Skip navigation
Frank K.
Currently Being Moderated

Oh, well, another reason to skip up-grading. . .

Feb 16, 2012 12:58 PM

I'm going to have to continue with version 2.7 since Adobe insists that I MUST copy all imported files from my CF cards to my boot HD, the LAST PLACE I want to put gigabytes of image files! That means I have to use Windows Explorer to access the folder and delete all those files and then empty the Recycle Bin frequently, so it doesn't clog-up my C: drive.

 

I've read a lot of baloney about how important it is to copy the files on import and how essential the catalog is to the function of LR, but NOT FOR ME! Version 2.7 has this simple feature, v3 dropped it and now 4 beta hasn't put it back, so forget it! If I can't have the CHOICE of how I like to work, as I did in v2.7, then you're not going to get my money. It's as simple as that. Thumb your nose at me? I'm walking.

 

Frank

 
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 16, 2012 1:05 PM   in reply to Frank K.

    Where else would you want your images but on a hard drive?  They don't have to go on your boot drive, they just need to go somewhere on a local or network drive.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 16, 2012 1:46 PM   in reply to Frank K.

    Frank,

     

    You can put your images on any drive you want.

     

    Lightroom_2012-02-16_17-44-12.jpg

     

    Note that you have to specify Move or Copy to have the destination panel show up.

     

    Hal

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 16, 2012 2:16 PM   in reply to Frank K.

    Frank K. wrote:

     

    Reformatting the memstick is an easy way to dump all that extraneous crap LR dumps on me.

     

     

    What extraneous crap does LR "dump" on you?

     

     

    But why does the top menu on Import have grayed-out choices for "Move" and "Add", leaving only "DNG" and "Copy"? It looks like they are supposed to be there, but somebody forgot to plug them in.

     

    Move:  Because automatically deleting from the CF is not permitted, thank goodness.

     

    Add:  I can't image why anyone would want to import images from a CF card and leave them on the card and nowhere else.  That would require you to always insert the CF inn order to edit any images.  Is that what you had in mind?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 16, 2012 5:49 PM   in reply to Frank K.

    If I am reading your workflow correctly, and you are initially editing your images while they are still on the CF card, that really is not a very good workflow. The card is not performing as well as a hard drive does, so it will slow you down. And, as you said, it will put XMP files on that card. That is not the recommended way to work.

     

     

    The most efficient way to work is to download all the images to a hard drive. Then work on those images. As you work your way through the images, if you find one that you don't want, just press the X key, and it will be marked for deletion. After you have gone through the full set of images, just press Ctrl+BkSpc, and Lightroom will filter your images to display only those that have been marked for deletion. You will then be given the option to either remove them from the catalog or delete them from the disk. If you delete them from the disk they are gone.

     

     

    Working with your images on the hard drive is much safer. In my opinion, I believe you should reevaluate your workflow. However, the wonderful thing about software is that you can design your own workflow to suit your individual taste. I just don't think the way you are doing it is a very good idea.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 16, 2012 5:56 PM   in reply to Frank K.

    Frank,

     

    I believe you are the second user who's indicated they use a CF-centric workflow. I won't get into the idiosyncracies of your approach except to say, if you value your images I'dl be more worried about having redundant copies on different media than whether it takes a few more operations to clean up after you've decided what you want to keep and what you want to delete. I may be dealing with a higher volume of images than you (thousands per shoot) but I constantly find that delaying the deletion of all but the most obvious chafe invariably has me finding new value in images I didn't initially rate highly. In some cases clients have paid for these secondary selections. Working purely from your cards as you prefer to do, you're operating without that second chance.

     

    I trust my preferred Lexar media but I'm always happier when the images are safely imported and backed up on two hard drives. Hard drives are cheap. Over time I find myself returning to high volume shoots for new stock requests, during those reviews I'll incrementally reject more images with the benefit of additional time and thought. Once or twice a year I search for all those rejects and delete them. I lose absolutely nothing but some disk space temporarily in return for that flexibility.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 16, 2012 7:54 PM   in reply to Frank K.

    While I too am of the opinion that it is crazy to work straight from the CF card, I do wish that Lightroom was friendlier to portable HDs.

    I keep a catalogue on a portable HD because I work between home and school, and LR is not particularly friendly to it.

    I wish it would recognise that my primary catalogue is on a portable drive, and I wish I could keep the same catalogue on multiple drives (for backup reasons, and so that I can work from my desktop computer with the HD unplugged).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 16, 2012 8:37 PM   in reply to s3333969

    Why can't you work with the catalog on a portable HD? I do that regularly, and don't find any issues at all with it. And almost all of my image files are on external drives that are not always connected.

     

    Are you on Windows? If so, it helps to tell Windows to assign the same drive letter to the drive every time. I don't remember how to do that, but perhaps a Windows user can help with that.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 16, 2012 10:26 PM   in reply to Mark Sirota

    It's more to save the metadata. When I save it will only save to one, which is annoying for backing up.

    Do you know something I don't?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 16, 2012 10:39 PM   in reply to Frank K.

    Frank, here's that thread dealing with the same concern if you haven't seen it. http://forums.adobe.com/message/4134246#4134246

     

    I agree there's a certain inefficiency to copying over large numbers of files, only to delete them later, but I don't have the luxury of time to engage in any form of "pre-selection". It's easier for me to stick the card in a reader and transfer the files while I eat dinner or do any one of the dozen things I need to do each night during an assigment. My fastest cards need to be recycled for the next day, and I have more than a terrabyte of space on my laptop and much more on my desktop.  I'm sorry if your photography affords you the time to work from the CF cards but LR no longer allows you to work that way.

     

    I think there will be a lot more users (not visiting these forums) who are more confused and dismayed (initially) by the wholesale changes to develop in LR4.

     

    Change is inevitable; but that doesn't mean we always have to like it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 12:05 AM   in reply to Frank K.

    I have read and re-read this thread three times, and I am more confused now than I was the first time time through.  First off - Frank, from what I can see, you have one of the most original workflows I've ever heard of.  I'm not saying you need to adjust it in any way, but like others have suggested, you might want to tweek it just a bit.  You're fighting Lightroom 4.0 like it's a bad acid trip or something.  Fighting it only makes the situation worse.  My biggest frustrations with Lightroom when I first started using it were not because I didn't know how to use Lightroom.  I just really didn't quite get how it fit into my workflow with Nikon Transfer (which is what I use to import files from my camera), Bridge, and Photoshop.  I was either redundent files, or I'd lose files because I'd edit them in Lightroom, but move them with Bridge.  I was creating a nightmare for myself until I stepped back a bit and studied how it was supposed to work.  And I realized the only way I could make it work was to adjust my workflow.  So to me, every new release is better than the previous, which is kind of the whole point.  What I'm trying to say is - if you think version 2.7 is better than the versions that have followed, then stick with version 2.7.  Nobody is forcing you to pay for an upgrade.  4.0 was offered as a free trial download so you could try it.  If it's not working for you, and you don't want to take the time to learn how to use it properly, then delete it from your hard drive.  No harm done.  You said it yourself: "There may be more efficient ways to use the software..."  There are. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 5:11 AM   in reply to Frank K.

    Hi Frank,

    I've also followed your 'flow' and maybe I'm not reading it correctly, but if I am, you can also select the files you want to import while on the import page.  One HUGH difference from ver. 2 to 3 and carries in 4 is an expanded page that resembles the grid mode.  This assumes you have the import page expanded and not compressed, though it should be expanded by default.  When your images are still on your card you can view them in a grid resembling the same look as in the library, including clicking on suspicuous images to enlarge.  All of your images will be have a check mark in the upper corner indicating they will be imported into your catalog.  Simply uncheck any that you don't want to import and they will gray out and won't import from your card.  If, for instance, you shot a ton of junk (bracketing, etc) and only want to import a few choices, then at the bottom of the grid there is a box to 'uncheck all'.  Do that and then go back and check only the few that you want to import.  It can save time later.

    One other thing, though perhaps a bit off LR4 subject and I suppose someone chastise me about this, but I can take it!  If I read correctly, in your original flow it seems as if you reformat your memory stick via the computer software, is that correct?  12 years ago I did the same thing and somehow corrupted a card - smart media at that time, if anyone remembers those!  I was told to only reformat in the camera as it is better for the card to be formatted by the OS in which it will be used.  Since then and many cameras later, that's what I do and coincidence or not, I've never had another card issue.

    I hope you come to enjoy the great strides made by the Adobe team in upgrading a fabulous program.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 7:30 AM   in reply to Frank K.

    Frank K. wrote:

     

    To Jim Hess: efficient use of software is not as important to me as efficient use of my brain. Software is the tool, it either fits my grasp or is replaced.

     

    I assumed that since you were complaining about all the extra stuff that Lightroom put on the disk that you were using XMP files. Obviously, that was a mistake on my part. So I don't know what you're talking about when you complained about all the extra stuff. I won't comment again in this thread, but I still think you need to reevaluate your approach. And you can scream back at me all you want, but it won't change my opinion. Good luck. That's the nice thing about software. Everyone can design a workflow that works for them. I really don't understand yours, and I don't want to try. But if it works for you then don't change.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 8:33 AM   in reply to Frank K.

    Frank K. wrote:

     

    why would I want to put the junk images on my computer and then have to spend the time deleting all those files which represent somewhere between 80 and 90% of all images?

     

    Why not?

     

    Here's what you do:

     

    - Import all your images into a folder that represents their final destination.

    - As the import is proceeding, switch to loupe view and start rating/culling.  Hit caps-lock, which causes LR to advance to the next image automatically when you select a rating.

    - If you don't want to rate an image and just want to get rid of it, just hit the delete key.

     

    Generally, LR will import images faster than I can decide what to do with them, so the limit on speed is my brain.  After I'm through all the images, they'll all be rated and all the ones I don't want are already gone out of the catalog and off the hard drive.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 8:58 AM   in reply to Frank K.

    Editing images for the initial cull of defective frames in the import menu is ridiculous - I need to be able to see them at actual pixel level to determine their quality, not thumbnails.

     

    Have you tried pressing E while in the Import dialog?  You can zoom all the way to 1:1.  This has been there since 3.0.  (And I don't think this was possible before 3.0, so I'm a bit confused...)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 9:05 AM   in reply to Frank K.

    Frank

     

    Just one more thought that might fit in with your workflow and mindset.

     

    You don't state your operating system but using Windows as an example, using Windows Explorer navigate to your CF card. Viewing the photos full size you can inspect your images and delete those you don't wish to keep. Import the others into Lightroom and do whatever you do in post processing.

     

    The above would seem to pretty well retain your current concept of workflow and still let you reap the post processing benefits of Lightroom.

     

    Rick

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 9:32 AM   in reply to Frank K.

    I don't understand what's crippled about LR3 and LR4 as compared with LR2.  The only import functionality from LR2 that disappeared, as far as I know, was the ability to rename the date-based folders at Import time; in LR3 and LR4 you have to rename the folders after import.

     

    What, precisely, are you unable to do in LR3 and LR4 that you could do in LR2?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 9:37 AM   in reply to Mark Sirota

    Mark Sirota wrote:

     

    I don't understand what's crippled about LR3 and LR4 as compared with LR2.  The only import functionality from LR2 that disappeared, as far as I know, was the ability to rename the date-based folders at Import time; in LR3 and LR4 you have to rename the folders after import.

     

    What, precisely, are you unable to do in LR3 and LR4 that you could do in LR2?

     

    There was a bug in 2.x that allowed this workflow.  It was corrected later.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 9:41 AM   in reply to Frank K.

    Frank K. wrote:

     

    It's a workaround, not a workflow for me, it took me hours to figure

    out how to minimize potentially destructive HD use with v4 and to my C:

    drive by default, too . If something went bad with all that file

    handling, I'd lose my whole OS and the programs on it.

     

    What the heck are you talking about?  Reading and writing these files to your hard drive has no chance of messing up your OS, and it causes an infintessimal amount of wear to the drive compared to the normal use by the OS of the page files, the registry, and so on.

     

    You've spent (wasted) a lot of time and effort trying to accomplish effectively nothing but making things more difficult for yourself, not to mention slower.

     

    If you have multiple shoots on the card, so what?  Two choices - import them one at a time into the correct folders for each, or import them all into a single folder (say, the one for the first shoot) and then move the others, which in LR is quite simple (drag and drop, right-click and select move to, etc.).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 10:12 AM   in reply to Frank K.

    I wasn't aware of the "E" option until you mentioned it, all I ever

    found is what's on the Lr4 screen when the download menu opens.

    Generally, I don't use quick-keys, only the mouse, but I'll give it a

    try as it might be the workaround that suits me.

     

    If you prefer to use the mouse (which seems surprising, since you claim to be all about speed) then click the Loupe button at the bottom of the Import dialog instead of pressing E.

     

    I understand now -- you're leveraging the old bug that allowed you to add files to the Lightroom catalog without copying them off the card. You can still do that if you trick your operating system into mounting your card as a disk rather than as a removable media device. Not advisable, but if you're insistent on doing it... How to do that would depend on your operating system.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 10:20 AM   in reply to Frank K.

    Frank K. wrote:

     

    There is a lot of confusion in the thread, that's not surprising, but the point originally was, why should I spend the money for a version of Lr that doesn't work the way it used to work and that is no longer

    compatible with the workflow I developed with the previous version?

     

    Uh huh...I thought I recognized this logic. You complained about the same thing in March, 2010 in this thread

    Use LR 2.7 without catalogs and collections?

    Your logic hasn't improved–although I'll admit you are consistant. The bottom line is you adopted your workflow based on a bug in Lightroom which mistakenly allowed users to add images to a catalog while keeping them on a card. It was a bad idea hen and it's still a bad idea. This isn't going to change in LR, so your only choice really is to either adapt your workflow of find a different product.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 12:30 PM   in reply to Frank K.

    Of course I'm consistent, I've been a photographer for 25 years and my

    work style wasn't developed for the sake of Lightroom. I found Lr to be

    a great digital lightbox for preliminary sorting and editing images and,

    as I said way back then, I already have a filing method that works, I don't

    need to completely revamp all my files to fit the peculiarities of

    Lightroom.

    You're really using the wrong tool to do this. Lightroom's designed workflow is orthogonal to what you want your workflow to be. If you really want to work like this, you should not use Lightroom. Lightroom simply is NOT a filebrowser. You want a filebrowser that can hand off files to a raw converter. Don't try to use a screwdriver when what you need is a sledgehammer. Better tools include Bridge, iView mediapro, and many other DAM tools. Different workflows for different people.

     

    That said, any good workflow should really copy the files of the cards as a first step. It is extremely important to immediately create a second copy of your files and not work directly on the flash cards. Contrary to hard drives, flash cards do have a problem with regular corruption. Also, it is way too easy to format the cards and to lose work that you didn't import yet because you simply do not suck all the images of the card as default. Hard drive space is cheap and it is very easy to manage files in Lightroom and even delete them as part of the workflow. If you never had a problem losing an image, I would say you have been extraordinarily lucky. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You will get data corruption and you will lose images. This is a reality of digital workflows. You need to design the workflow to be efficient and to minimize your chances of loss. Redundancy is very important in reaching this goal.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 12:53 PM   in reply to Frank K.

    Truly Frank, I don't think it's a matter of arrogance.  Nobody is criticizing your photos or your post-processing tastes.  All that's being criticized is the act of editing photos from a CF card (or SD card, for that matter).  And, for what it's worth, you can organize or not organize your image files however you please.  But you should simply understand that your chosen method of working directly from a memory card stands in stark contrast to the widely-accepted conventions for storing/editing image files from a hard disk (oftentimes with at least one backup copy).

     

    It's not arrogant to tell you that... it's just the truth.  Very few people attempt to manage their photos in the way that you choose to, primarily because of all the entirely reasonable points that have already been explained on this thread - speed issues, increased chance of losing your files, etc.

     

    The point is, you will likely be one of a very tiny minority (along the lines of a small fraction of one percent) that may not upgrade to LR4 simply because you refuse to copy your photos to a hard disk.  At the end of the day, it's simply not half as inconvenient or inefficient as you seem to think.  It's a pretty simple process, conducted only once for each shoot, that really doesn't take too long and which protects your image files from accidental permanent deletion or loss by card failure as well as improving LR performance.  It's really a win-win decision.

     

    Hey... you don't HAVE to change the way you handle your files.  Nobody is really telling you that have to, either.  They are simply advising you that your method, despite "working for you" and meeting "your needs" (which seem somehow to be much different from those of other photographers) is generally accepted as a less-than-ideal practice across the board these days.  It is what it is.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 3:13 PM   in reply to Frank K.

    Frank K. wrote:

     

    Your response and some of the others just sound like arrogance toward

    Lr users.

     

    Frank

     

    Geeze Frank.  Try rereading your original post and tell me you didn't come out swinging with a serious attitude and an ignorance for how to use LR3/4.  A lot of patient and polite people have tried to help you. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 3:25 PM   in reply to Frank K.

    Enough is enough!  You don't like LR4!  Use something else and stop using thismbandwidth.

     

    Wil

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 4:20 PM   in reply to RickBu

    Frank

     

    If you Google "view cr2 files" and check out How to view Canon CR2 raw file in Windows Explorer you will find a link to a download that will allow you to view your RAW's in Explorer.

     

    This capability as you will notice goes all the way back to Winows XP. I am very surprised that you were not aware of this.

     

    Rick

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 17, 2012 4:33 PM   in reply to WCA01

    WCA01 wrote:

     

    Enough is enough!  You don't like LR4!  Use something else and stop using thismbandwidth.

     

    Wil

     

    Amen!

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points