Best way would be to copy all the images and the catalog file on the external device and connect the external device to any machine on which you want to use the Lightroom. By doing this Lightroom catalog will be updated on every use.
And we don't suggest involving the network location while using Lightroom for the better performance.
1 person found this helpful
The database is single user only and hence is not suitable for networks.
The solution I have is to keep the catalog with previews and smart previews on an external drive and images on a second external drive. Having the catalog and files on the same drive can slow down access.
I travel a lot and use two laptops so just plug in to the one I wish to use.
Not too inconvenient at all... and relatively risk free when adequately backed up.
That is precisely what I want to avoid...! I want to be able to grab my laptop and go and process images anywhere (within range of my home wifi) or sit down and use my desktop PC and work on the same catalog, without having to have a usb drive dangling from the laptop wherever I go....
How have you overcome the problem of changing drive letters when you swap one or other drive between laptops...? One of the advantages I see of having the images & catalog permanently on a network share (or some such) would be that I could ensure that the PC & Laptop always sees it (them) as the same drive letter.
I suppose I could have a local catalog on my PC & laptop that both reference the same set of images. I could then write a batch file to pull the 'master' catalog off the PC before starting LR and send it back after LR closes....perhaps...I'm a bit rusty with CMD batch scripts
Of course, I'm assuming here that I can have a local catalog referencing remote images...?
To prevent Windows from changing drive letters on you, you need to manually assign the letters and use letters higher in the alphabet, say "L" or higher.
You can store the catalog file on a network drive with your image files. You just cannot use the catalog while it is on the network drive. Using batch scripts you could probably do something like:
copy the catalog from the network to the local drive
wait 10 seconds
if exist *.lock goto loop
copy the catalog from the local drive to the network drive
I use Macs and I number/name my drives with unique identifiers.
You can have the Catalog locally and images remote however multiple catalogs creates its own issues.
Personally I haven't tried having a catalog accessible from say dropbox so can't comment .......
Hi ManiacJoe...yup.. that would do it...TY
What really rankles is that writing it's even necessary in the first place...the 'LR doesn't work with networks because performance' excuse smacks of lazy programming, or a least design. We live in an increasingly connected world - fast home wifi is here to stay..get over it!
Actually, to give the devs their due (LR is a great product! I've been a loyal user/purchaser since v2), I suspect that the root of this issue lies with those responsible for the prioritisation of the features that get put into the product. The work to address/work around/solve the cross-network performance 'challenge' would be all under-the-covers, so its no doubt not seen as 'important', compared to the latest shiny new photo processing widget, so gets de-prioritised all the time.
I work in the field of software requirements' capture, analysis & prioritisation, and I see the same thing all the time. Development effort to address usability issues (that would benefit existing customers) always gets side-tracked in favour of whizzy new features aimed at attracting new customers...
The prohibition of network access is not about performance. Network access is purposely prevented to stop people from trying to share the database with multiple users at the same time.
There was a decision made by the very top people in the area at Adobe (think Knoll, Hamburg, et al) to have a single use database for Lightroom so as to prevent possible corruption of image files. One of the major premises for Lightroom is non destructive editing and protection of image data, allowing two users to access a database is fine but for two users to be then accessing the raw files (yes it is just read only but they are undocumented file types from differing cameras and manufacturers) is too big a risk for all concerned.