which images should qualify, e.g. only those which are both rated 3 stars or above, and lack the keyword "private"). 

Jeffrey Friedl offers two Publish plugins with added function, which may be of interest to you:

One organises the published image versions into subfolders within the designated location, according to your folders structure seen in  Lightroom http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/folder-publisher

Another organises them according to your LR Collections http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/collection-publisher .

[kerryn60621049]

Thank you for the helpful reply.

I ran across the publish option (and the related plug-ins) earlier and briefly looked again at it now.  Perhaps that will work, but I'm not sure.

The goal is to have an organized permanent archive of all my edited LR photos on a spearate drive that my wife or kids can access later with whatever program (Phjotos, etc.) they have handy.  If I publish my LR photos/folders to a separate drive, will they be able to access/download/copy when they plug the drive into a different computer?  Are the images/folders permanently published and accessible there?  (Something about "publish' sounds a bit temporary and possibly restricted to me, but I don't really know.)

The Export as Catalog approach sounded like a a more customary way of "saving" images permanently, but as I said, it seemed that mnight only work to export selected images (not my entire LR catalog) and the folder structure wouldn't be preserved, so I'd have a mass of saved images without folders to organize them.  However, if there's a way to use Eport as Catalog to achieve my goal, I'd love to hear it.

Any other ideas are welcome too!  Thank you!

[dj_paige]

"If I publish my LR photos/folders to a separate drive, will they be able to access/download/copy when they plug the drive into a different computer?  Are the images/folders permanently published and accessible there?  (Something about 'publish' sounds a bit temporary and possibly restricted to me, but I don't really know.)"

Publish is not temporary. The files and folder created are there for anyone to see or use if the drive is plugged in to any computer. These files and folders are "permanent"; I put permanent in quotes because no computer files are truly permanent, if someone deletes or modifies them after you publish them, the files are gone, and you can't really prevent that. Also if the disk fails, the files are gone as well, unless you have more backups.

"The Export as Catalog approach sounded like a a more customary way of 'saving' images permanently, but as I said, it seemed that mnight only work to export selected images (not my entire LR catalog) and the folder structure wouldn't be preserved, so I'd have a mass of saved images without folders to organize them."

Export as Catalog creates a new Lightroom Catalog file that is usable only by someone who has Lightroom and understands how to use it, which does not sound like the situation you are describing. It certainly does NOT save images permanently, it doesn't save images at all.

[kerryn60621049]

Thank you for these helpful responses.

If Publishing is "permanent" (with the caveat you mention), it does sound more promising than I thought.  I will experiment with the third party plug-ins mentioned.  (Can I assume that someone could use a software program other than LR to access the published images?

It makes sense that if you Export as Catalog someone would have to use LR to access the catalog and associated images.  And you're right, I'm trying to preserve the option for others to access the images without LR, so this probably isn't the best approach for me.  (One quibble: As I understand it, Export as Catalog does save whatever images you select together with the new catalog.  See https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-classic/help/create-catalogs.html#copy_or_move_a_catalog)

Thanks again!

[dj_paige]

Export as Catalog will save the ORIGINAL images if you check the box "Include Negatives", but these are not the edited images and they will not have user-supplied metadata.

When Lightroom exports or publishes a photo as JPG or TIF, these can be read or viewed by any software.

[kerryn60621049]

I only have JPEGs and they are all edited.  I would select them (but not click the Inlcude Negatives box).  I just wanted to preserve only the edited images in a way others can access them easily.

So it sounds like I theoretically ciould use Export as Catalog to save my edited JPEGs to an archival drive, and others could see the JPEGs using non-LR software.  As I understand it, however, the problem with this approach is that I would lose the folder organization, which I think would be very important for others to be able to search and find images that they want.  (I'm also not sure how you'd "select" thousands of images across of folders to do it this way.)  Is that correct?

Thanks so much!

[dj_paige]

"So it sounds like I theoretically ciould use Export as Catalog to save my edited JPEGs to an archival drive, and others could see the JPEGs using non-LR software."  

No, this is the opposite of what I just said. Export as Catalog will make copies of your ORIGINAL UNEDITED photos. It does not save EDITED photos. Export as Catalog simply does not fit your stated goals.

[kerryn60621049]

Got it, now.  I thought I had read somewhetre that Esport as Catalog saved images w/ edits.  But now understand that it only save the unedited images (if you so select).  Thanks again.

[richardplondon]

The only difference between "Export" and "Publish", is that "Publish" can be intelligently repeated at a future date.

If you Export copies of all your photos one day, and come back six weeks later, it would then be difficult to work out which photos were new in the meanwhile, and which had been altered in the meanwhile, and which were unaltered in the meanwhile. The only way to be sure might be to export them ALL once again, over the top. And the same the next time.

If you Publish, then LR keeps track of which photos in your Catalog have been changed subsequently. So when you next click the button, only the needed photos get copies exported.

But the exported results are the same either way: completely conventional JPGs, showing your edits and keywords. I export to a middle res with slight output sharpening, not to full original size, since that better suits my own and my wife's typical 'convenience' usage of these exports. 

The Folder Publisher plugin can distribute these into corresponding subfolders automatically, which standard Publish does not do. It is probably better for you right now, also easier for others later, also better in principle IMO to not mix exports in among your LR originals' folders. These are two different kinds of file intended for different audiences, and with different organisational needs. Best handled independently.

Personally I export only selected images, in a fully separate location, into folders that are more descriptively named than with my LR setup. It's not helpful to me to do this with a Publish method, since this is usually a known one-off batch that will not undergo much later updating.

[kerryn60621049]

Thank you so much for this very thoughtful reply.  The Publish approach certainly seems to have some big advanatages, as you point out.  (I also see that it might be easier for others if I exported selected images to a simpler set of descriptively named images than my current rather complicated LR folder set.). I'm going to try the Publish Folder plugin the next week or so.  I bet that's what I'll settle on, but I'll evaluate as I go.  Thanks again.

[kerryn60621049]

A qucik update and a few questions:

I downloaded and installed the Freidl plugins.  I set up a smart collection that is defined by a source folder, in this case the parent folder that contains all my Lightroom images (currently ~54,000).  The correct number of images then appeared in the smart collection.   I then selected all the images in the collection and began publishing them to a new 2T external drive where I intend to archive my edited JPEGs for others' future enjoyment and use.  Folders and images began appearing on the external drive just as expected.

As I import new images into my LR parent folder (or modify existing images), presumably they will appear in the corresponding smart collection and show up as new images to publish.  When I connect my external drive, I assume I will have to manually select and publish the new/modified images to the drive.  Sound ok so far?

My initial instinct was to export the images at the highest quality settings to preserve future users' ability to do whatever they want with them.  After some internet searhing for advice on high quality export settings, I set quality to 100, did not limit image size and set dpi to 300.  Not surprisingly, it's taking an awfully long time to export ~50,000 large image files with those settings.  (It's running at a rate of ~300/hour.).   If I need to stio the publishing process temporarily (to do other things with my computer, etc.), am I correct in assuming I can resume where I left off?   I'm also considering whether I should stop the current publishing process and start over with different export settings.  (I realize the initial publishing session takes by far the longest; future ones should be much shorter, even at my current settings, although I might have a few hundred new photos to publish as a time.)  I would appreciate anyone's advice about how to balance preserving image quality and export practicality.  So please let me know what export settings you'd recommend in this context.

Thanks very much.

[dj_paige]

There's no need to export at quality of 100. See here: http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/jpeg-quality

By setting the export quality to approximately 75, you lose very little in visible quality, but you save a huge amount on disk space and you save a huge amount of export time.

There is no way to set dpi to 300, because Lightroom has no dpi setting in the export dialog box. There is a Resolution setting, also known as ppi (which is not dpi, they are different). Better you should ignore this and leave "Resize to Fit" unchecked which will preserve image quality (given the choice of 75 above using the quality slider).

The Publish services are fine if you stop them and re-start, they know where they left off.

[kerryn60621049]

Got it, thanks.  Persuasive article.  Starting over at 75 Quality setting.  Hopeful it will go a lot more quickly now.

[kerryn60621049]

As I mentioned, I'm now using plugin to Publish photos to external drive at 75 Quality.  It's running faster (about 600 photos/hour) but I wondered if it's a bit slower than it could be.  In partcular, as you suggested I did not check the Resize box but the plugin populate the PPI field with 1,080, and I left it alone, thinking it wouldn't affect anything. Should I change the value in the PPI field?  T'hanks!

[kerryn60621049]

One other thing I've noticed and am curious about.  The publishing process is producing quite a few (~70 out of ~4,000 images published so far) images that it calls "Modified Photos to be Re-Published."  Did the publishing process somehow modify them?  I didn't modify any images after initiating publsihing.  Seems a bit worrisome.  Any insight?  Thanks!

[dj_paige]

The advice I gave was to ignore this field.  However if "resize to fit" is UNchecked, then this field is not going to be used anyway.

It's running faster (about 600 photos/hour) but I wondered if it's a bit slower than it could be.

It runs at the speed it runs at. This depends on how big your photos are and how fast your hardware is. I'm not sure why you think its slow.

[kerryn60621049]

Understood.  I UNchecked the Resize box.  Based on your advice, I assumed the shown PPI value wouldn't affect anything.  (If that's true, though, it's curious that unchecking the Resize box doesn't blank/gray out the value in the PPI field.)

Another curious thing is that the publishing speed improved dramatically after a few hours.  It's been publishing about 5,000 images/hour for the last 8 hours or so.  Almost done with initial export.

Still producing a few Modfieid Image to be Re-Published Later.  Any insight into what the issue there is?

Thanks!

[Just Shoot Me]

I have to partially disagree with both of the other replies.

If you want your Edited in LR images to be available to others in the future then IMHO you have only one option and that option includes using one of 2 file formats, JPG or TIF.

You Export your edited images to either format and store them on one of your external drives and then copy them to the other and even a third external drive.

If you want them to have access to ALL of your images then the ones you haven't bothered to edit export them as JPGs (that is if they aren't JPGs already)

The 2 other options listed above is based on someone in your family (Friends) having LR Classic to View either your published copies or the Exported catalog.

Your original images, whether they are JPG or RAW files contain No edits. All the edits you have done are stored in the LR catalog file. Only at the time of Export, as either a JPG or TIF files, are the edits burnt into, included in, that exported image file.

Even if you have the option check to "Auto Write Changes to XMP" the only programs that can read those edits, from the Sidecar XMP file, is one of the Adobe RAW file editors.

I am in the proccess of doing basically the same thing as I don't think in the near future I will have access to LR Classic, PS and Adobe Camera RAW anymore.

[kerryn60621049]

Thanks.  

A couple of clarifications:  1.  All my images are JPEGs.  2.  All my images are ediated. (I delete unedited images.)

I understand that when you Export and image it saves the edits with the image somehow.  I suppose Publish essentially does the same thing.

I'm just trying to figure out the best way to create a complete and organized copy of all my LR edited images that my family can readily access and search (with or without LR) if I'm not around to do it for them.

Thanks!

[dj_paige]

"A couple of clarifications:  1.  All my images are JPEGs.  2.  All my images are ediated. (I delete unedited images.)

"I understand that when you Export and image it saves the edits with the image somehow.  I suppose Publish essentially does the same thing.

"I'm just trying to figure out the best way to create a complete and organized copy of all my LR edited images that my family can readily access and search (with or without LR) if I'm not around to do it for them."

It's hard to read this and come to a conclusion that either you have received the information you need, or that you still need more information. Do you still need more information?

[kerryn60621049]

I think I've got what I need for now, thanks.

Seems that Publishing the saved images is the only option for me at this point.

Thank you.

[Rob_Cullen]

Here is another idea-

Requires disk space with the original files!

1. Select photos-  (could be ALL Photographs)

2. Export as JPG to sub-Folders of the Originals.  (Thus exported JPGs with edits applied remain in the same folder structure)

Export to: 'Same folder as original photo'

Put in Sub-Folder -named as required.

Rename, or not,

You could Resize, (to limit pixel dimensions) or not!

Folder structure is unchanged with originals and edited JPGs in sub-folders of their originals.

[kerryn60621049]

That seems like a great alternative!

So on the arhival drive, I would have all my original LR folders (containing unedited images), each of which will have aubfolder with the edited JPEG images, right?

Could I later reorganize the dolers on the arhival drive so that I just keep (or separate) the folders with the edite JPEGs, so it's obvious to a future user that's where to look for the edited images?

Thanks so much!

[dj_paige]

"Could I later reorganize the dolers on the arhival drive so that I just keep (or separate) the folders with the edite JPEGs, so it's obvious to a future user that's where to look for the edited images?"

Yes you could, it would be manual and slow and tedious and you'd have to re-organize the folders one by one (and don't make a mistake and skip a folder or put it in the wrong place...). And if you took more photos and wanted to include them in this manually modified folder structure, its more slow tedious work (and don't make a mistake).

I guess I don't understand your reluctance to use a Publish service here, it seems to do exactly what you want with no drawbacks that I can see. It's all automated, no manual or tedious or mistake-prone work for you to do, easily updated via the plug-in, you click the mouse on Publish and then you can walk away and let the computer do the work.