Are you talking about Lightroom Classic? If so, it isn't necessary to create new catalog. Simply move the existing catalog to a different hard drive along with the previews folder if desired. Double-click on the catalog in its new location and start working in Lightroom as usual. If you don't move the previews folder then Lightroom will create a new one in the new folder location.
I'm fine with moving the entire catalog to a different hard drive also, but again, that will only last so long. There has to be a way to create catalogs on multiple hard drives. Online doesn't work for me as I work all over the Americas and often without internet.
With Lightroom CC there is only one catalog, and it is on the Adobe server. It is not possible to work with multiple catalogs using Lightroom CC. Perhaps Lightroom Classic would be more suitable in your situation.
so what do you do when the hard drive runs out of room? There HAS to be away to use multiple hard drives
Are we talking the same language or about the same program? Lightroom CC stores all your images in the cloud. The catalog is in the cloud. Storing copies on your computer is optional, and you can designate where those images are stored. Lightroom Classic stores images in folders locally on your computer. It is possible to store those images on multiple hard drives, and with Lightroom Classic it is possible to utilize multiple catalogs although that isn't necessary.
It definitely doesn't store all the images in the cloud. The folders, etc show up online when I log on, but there are no images in them (I never use the online version anyways). Plus, I import photos all the time not connected to the internet. I have the plan with 20 GB of cloud storage (which is full BTW) and have easily 2 TB of photos in folders in Lightroom CC.
The error I get is to free up more space on my hard drive to be able to import more photos. If I attach a different hard drive and try to import new photos, LR won't do it as the path is not there any more to where the catalog is (at least to my understanding).
There has to be a way to be able to use LR CC with different hard drives. Why would the program be created in a way that you are limited to space on one HD? Doesn't make sense. I am not, and have never used LR Classic. I pay $9.99/mo. Don't even have LR Classic on the computer.
I have no idea. If, as you say, you have the plan that includes 20 GB on cloud storage, I don't understand how you can have 2 TB of images stored in Lightroom CC. It doesn't make sense, I don't understand, I won't bore you with any more responses. Someone else will have to provide assistance.
Will someone please enlighten me as to what plan the OP is using, or how the OP has Lightroom CC configured?
Reading between the lines, Jim.....
The OP has the 20GB version of the Photography Plan, i.e. PS, Classic, LR and 20GB cloud space. However, only Lightroom (i.e. the cloud version) is being used, not Classic. Apparently around 2TB of images have been imported into Lightroom.
Being cloud-centric, the desktop version of Lightroom works as follows:
1. For a start, there IS a local catalog (in the Local Library), which is always on the system drive and cannot yet be changed. There are, however, controls on the Preferences>Local Storage tab to control/limit the amount of hard drive space taken up by that local library.
2. When images are added to Lightroom, either from memory card or from a hard drive location, they are first copied into Lightroom's own local space. The default location for that local copy of the originals is inside the local library on the system drive, however it is possible to set a different location for locally stored originals (again on the Preferences>Local Storage tab), and that alternate location can be on a different drive, including a NAS. The images are stored in a date-based folder scheme, though that structure has no visibility from inside the Lightroom UI.
3. Once the import has completed, those locally stored originals are uploaded to the cloud, from where they will be available to all the other Lightroom clients, including the online Web app.
4. After the upload has completed, the local copy may become eligible for deletion (but not if the option to store a local copy of originals is enabled in the Preferences). Deletion may happen over time depending upon the amount of pressure on the free space on the selected drive.
So, trying to apply the above to the OP's situation, I would guess that only 20GB of the imported 2TB of files have been uploaded to the cloud, because 20GB is the limit of the chosen plan. That would explain why the albums are all empty when viewed through the online interface, i.e. they're not in the cloud.
To me, that's an unsustainable position to be in, leaving two alternatives:
a) Change the plan to include an appropriate amount of cloud space, or
b) Use Classic instead of Lightroom, as you suggested. It's included in the plan, and makes much more sense if the the OP wants to have support for images spread across multiple hard drives.
I suppose since I only work with a desktop computer, no laptop or tablet and don't use my mobile phone for any photo work, Lightroom CC just doesn't make much sense for me. And from my perspective, I find it difficult to understand why users find it so attractive. Thank you, Jim, for taking the time to explain its workings a bit more completely for me. I haven't taken the time to fully understand it. I have tinkered with it a bit, and can see how it could be attractive in some situations. But it just doesn't seem to fit my situation.
And from my perspective, I find it difficult to understand why users find it so attractive.
It's obviously not for everyone, in particular those who have developed a fluid desktop-based workflow over many years. I'm still mainly Classic-based, but I also very much enjoy some of the benefits of the cloud ecosystem. The particular attractions for me include the ability to have all my images stored on whatever device I have with me, usually my phone but also a couple of tablets. I've been surprised at the number of times and situations where that has been invaluable. Also I really enjoy sharing some of my images with family and friends, especially the fact that I no longer have to export & upload or publish & upload....I simply share an album and the viewer always sees the current edited image. I also frequently use the "story-telling" capability in the Display tab in LrWeb, which brings an added dimension to the shared album. Other benefits for me are the ability to organise images on any of my devices, and the ability to take phone snaps which arrive back in Classic without any action needed on my part. I'm not sure I'd bother going tablet/phone-only on my travels, though I reckon I could make it work if I needed to (but would need some form of portable backup device as well).
But sure, if it's not for you that's not a problem, though I'd generally advise people not to dismiss it until they've given it a proper trial.
Much (most) of that is perfectly possible with LrClassic, LrWeb and iOS/Android versions of LR Mobile.
Adobe did great work building that workflow around Lr Classic. But in my view, Lightroom CC only makes sense as the equivalent of the mobile apps running on one's second computer, and I can't recommend it for anything more than that.
I was talking about, and was careful to say, "the benefits of the cloud ecosystem". I agree that using the Lightroom desktop app on the same system as Classic in a hybrid workflow makes little sense, and I don't tend to use it that way. My main use of the desktop app on my Classic computer is doing what Classic can't do, i.e. getting originals uploaded. Sure I could use LrWeb, but I find LrDesktop more convenient.
Having said that I think that there's very little missing from Lightroom desktop, for me personally (and presumably all those folks with the Cloud + 1TB only plan), that would prevent me using it as the main desktop image processing application if I needed to.
In all those cases that you mention, Jim, retaining originals rather than smart previews in the cloud is of such negligible benefit. Occasionally it is worthwhile, and "Lightroom CC" or "Lightroom Desktop" or whatever it's officially called today is more convenient than LrWeb and just-about justifies keeping it on my main Classic computer. On the laptop, I think it makes enough sense.
I feel it merely offers the lowest common denominator of things people need. Great at sticking files in the cloud though. And it's such a shame as Adobe did great work with Lightroom and then the mobile apps, but I think they took a wrong turn with this one. Maybe one day I'll recommend it to someone!
It sounds like you’re using the wrong product. Lightroom Classic is what you want.
That was my thinking when I first started communicating with this person. In this particular situation, Lightroom Classic seems to be a much more workable solution.
I just switched from Classic to CC and moved my catalog into the cloud. For me, it’s working great. I’ve been using my 12.9 iPad Pro to import and process my photos for 2 years now. The only thing I’m missing vs classic is the ability to apply a graphic watermark.
The OP is simply using the wrong product. 2TB local and 20 GB cloud plus the desire to use multiple catalogs is not Lightroom CC.