Is this workflow possible/convenient?

[Vigalpo]

Hello all:

Recently I bought an Intel NUC and I'm very happy with it. I'd put a a fast SSD in it, 970 Evo, but I don't want to store my pictures in this internal SSD because it will be filled sooner than later. What i want to do is the following:

I have a 1TB Samsung T5 SSD that I can connect to one USB 3.1 Gen 2 of the NUC. This would be my daily working disk. Let's say this contains the pictures from the last two years. THis disk is as fast as an internal (SATA) SSD so I can work smoothly with my pictures.

I have a 4TB Lacie USB 3.0 disk, magnetic spinning disk, so much slower than the Samsung. This would be my backup disk and would contain all the pictures I have taken since I bought my first digital camera 15 years ago. I also backup my pictures to 100GB BDs so if the disk is near full I can safely delete the oldest ones.

I had set two catalogs, one for the daily working disk and another for the backup disk. Both are in the internal SSD, not in the removable disks. Is this right?

After a shooting session I import the raw files from the camera card to the daily working disk and a copy is made to the backup disk. Then I disconnect the backup disk and start developing the pictures in the working disk. In this process pictures are rated, metadata is changed and are developed and get an .xmp file, when Lightroom is not enough I continue editing in Photoshop, so some PSD files that are not in the backup disk are generated, also some raw files are deleted because I decide it doesn't worth to keep them.

When I'm finished working with the pictures (this can take months) I would like to copy all the changes I've made in the working disk (in the catalog and in the fliles themselves) to the back up disk. Sometimes I think I have finished but I come back to work with a picture so I have to repeat the process.

How can I  do all this with Lightroom?

[dj_paige · Accepted solution]

There no speed benefit (or other benefit) to putting your photos on an SSD. Put your catalog file on the SSD, photos on a slow spinning disk. Your workflow ought to be to copy the photos from the camera card directly to the spinning HD, which eliminates the step of moving them there later.

I had set two catalogs, one for the daily working disk and another for the backup disk. Both are in the internal SSD, not in the removable disks. Is this right?

If your backup is on the same disk as the original working catalog, then you do not have a backup. Why? Because if that disk fails, then you have zero copies of your catalog file, and I'm guessing that would not be a good situation for you. Backups must go on a different disk than the original.

I also backup my pictures to 100GB BDs so if the disk is near full I can safely delete the oldest ones.

Safely delete the oldest ones? I don't follow, but delete photos from your backup set (or from your originals) doesn't sound good to me.

After a shooting session I import the raw files from the camera card to the daily working disk and a copy is made to the backup disk.

If you have a concern about eventually running out of space on the "daily working disk", then don't put your photos there in the first place. You are simply creating more work for yourself in the long run. Put the photos on the external spinning disk straight out of the camera, save yourself a step. The idea of a "daily working disk" really doesn't make sense in Lightroom.

When I'm finished working with the pictures (this can take months) I would like to copy all the changes I've made in the working disk (in the catalog and in the fliles themselves) to the back up disk.

Photos should go on the external spinning HD immediately. Then no need to copy. Backups must go to a different disk, this can be done via any backup utility or via Lightroom at the time of import. You also need to make regular and automated backups of your catalog file, using the Lightroom function to make catalog backups, said catalog backups must (I said "must", this is not optional) go on a different hard disk than the original.

[Vigalpo]

Thank you for your advise. It was shocking for me to realize that there is no benefit in storing the working pictures in a fast SSD. Is that true also for Photoshop editing? It's hard for me to admit I was wasting my money when I bought the Samsung T5 that is not exactly cheap.

Your comment also made me realize that when I save the pictures to the Blu-Ray discs and then delete them from my spinning HD, I lose all the information in the Lightroom catalog. Is there a solution for this?

[dj_paige]

Vigalpo  wrote

Thank you for your advise. It was shocking for me to realize that there is no benefit in storing the working pictures in a fast SSD. Is that true also for Photoshop editing? It's hard for me to admit I was wasting my money when I bought the Samsung T5 that is not exactly cheap.

I don't know if Photoshop works that way. You ought to ask in the PHotoshop Forum.

Your comment also made me realize that when I save the pictures to the Blu-Ray discs and then delete them from my spinning HD, I lose all the information in the Lightroom catalog. Is there a solution for this?

Yes, the solution is to not delete the photos from Lightroom. You can move the photos to whatever disk you want and keep them in Lightroom and then you don't lose the information.

[JP Hess]

There is no speed benefit to having your master images on the SSD. The master images are accessed very little once they are imported. You want your catalog and previews on the SSD, but your images can be imported to a spinning drive and there will be no hit in Lightroom performance at all. Importing your master images to the SSD and then eventually moving them onto a spinning back up drive can be an exercise for you if that is something you really want to do to practice your computer skills. But it isn't really necessary.

[Vigalpo]

Thank you for yout advice!

[Guest]

I'm going to disagree.   I'd explain why, but I've been attacked by 2 other community professionals over correct posts (one of them even went on to make a new post later about the "new feature" in Windows that he'd been arguing didn't exist with me) so basically go do your own research.