Catalogue Management

[dunker56]

So I now own a new pc, a small NUC Skull Canyon. I opted to go with a 250gb ssd and connect external HDD's up to it (or turn their switch on) when wanting to access the brunt of my data (12tb+). I didn't see the merit in having a 500gb or even 1tb ssd, as eventually the data/images/pics/files are going to have to be passed off onto cheaper HDD's (that I already own).

I'm now currently trying to figure out my workflow, from the moment the sd card is ejected from the dslr to importing and exporting images.

I can easily keep a nice 100gb 'buffer' reserve on this 250gb ssd C: for importing and editing (I'll imagine I'll have the fastest and smoothest experience doing this), but I'm a little shakey how the exporting is going to work. Do I export to the HDD's? I could do that, but I won't always have the HDD's switch on (they are in a vantec quad dock, self powered with a fan, sometimes a noisy thing which I don't want to have on all the time). Partially the decision to move to a NUC was the realisation that I seldom accessed the HDD's in my old noisy desktop machine, thus far I am enjoying the peace and quiet.

Initially I will copy files from the sd card to the main C: ssd. I will edit and export to this same drive I think, only when I near the 100gb threshold will I start moving the files off the C: and to somewhere else (should be a good month or two before needing to shift 100gb worth of RAW and Jpg Exports). That should give me the time I need if I ever need to go back to LR and edit a pic taken a few weeks past (which I've had to do on the odd occasion).

But what about long term... can LR's catalogue point to two locations? So in the event I want to retrieve and tweak a picture from 6 months passed (raw file and jpg no longer living on the internal SSD, therefore the Library won't be able to locate it 'missing file' etc), can it find the same file name if I point LR to check on another drive also (like the external hdd, switched on obviously)?

Failing that I might have to rethink about LR being used as a 'library catalogue' system and treat as a standalone editor.

If going down this route, can you;

a) Make LR work a little faster, turn off the Library Catalogue features?

b) When it comes to Export time, could I export a Jpg of the edit (which i normally do) as well as simultaneously exporting a RAW/DNG of the edit (so that if I import that same DNG export again, LR can see the adjustments I made? Or are they all reset?

Hmm... what do other people do in these circumstances?

TIA!

[Conrad C]

dunker56  wrote

But what about long term... can LR's catalogue point to two locations? So in the event I want to retrieve and tweak a picture from 6 months passed (raw file and jpg no longer living on the internal SSD, therefore the Library won't be able to locate it 'missing file' etc), can it find the same file name if I point LR to check on another drive also (like the external hdd, switched on obviously)?

That shouldn't be problem. Lightroom can manage multiple volumes. I don't know if there's a limit, but my Lightroom catalog points to images on several internal drives on my tower computer, external hard drives, other computers on the network…and it's no problem to move images between those volumes, within Lightroom.

There may be a minor issue in Windows, where Lightroom might become confused when drive letters become associated with different volumes than they were previously. I think the solution is to permanently assign drive letters, but I'm not sure because I'm using Lightroom on a Mac where this issue doesn't come up because drive letters aren't used.

dunker56  wrote

Failing that I might have to rethink about LR being used as a 'library catalogue' system and treat as a standalone editor.

If going down this route, can you;

a) Make LR work a little faster, turn off the Library Catalogue features?

Since cataloging (that is, generating an image preview and adding its data to the database) is never optional and cannot be turned off, you won't save time on an image by image basis. The only time savings would come from cataloging a few images you want to edit, instead of hundreds you want to organize.

If you're only interested in the Develop module in Lightroom, and you're a Creative Cloud member, you can download Adobe Bridge, use it as a no-catalog file browser to browse your images, and open them into Adobe Camera Raw inside Bridge to do your raw editing. The raw editing options inside Adobe Camera Raw as basically the same as in the Lightroom develop module.

[Just Shoot Me]

Import directly to the external drive. Export to that same external drive.

Keep the catalog on the SSD. That will mean the Previews will also be on the SSD.

If I was doing this I would get a 500GB SSD. The more free space you have on a SSD the longer that SSD will last.

[dj_paige]

But what about long term... can LR's catalogue point to two locations? So in the event I want to retrieve and tweak a picture from 6 months passed (raw file and jpg no longer living on the internal SSD, therefore the Library won't be able to locate it 'missing file' etc), can it find the same file name if I point LR to check on another drive also (like the external hdd, switched on obviously)?

Yes, Lightroom can point to photos on multiple drives.

The photos now on your SSD can be moved to another drive via Adobe Lightroom - Find moved or missing files and folders (see the section "Part 2 — Updating Folder Location").

As stated above by Just Shoot Me , don't put your photos on the SSD in the first place. Put them on the external drive straight out of the camera.

Failing that I might have to rethink about LR being used as a 'library catalogue' system and treat as a standalone editor.

If going down this route, can you;

a) Make LR work a little faster, turn off the Library Catalogue features?

You cannot make LR work faster by turning off the Library. It is not possible to turn off the Library. Library has no influence on the speed of other Lightroom modules, such as editing. The whole idea makes no sense. If you are having speed problems with Lightroom, you need to describe in detail exactly what actions are slow in Lightroom.

b) When it comes to Export time, could I export a Jpg of the edit (which i normally do) as well as simultaneously exporting a RAW/DNG of the edit (so that if I import that same DNG export again, LR can see the adjustments I made? Or are they all reset?

This is unnecessary extra work, and a horrible workflow. As stated above, put the photos on the external drive straight out of the camera, and then none of this is necessary.

[dunker56]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Conrad+C  wrote

dunker56   wrote

But what about long term... can LR's catalogue point to two locations? So in the event I want to retrieve and tweak a picture from 6 months passed (raw file and jpg no longer living on the internal SSD, therefore the Library won't be able to locate it 'missing file' etc), can it find the same file name if I point LR to check on another drive also (like the external hdd, switched on obviously)?

That shouldn't be problem. Lightroom can manage multiple volumes. I don't know if there's a limit, but my Lightroom catalog points to images on several internal drives on my tower computer, external hard drives, other computers on the network…and it's no problem to move images between those volumes, within Lightroom.

There may be a minor issue in Windows, where Lightroom might become confused when drive letters become associated with different volumes than they were previously. I think the solution is to permanently assign drive letters, but I'm not sure because I'm using Lightroom on a Mac where this issue doesn't come up because drive letters aren't used.

dunker56   wrote

Failing that I might have to rethink about LR being used as a 'library catalogue' system and treat as a standalone editor.

If going down this route, can you;

a) Make LR work a little faster, turn off the Library Catalogue features?

Since cataloging (that is, generating an image preview and adding its data to the database) is never optional and cannot be turned off, you won't save time on an image by image basis. The only time savings would come from cataloging a few images you want to edit, instead of hundreds you want to organize.

If you're only interested in the Develop module in Lightroom, and you're a Creative Cloud member, you can download Adobe Bridge, use it as a no-catalog file browser to browse your images, and open them into Adobe Camera Raw inside Bridge to do your raw editing. The raw editing options inside Adobe Camera Raw as basically the same as in the Lightroom develop module.

I am a member, I never knew what Bridge was for, interesting. I sometimes go between LR and PS (masking stuff usually), I seem to pass through Camera Raw at the time but never really mess around with it.

[dunker56]

dj_paige  wrote

But what about long term... can LR's catalogue point to two locations? So in the event I want to retrieve and tweak a picture from 6 months passed (raw file and jpg no longer living on the internal SSD, therefore the Library won't be able to locate it 'missing file' etc), can it find the same file name if I point LR to check on another drive also (like the external hdd, switched on obviously)?

Yes, Lightroom can point to photos on multiple drives.

The photos now on your SSD can be moved to another drive via Adobe Lightroom - Find moved or missing files and folders (see the section "Part 2 — Updating Folder Location").

As stated above by https://forums.adobe.com/people/Just+Shoot+Me  , don't put your photos on the SSD in the first place. Put them on the external drive straight out of the camera.

Failing that I might have to rethink about LR being used as a 'library catalogue' system and treat as a standalone editor.

If going down this route, can you;

a) Make LR work a little faster, turn off the Library Catalogue features?

You cannot make LR work faster by turning off the Library. It is not possible to turn off the Library. Library has no influence on the speed of other Lightroom modules, such as editing. The whole idea makes no sense. If you are having speed problems with Lightroom, you need to describe in detail exactly what actions are slow in Lightroom.

b) When it comes to Export time, could I export a Jpg of the edit (which i normally do) as well as simultaneously exporting a RAW/DNG of the edit (so that if I import that same DNG export again, LR can see the adjustments I made? Or are they all reset?

This is unnecessary extra work, and a horrible workflow. As stated above, put the photos on the external drive straight out of the camera, and then none of this is necessary.

Thanks for that.

Ok so first off I won't be adding the files from the camera straight onto the external disks, for two reasons;

1) Speed. I'm no techy but I am imagining having the raw files on the internal ssd (960 evo NVMe 250gb M2) will be a faster and smoother editing process than through USB 3 to HDDs. I could of course be completely wrong, that in reality there is no efficiency by having the files on the same disk as LR, as I said I'm no techy, I'm basing this on perhaps 'old days' mentality and I am not wholly up to date with todays tech.

2) And now for the more important reason, noise and hassle. I photograph often, EOD sometimes, and the Quad Dock is similar in size and noise (from its fans) as a small desktop pc. I bought a small NUC Skull Canyon PC to try and move away from having a constant whirring away of a fan right next to me, to integrate and use the Quad dock on such frequent basis I think really defeats the purpose of the NUC SC. I of course understand the logic in suggesting it, it wouldn't be an issue to others and perhaps a younger version of me, but right now that's not what I want the Dock to be doing. I want the Dock to be in RAID and then once a week or fortnight it's turned on and stuff migrated off the internal SSD (to create space once again) and onto that.

Now as for my ludicrous idea of using LR without a catalog, that train of though stemmed from a 'slowed' down process in many regards to some other stand alone apps I have used, in various ways of which I'll try and explain briefly. My thinking was when it actually came to the Develop modue, that part was fluid, it's everything else that's kinda slowish, so was kinda wondering if there was a 'Develop only' mode to LR, but of course not and I see why now.

But perhaps someone can suggest ways to help make my workflow process quicker (from a LR only perspective);

1) First thing is the import, and then loupe mode and start the culling. I've watched a few youtube tutorials on this, what I'm finding is the process when marking/tagging a file (x or p) is slow and laggy unless I build previews. That 1:1 preview building takes quite a lot of time, I haven't yet tried building any other preview mode, but considering I am buidling previews only with the intention of culling (just so i can zoom in, see if the parts I meant to be are sharp and in focus etc or not), it feels like a slow process. Considering I could fire up something like Faststone and not have that lag and build preview time... so at this point in time I'm not sure if I abandon LR from the culling process entirely or not.

2) What i've noticed is the larger the catalog the longer times to load LR and performance in general. LR from my experience works better if restarted after an hour or so, and where possible deleting files from the library and keeping the library picture count down.

These two things made me ask about a 'lighter' version of LR, standalone editor etc, but I have the answer to that question. Use Bridge>Camera RAW>PS if going down that route.

Where I need help now (I think), is if I can get away with quicker preview build times (perhaps I don't really need 1:1 previews, especially considering the majority of these files will get culled) and then also once I have migrated the exported Jpgs and initial RAW files from their original location on the SSD (lets say it's 'C:\Users\xxxx\Pictures\Pentax In' for import and 'C:\Users\xxxx\Pictures\Pentax Out' for export), once these files have been moved from here to the external hdd, how do I tell LR to still 'see' them, so that if say in 2 months time I do need to go back and reedit (turn on the external hdd) LR can see the file (with the last adjustments made) and I can edit?

fwiw there shouldn't be an instance where the same file exists in two locations at once. I will be 'Moving' the file to the external hdd, not copying.

[JP Hess]

I'll only make one comment about importing your images directly to the external hard drive. You won't notice any difference in performance if you do that. The catalog should be on a hard drive that performs well and has plenty of room. Your images can be distributed across several external hard drives, and that won't impact performance at all.

[dunker56]

JimHess  wrote

I'll only make one comment about importing your images directly to the external hard drive. You won't notice any difference in performance if you do that. The catalog should be on a hard drive that performs well and has plenty of room. Your images can be distributed across several external hard drives, and that won't impact performance at all.

Ok, still won't transfer the files direct to the HDD everything due to point 2) that I brought up, but nice to know that you think there isn't any difference in my machine specs and using the internal SSD to do stuff like build previews vs USB>HDD.

How do I go about telling LR to 'watch' another location/directory then? Or doesn't it quite work like that? I'm a little confused over the whole Library/catalog.

If I'm importing pics from the directories mentioned above, and exporting them also (both of which are the internal SSD), once they're moved to another HDD, how does LR 'find them'?

[JP Hess]

dunker56  wrote

JimHess   wrote

I'll only make one comment about importing your images directly to the external hard drive. You won't notice any difference in performance if you do that. The catalog should be on a hard drive that performs well and has plenty of room. Your images can be distributed across several external hard drives, and that won't impact performance at all.

Ok, still won't transfer the files direct to the HDD everything due to point 2) that I brought up, but nice to know that you think there isn't any difference in my machine specs and using the internal SSD to do stuff like build previews vs USB>HDD.

How do I go about telling LR to 'watch' another location/directory then? Or doesn't it quite work like that? I'm a little confused over the whole Library/catalog.

If I'm importing pics from the directories mentioned above, and exporting them also (both of which are the internal SSD), once they're moved to another HDD, how does LR 'find them'?

What do you mean tell Lightroom to watch another location? All you have to do is choose that external hard drive as the destination and it will show up in your library module. You just choose that folder on the external hard drive like you would any other folder. It's possible to have your images spread across multiple hard drives Lightroom doesn't care where the images are located. If you want to put the folders on the external hard drive before you import them, that works too.

[dunker56]

JimHess  wrote

dunker56   wrote

JimHess    wrote

I'll only make one comment about importing your images directly to the external hard drive. You won't notice any difference in performance if you do that. The catalog should be on a hard drive that performs well and has plenty of room. Your images can be distributed across several external hard drives, and that won't impact performance at all.

Ok, still won't transfer the files direct to the HDD everything due to point 2) that I brought up, but nice to know that you think there isn't any difference in my machine specs and using the internal SSD to do stuff like build previews vs USB>HDD.

How do I go about telling LR to 'watch' another location/directory then? Or doesn't it quite work like that? I'm a little confused over the whole Library/catalog.

If I'm importing pics from the directories mentioned above, and exporting them also (both of which are the internal SSD), once they're moved to another HDD, how does LR 'find them'?

What do you mean tell Lightroom to watch another location? All you have to do is choose that external hard drive as the destination and it will show up in your library module. You just choose that folder on the external hard drive like you would any other folder. It's possible to have your images spread across multiple hard drives Lightroom doesn't care where the images are located. If you want to put the folders on the external hard drive before you import them, that works too.

Ah ok, so if I have this right, initially all my exports are to my internal SSD, if I export even just ONE picture to the External HDD, then LR will consider that a directory and add any files in that location to its library?

[JP Hess]

Do you mean if you import to the external hard drive? But yes, as soon as you import to the external hard drive that folder on the external hard drive will be added to the library. I suppose it would add exports as well as long as you are adding them to your catalog. That's something I usually don't do.

[dunker56]

JimHess  wrote

Do you mean if you import to the external hard drive? But yes, as soon as you import to the external hard drive that folder on the external hard drive will be added to the library. I suppose it would add exports as well as long as you are adding them to your catalog. That's something I usually don't do.

Bit confused here, typically you import from not to?

I'm meaning I will only ever import from the internal ssd (ideally), I will also export to the same internal ssd. Yet when I have moved the files to another HDD, how can I get LR to keep track of that 'move' (without having to clear the library and re add manually all over again).

I think much of the confusion here stems from the part that LR does not automatically/watch and import files from a directory, you have to manually do it. You can't tell it to watch 'x' folder and if it fills up with files add them to the library. And if the current library has files missing, then remove them etc.
Lots of other software, file sharing/streaming software for example might ask for directories where they 'watch' and any content added ore remove from that is reflected in the programs library. I'm kinda hoping LR would be like this, it notices the files are no longer on C: but is keeping an eye on F: and can see the same filenames etc so they still are accessible (of course provided the external hdd is turned on).

The computer i have has a direct SD card reader, I would like to input the card from the camera into the SD Card on the NUC, set it to 'automatically import' when I do that, or copy the contents from the sd card over to the internal ssd, get LR to import the files from there, do the cull, do the edit, do the export (same drive), and have them sitting there for awhile before transferring (move not copy) the files off the ssd to an external. I want to do this as I edit and photograph often, but I do not want the whirr and noise and hassle of turning on additional computing equipment, if I wanted fan noise all day I would just stay with a desktop tower and have the hdd's housed inside.

I think I'm just going to have to do some testing with LR...

[Just Shoot Me]

dunker56  wrote

JimHess   wrote

Do you mean if you import to the external hard drive? But yes, as soon as you import to the external hard drive that folder on the external hard drive will be added to the library. I suppose it would add exports as well as long as you are adding them to your catalog. That's something I usually don't do.

Bit confused here, typically you import from not to?

I'm meaning I will only ever import from the internal ssd (ideally), I will also export to the same internal ssd. Yet when I have moved the files to another HDD, how can I get LR to keep track of that 'move' (without having to clear the library and re add manually all over again).

So you manually copy files to the internal SSD and then import them into LR using the Add option in the LR import window?

You do realize that you can use LR to Copy the files off the memory card of your camera to any drive that connected to your computer during the importing process.

You use LR to Move the files, and folders they are in if you like, to the external drive.

But you don't have to do that. During the import process you can have LR copy them to a folder on the external drive. Alleviating the need to move them later.

There is no speed difference having the images on the internal SSD compared to having them on the external drive.

Once imported LR never touches the original files. You aren't gaining anything by having images on a SSD.

I store all my image files on an internal standard rotating hard drive.

With USB 3 the speed of standard rotating external hard drive is about the same as if it was installed inside the computer case and connected directly to a SATA port.

dunker56  wrote

I think much of the confusion here stems from the part that LR does not automatically/watch and import files from a directory, you have to manually do it. You can't tell it to watch 'x' folder and if it fills up with files add them to the library. And if the current library has files missing, then remove them etc.
Lots of other software, file sharing/streaming software for example might ask for directories where they 'watch' and any content added ore remove from that is reflected in the programs library. I'm kinda hoping LR would be like this, it notices the files are no longer on C: but is keeping an eye on F: and can see the same filenames etc so they still are accessible (of course provided the external hdd is turned on).

You really don't understand how LR is designed to work and how to properly work with LR.

I Personally have not manually copied any image file to my computer in years. I use the LR import feature to copy the files from the SD cards of my camera in to folders by the date of when the images were taken. I have LR do all that during the import process.

The cards are also Auto Ejected once the copying and importing is completed.

You can have LR remove references to missing image files by using the Synchronize Folder option

LR is an Image cataloging and editing program. It is not a File sharing or streaming program (although you can upload images to file sharing sites from LR).

I think you should look for some other piece of software for your needs.

[dunker56]

So you manually copy files to the internal SSD and then import them into LR using the Add option in the LR import window?

Yup. Or right click a single file > Open With > Lightroom, then once in lightroom check all and import.

Please, lemme explain something briefly. I have been using LR and PS for well over a year, once I get to the editing stage I'm pretty competent, I know my ignorance at this particular phase of the program make have you shaking your head in disbelief but there was method to my madness (and may still be).

I found (a year or two ago when first experimenting with LR) that the import process was slow, so I went hunting for other software, basically to handle the viewing and culling part of photography. I tried Fastrawviewer and Faststone, staying with Faststone mainly. It seemed to allow me very quickly to view the RAW DNG files and mark/tag the file, what I consider the first phase of culling (i tend to cull a bit more after than).

Then once I have culled a good 70% I might then import the remaining 30% into LR (I was slower building at 1:1 previews) and cull some more. I may still opt for this workflow as I can cut down on the build previews significantly with a first swing round of culling. So yeh, even tho I could see Win 10 was offering to import direct from the sd card I never opted for that process, I figured it must copy the files off from the sd card somewhere, otherwise you'd never be able to retrieve your card again without losing the library

You use LR to Move the files, and folders they are in if you like, to the external drive.

Ah... now we're getting somewhere. So, lets imagine my SSD is getting kinda full, I now want to migrate my initial RAW files along with their finished exported Jpgs to a different drive. All along I have been thinking I manually move the files via windows explorer and LR has a hissy fit not knowing now where to look to find the files so that the library can stay intact.

I'll google this process but totally feel free to treat my like an idiot and mansplain this process, I am thick skinned and prefer this way

But you don't have to do that. During the import process you can have LR copy them to a folder on the external drive. Alleviating the need to move them later.

There is no speed difference having the images on the internal SSD compared to having them on the external drive.

Once imported LR never touches the original files. You aren't gaining anything by having images on a SSD.

I store all my image files on an internal standard rotating hard drive.

With USB 3 the speed of standard rotating external hard drive is about the same as if it was installed inside the computer case and connected directly to a SATA port.

I don't have to, but i want to (for reasons explained multiple times before). Ok, so we've established the myth that editing files on the internal SSD is no quicker than an external HDD via USB3, but I still don't want to do that as it involves turning the Quad Dock on from it's awkward location with it's noisy whirring fans on a daily or EOD basis. I of course don't mind toggling these quad docks on once a fortnight or once a week or once a month, but not daily. That's the advantage of a NUC, it's super quiet (and so it should be) if not having to cool multiple HDD's all the time.

Ah... now here's where you can help clarify something more for me. You say I'm not gaining anything by having the images on the SSD, but don't I need them there to actually edit? Because if we remove the files after importing are we not giving way to the 'missing file' issue? Does the import do so much more in LR, so that once I have the files imported I could actually rid myself of the RAW files (on the internal SSD) and edit away? I didn't think that was possible...? I understand that the original RAW files imported are not themselves altered (you'd have to do an export DNG/RAW for that? But I always understood that LR would need to be able to access/see the files in order to use Develop mode.

You really don't understand how LR is designed to work and how to properly work with LR.

Nop, not in this specific aspect (otherwise I wouldn't be posting here hehehe). I'm fairly competent in the develop mode however.

I think you should look for some other piece of software for your needs.

I won't be doing that, I have the subscription to LR, PS and I use the Adobe Portfolio, I also have a number of Topaz Plugins that I like to use and take advantage from time to time. I find LR a little more user friendly than PS and I know my way around it better than some other software. It's all just from a case of file management and handling of the catalog that I need educated in. I am genuinely thankful for the help and assistance thus far, even tho it may appear I am being awkward that is not my intention, I am just trying to manage my physical work space effectively and rid myself of constant annoyances (even tho these translate to another variety of pest but in my mind is definitely more preferred).

[dj_paige]

Ok so first off I won't be adding the files from the camera straight onto the external disks, for two reasons;

1) Speed. I'm no techy but I am imagining having the raw files on the internal ssd (960 evo NVMe 250gb M2) will be a faster and smoother editing process than through USB 3 to HDDs. I could of course be completely wrong, that in reality there is no efficiency by having the files on the same disk as LR, as I said I'm no techy, I'm basing this on perhaps 'old days' mentality and I am not wholly up to date with todays tech.

There is no noticeable speed difference. There is no efficiency in having the files on the same disk, other than a trivial amount that you will never notice.

I want the Dock to be in RAID and then once a week or fortnight it's turned on and stuff migrated off the internal SSD (to create space once again) and onto that.

Unnecessary extra work, plus possibility of making errors. Put the photos right on the external HD when they come out of the camera, make your life simple.

what I'm finding is the process when marking/tagging a file (x or p) is slow and laggy unless I build previews

Yes, of course, this is by design. Somewhere along the way, if you want to see the photo in loupe mode, the computer has to do some work to render the photo the proper size and with the proper details. You can generate the 1:1 previews on import, and then import takes longer; or you can generate the 1:1 previews on the fly, as your are doing, and then the culling process takes longer. It's your choice, but you can't avoid having the computer do the work to allow you to see the photo in loupe mode properly.

What i've noticed is the larger the catalog the longer times to load LR and performance in general. LR from my experience works better if restarted after an hour or so, and where possible deleting files from the library and keeping the library picture count down.

There are many causes of slowness. Catalog size is not one of them (exception: making backups).

Your entire discussion seems to be fighting against the way Lightroom is designed to work. If you really don't like the way Lightroom is designed to work, then you need to use other software, like Bridge, for example. If you are going to use Lightroom, don't fight it, find a workflow (as we have advised) that works with Lightroom's features instead of against it.

[dunker56]

dj_paige  wrote

Ok so first off I won't be adding the files from the camera straight onto the external disks, for two reasons;

1) Speed. I'm no techy but I am imagining having the raw files on the internal ssd (960 evo NVMe 250gb M2) will be a faster and smoother editing process than through USB 3 to HDDs. I could of course be completely wrong, that in reality there is no efficiency by having the files on the same disk as LR, as I said I'm no techy, I'm basing this on perhaps 'old days' mentality and I am not wholly up to date with todays tech.

There is no noticeable speed difference. There is no efficiency in having the files on the same disk, other than a trivial amount that you will never notice.

I want the Dock to be in RAID and then once a week or fortnight it's turned on and stuff migrated off the internal SSD (to create space once again) and onto that.

Unnecessary extra work, plus possibility of making errors. Put the photos right on the external HD when they come out of the camera, make your life simple.

what I'm finding is the process when marking/tagging a file (x or p) is slow and laggy unless I build previews

Yes, of course, this is by design. Somewhere along the way, if you want to see the photo in loupe mode, the computer has to do some work to render the photo the proper size and with the proper details. You can generate the 1:1 previews on import, and then import takes longer; or you can generate the 1:1 previews on the fly, as your are doing, and then the culling process takes longer. It's your choice, but you can't avoid having the computer do the work to allow you to see the photo in loupe mode properly.

What i've noticed is the larger the catalog the longer times to load LR and performance in general. LR from my experience works better if restarted after an hour or so, and where possible deleting files from the library and keeping the library picture count down.

There are many causes of slowness. Catalog size is not one of them (exception: making backups).

Your entire discussion seems to be fighting against the way Lightroom is designed to work. If you really don't like the way Lightroom is designed to work, then you need to use other software, like Bridge, for example. If you are going to use Lightroom, don't fight it, find a workflow (as we have advised) that works with Lightroom's features instead of against it.

I appreciate your time to reply. I have however stipulated that I won't do this, I understand I am being somewhat difficult, you are not obliged to help me any further if it pains you. However I will say this;

Even if I had a 500gb or 1tb internal SSD, you eventually run into this problem media needs to be moved off to create more room, but you still want the program to find the moved media. That's all I'm really asking for at this time, how to do this with LR. Its the reason I opted for a smaller SSD than paying twice or four times for a 500gb or 1tb SSD, I can work with a 100gb 'buffer' of space on this internal SSD, when it gets close to that, migrate the media away. This way I am not subjected to constant whirring of fans on a daily basis, nor reaching to switch the HDD on or off constantly.

I guess Faststone is just using jpg previews which is why its so quick to fire up the pics and let me have a quick look around during the culling process. Is it perhaps (for my purposes) overkill to be building 1:1 previews at this time? I noticed in the menu there is 'Standard-Sized' and 'Smart' previews, are these quicker and give a general idea of the shot taken?

Well, it's been awhile since I removed say 700 shots from the catalog, it definitely made loading times and the whole LR experience smoother and quicker once emptying that library. I guess the experience of this process will be user dependent, the specs of the machine and what not, it certainly wasn't imagined.

I don't think I'm fighting against Lightroom's 'design', a few people here have hinted that LR can 'point' to many different places for its catalog, no one seems to be actually holding my hand tightly enough to guide me through this process.

Let's pretend I have a 500 pictures in the library, all of them consist of being edited and adjusted (raw files), they are located; C:\Users\xxxx\Pictures\Pentax In. Each of those RAW files has been exported as a Jpg, those files exist here; C:\Users\xxxx\Pictures\Pentax Out. It's clear out time. I move (not copy) both of those directories to my external hdd.

Now i know when I boot LR up, the pictures might look like they are there in the library, but as soon as I go to edit a file it'll say something like 'file missing'. It is going to be very seldom I ever actually need to revisit these files again, but on the off chance that I do I would like LR to be able to see them (of course realising that this means I need to toggle on the Quad Dock so that it can find them again).

How and is this possible? That's now the crux of my post.

[Conrad C]

There are a couple of places where your conclusions are not necessarily related to some observations you've made:

dunker56  wrote

1) First thing is the import, and then loupe mode and start the culling. I've watched a few youtube tutorials on this, what I'm finding is the process when marking/tagging a file (x or p) is slow and laggy unless I build previews. That 1:1 preview building takes quite a lot of time…

Many YouTube tutorials on this subject became outdated when Lightroom Classic came out in October. It is true that you used to have to build 1:1 previews before you could cull quickly, and no one liked that delay. But in Lightroom Classic, you can now import with the Build Previews option set to "Embedded & Sidecar". With that setting, Lightroom will actually use the previews that were embedded into the raw files by the camera. These are the same previews that Faststone, Photo Mechanic, and others use, so when you use Embedded & Sidecar previews in Lightroom, culling is reasonably fast in Lightroom.

The only reason Lightroom didn't use those embedded previews earlier is because they don't match what the Lightroom raw engine would render. But if you're just culling, the exact appearance doesn't matter, so using embedded previews becomes acceptable. If you start editing an image, Lightroom replaces the embedded preview with its own, so that you can accurately see your edits.

dunker56  wrote

2) What i've noticed is the larger the catalog the longer times to load LR and performance in general. LR from my experience works better if restarted after an hour or so, and where possible deleting files from the library and keeping the library picture count down.

According to Adobe and many others, catalog size doesn't affect performance. But what you might actually be seeing is a problem Lightroom has had, specifically in Windows, where it gets slower over time during the same session and would have to be restarted. This specific slowdown is something Adobe has been working on for an upcoming release. In other words, what you're seeing is probably true, but the actual cause may be different than what you've concluded.

There is no need to keep the library picture count down. I'm approaching 100,000 files in my catalog, and there are many Lightroom users who have catalogs containing several times more images than I have.

[dunker56]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Conrad+C  wrote

There are a couple of places where your conclusions are not necessarily related to some observations you've made:

dunker56   wrote

1) First thing is the import, and then loupe mode and start the culling. I've watched a few youtube tutorials on this, what I'm finding is the process when marking/tagging a file (x or p) is slow and laggy unless I build previews. That 1:1 preview building takes quite a lot of time…

Many YouTube tutorials on this subject became outdated when Lightroom Classic came out in October. It is true that you used to have to build 1:1 previews before you could cull quickly, and no one liked that delay. But in Lightroom Classic, you can now import with the Build Previews option set to "Embedded & Sidecar". With that setting, Lightroom will actually use the previews that were embedded into the raw files by the camera. These are the same previews that Faststone, Photo Mechanic, and others use, so when you use Embedded & Sidecar previews in Lightroom, culling is reasonably fast in Lightroom.

The only reason Lightroom didn't use those embedded previews earlier is because they don't match what the Lightroom raw engine would render. But if you're just culling, the exact appearance doesn't matter, so using embedded previews becomes acceptable. If you start editing an image, Lightroom replaces the embedded preview with its own, so that you can accurately see your edits.

dunker56   wrote

2) What i've noticed is the larger the catalog the longer times to load LR and performance in general. LR from my experience works better if restarted after an hour or so, and where possible deleting files from the library and keeping the library picture count down.

According to Adobe and many others, catalog size doesn't affect performance. But what you might actually be seeing is a problem Lightroom has had, specifically in Windows, where it gets slower over time during the same session and would have to be restarted. This specific slowdown is something Adobe has been working on for an upcoming release. In other words, what you're seeing is probably true, but the actual cause may be different than what you've concluded.

There is no need to keep the library picture count down. I'm approaching 100,000 files in my catalog, and there are many Lightroom users who have catalogs containing several times more images than I have.

Excellent! This sounds like what I am looking for, will look into that and yes no doubt outdated info.

And your observations about LR being slower once the catalog is binned vs restarts could also be true, tho I am sure the increase in speed and efficiency was felt immediately after an empty before a restart, but this was awhile ago now (different pc, different specs).

[JP Hess]

It is not possible to turn off the Lightroom "catalog feature" because the catalog is literally the only file that Lightroom opens. It is the center, the central file of the Lightroom system. Without a catalog, Lightroom cannot function. Everything you do using Lightroom is stored in that catalog. Your images are simply stored in folders on your computer. When you import images into Lightroom, essentially all you are doing is adding those images as records and the Lightroom catalog, which is a database. Lightroom does not make any changes directly to the images on your computer. All changes, adjustments, keywords, are simply information that is stored in the catalog. In order to have an image that includes all of the things you have done to it in Lightroom, it is necessary to export a copy.