Copy link to clipboard
Copied
For each client, I import the raw images into a new/separate Lightroom folder. Once I've finished editing, I move the raw files to an external drive (meaning the Lightroom folder is now empty). Is there a way to archive the original Lightroom folder (at this point it's empty since I moved the raw files off the computer)? I ask because I want to be able to see/use those edits in the future if necessary by just locating the raw image files back onto my computer.
Any thought would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Your best option is to export the Export the Folder as a Catalog and include the negatives. This will create a stand alone catalog with the images that you can archive. You can then remove the images from your catalog and the hard drive.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
There is no need to create folders specifically for Lightrooom - just import from whatever folder the raw files are in.
Since the files are not "in" Lightroom, but are only referenced by the catalog, they can be anywhere on your computer, external drives included.
Here's what I would do in your situation:
You can now access these files normally from your main catalog, provided that the external drive is connected.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Thank you! I actually want to find a way to move the folder in lightroom when I'm finished w the photos in it so that way it's no longer on my to-do list. Any thoughts?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Moving large numbers of files is best done outside of LR. For example, when moving a whole folder, use your computer's file browser, then "relocate" or "find missing" on that one folder in the LR Folders panel.
LR will sometimes drop the ball when moving many files. When this happens, often times the files are lost forever.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
goCoreygoPhoto wrote
Thank you! I actually want to find a way to move the folder in lightroom when I'm finished w the photos in it so that way it's no longer on my to-do list. Any thoughts?
For new photos:
Don't put the photos in the first location!! If you are now moving the photos from the first location to a second location after you work on them, put them in this second location straight out of the camera, when you import them into Lightroom. Save yourself some steps each time. There's no benefit to the workflow that moves photos from one location to a second location.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Don't develop a workflow where you put photos in one location (let's call this location A) to edit them and then move the photos to another location (let's call this location B) when you're done.
Instead, either leave the photos where they are (location A), or better yet, when the photos comes straight out of the camera, put them in their final location (location B) and edit them from there. You will make your life so much simpler, and ... when you want to use the photos in the future, there's no need to locate them and then "just locating the raw image files back onto my computer."
Why do all this work of moving photos when it's completely unnecessary?
The solution above by Per Berntsen​ works well for photos you have already imported and edited in Lightroom. My discussion applies to new photos.
I would not advise the solution above by Theresa J​, it is simply unnecessary to do the work to create catalogs and then delete photos from Lightroom and move things from here to there, and move them back later if you still want to use those photos; you get no benefits over the method I have described, and the method I have described is a lot less work, no moving of photos, no creating catalogs, etc.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
If the final destination is an external drive, or in my case a server, isn't it better for lightroom to work from the files on your local machine initially?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
"If the final destination is an external drive, or in my case a server, isn't it better for lightroom to work from the files on your local machine initially?"
Better? In what sense?
If you mean is it faster, then no, the speed of the disk where the photos are stored has such a trivial effect on Lightroom Classic that you will never notice the difference. And even that trivial difference in speed is lost later because then you have to take the extra time to move the photos at some point to a different drive. When the photos come straight out of the camera, put them onto the disk where they will be stored; do not put them on disk 1 and then later move them to disk 2.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I can think of some exceptions:
- if the connection to the archive is spotty or sometimes slow due to traffic (shared network drive)
- if it's non-existent (shooting on location and either tethered or importing immeditely for quick edits)
- if your archive is online (the OPs is not, but it's a common consideration)
- if you have multiple versions of your archive (you should) that need to be synced
- surely there are more
More importantly though, you're basically saying it's best to import or shoot straight to your archive, and make edits to it live. Even when the speed/convenience factors above are not an issue, I have to disagree. An archive is a photographer's entire body of work, spanning their entire career, and it should be kept separate from working files. For redundancy, it should exist in multiple physical locations which requires syncing/duplicating which gets messy if you're also making edits to it. Not only does it get messy, but it increases the chances of a mistake causing an important file to get lost.
In short, if it works for you to work directly from you archive, that's great, but I don't think it's going to work for everyone, and I would strongly advise against it.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
An archive is a photographer's entire body of work, spanning their entire career, and it should be kept separate from working files.
Well, this is one of the great advantages of Lightroom. It never changes the image portion of your original files. So it doesn't matter if you keep it separate and call it an "archive", or you store your photos any way you want and don't call it an "archive", you can't lose or damage the photos by using Lightroom. I don't need to keep stuff separate in order to be sure that my original images aren't going to be changed by my use of Lightroom. I just put them where I want them to be stored, knowing that Lightroom will not change my photos — in essense, I archive them immediately out of the camera. I agree that backups are critical.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I agree with DJ. The better workflow is to put the images in their final location at the front end. Lr has no problem seeing, and working with images on external drives, as long as the drive is connected. I was just providing you a simple solution for your current setup.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Yes, I agree, thank you! But what If I wanted to mark that I was finished editing that photo deck (the folder in lightroom) so that was I know to move onto the next client????
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I would just remove the folder from Lr. Then you don't have to think about it again.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Yeah but then I lose all the edits I made.....
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
You don't have to. There are 2 options to save the edits. First, you can save manually save the metadata by selecting an image and doing a CMD-S, or CNTRL-S. Or you can turn on the preferences to automatically save all the metadata throughout the catalog. The second option could slow down your workflow though if you leave it turned on. Go to catalog settings>metadata to turn it on.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Or there is a third option which goes back to by original suggestion. Export the folder as a stand alone catalog. This will save everything, including collections if you made them. You don't need to include the negative files unless you are moving the images.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
https://forums.adobe.com/people/Theresa+J wrote
I would just remove the folder from Lr. Then you don't have to think about it again.
I vehemently disagree.
Don't remove folders from LR. This also removes the edits from LR. There's no reason to do this, it is work that has no benefit, and requires additional work if you want the photos back in LR for later use (and by the way, don't make a mistake along the way).
Leave the photos in LR. Every other solution is more effort, and has more possibility of error. The original poster has not expressed the concept or need to "don't have to think about it again".
To indicate that the editing has been finished, you can use keywords, or color labels or just about any other metadata in LR. You don't need to move the photo to indicate editing has been finished.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
DJ, I explained how he could save his edits if he doesn't want to keep the images in his catalog in my additional comments. I understand why he might not want to keep everything in the catalog. I agree that he doesn't have to remove them but maybe he wants to. I do a ton of product photography that I don't want to keep in my main Lr catalog permanently. Sometimes I import images to work on, or do a demo with, or use for a class I'm teaching but when those projects are done I remove them. There is nothing wrong with this workflow either, if you understand where the edits are and how to save them.
It might even make more sense to create individual catalogs for each client and then archive the catalog with the images when the project is done. I use this workflow at times myself.