organization

[subpilotpaul 0]

At the moment I import my RAW files into iphoto but then I don't really want to adjust and save changes to the RAW file in iphoto. Should I save the RAW files in a folder and just import edited photos into iphoto or what? Just curious as to how people manage their photos on their computers? I'm sure there are many ways of doing this but is there a way of doing this that is "the" way?

 

Paul

[jeremypayne 0]

At the moment I import my RAW files into iphoto but then I don't really want to adjust and save changes to the RAW file in iphoto. Should I save the RAW files in a folder and just import edited photos into iphoto or what? Just curious as to how people manage their photos on their computers? I'm sure there are many ways of doing this but is there a way of doing this that is "the" way?

 

Paul

Check out Lightroom or Aperture.

 

I don't really know how iPhoto works these days, but it isn't saving changes to your RAW files. If it works anything like it used to, when you 'save' changes you are generating a jpeg somewhere.

[Scubamoose 0]

I use Lightroom as well.

I Import RAW's into Lightroom and export adjusted JPEG's into galleryes etc. All original RAW's I archive without any adjustments onto external hard drives.

[Steve Williams 0]

Same here Paul. Just as Karel says. Lightroom is built to handle lots of images quickly. If your coming back from a trip with hundreds or even thousands of file to sort through it saves an amazing amount of time,

 

Steve

[subpilotpaul 0]

I was thinking of doing it as you say Steve/Karel, saving my raw images somewhere else and adjusting them through Aperature and then just importing jpegs into iphoto.

 

Paul

[PRC 2]

Lightroom - it's the best way to go.

 

Paul C

[adamhanlon 0]

Another vote for lightroom!

[bvanant 190]

If you are using a Mac then download both Aperture and Lightroom and play with them free for a month. Lots of folks use one or the other; a bit depends on your workflow and other habits. I like lightroom a bit more than aperture but either could work for you and in 30 days you can figure out pretty easily which one is best for you.

Bill

[CompuDude 0]

Yup. Since you're on a Mac, Aperature is a good option, and Lightroom is another worthy option. Lightroom has more users just because there is a PC version, while Aperature is Mac-only (like iPhoto).

 

If you're using iPhoto now, the move to Aperature should be pretty easy, because it's essentially iPhoto on steroids.

 

Neither iPhoto nor Aperature will make any actual changes to your raw files. Both of them perform 100% non-destructive editing... the changes are saved to a separate version of the file so you can roll back top the original at a any time. Lightroom is probably be the same, but I'm less familiar with how it works so no guarantees.

Edited November 28, 2009 by CompuDude

[Scubamoose 0]

Neither iPhoto nor Aperature will make any actual changes to your raw files. Both of them perform 100% non-destructive editing... the changes are saved to a separate version of the file so you can roll back top the original at a any time. Lightroom is probably be the same, but I'm less familiar with how it works so no guarantees.

 

Yep, lightroom works the same way.

[ornate_wrasse 0]

There are other ways of doing this. I'm going to suggest it because it appears you are shooting with a D70S camera. If so, your RAW files are NEF files.

 

I import my photos from the memory card into my computer using Photo Mechanic. It's a program which very quickly imports images into your computer and allows you to asign key words and make selections about which images are keepers and which ones require no further action, among other things. The ones I like I can then open up easily for editing in Capture NX2 which is an excellent RAW converter for those shooting RAW with Nikon cameras. The two programs, Photo Mechanic and Capture NX2 work quite well together.

 

I may end up buying either Lightroom or Aperture, but so far using Photo Mechanic and Capture NX2 work for me.

 

Ellen

[rtrski 20]

At the risk of resurrecting a slightly older topic, any suggestions for a NON Lightroom 'organizer' program, for Windows use?

 

I know LR is likely to be the best option, but its a bit pricey and frankly probably overkill for my shooting frequency. One-at-a-time developer/editors with almost no organization however aren't quite cutting it for me anymore.

 

I do tend to shoot RAW, and I've also already settled on DXO Optics Pro for my RAW developer as I like the lens corrections available. Again, it integrates pretty nicely with LR either up-front (can just batch-develop everything based on the camera and lens info with some basic setting choices before putting new shots into the database) or as a called editor after (for more specific/detailed edits), so if there aren't any acceptable alternatives, so be it. (Not trying to talk myself into it, trying to see if there are intermediate measures still!)

 

What I'm most interested in is the ability to rate, keyword, tag, sort, and search pictures, plus be able to do basic corrections (minimal editing). I want a relatively safe database, preferrably one that's not actually editing the picture bits directly although I don't mind if its writing any of the keywording etc. into the image file in case the DB links get broken by Windows file moves.

 

The list of options to consider I've got so far are:

 

1. Corel Paintshop Pro Photo X3 - newest version adds keywording and rating, virtual folders (search and sort on keywords), etc. Doesn't do non-destructive editing though I don't believe.
   
2. Photo Mechanic - almost exactly what I described above, but still $150 for the full license. Seems like other programs offer a bit more for the same money. Did play with this one a little a couple months ago in trial version and hit a few snags, but so far I believe I could make it do what I want with a bit more practice and knowledge. Just the half-of-LR price kinda leaves me cold for what it does.
   
3. ACDSee Pro 3 - from reading their website not sure how easy batch or group keywording is, and may have more editing in it than I 'need', but costs same as PM above.
   
4. ACDSee Photo Manager - lighterweight manager, may be enough for just keywording/organizing, and cheap as chips (I think $40 right now actually for their 2009 version).
   
5. DBGallery Photo Database - may not have the name right - doesn't seem like it does anything but produce a DB and allow embedding of keywords into whatever photo organization you already have. Website seems a bit cheesy, and didn't see a trial download, but may have to take a 2nd look.
   
6. Windows Photo Gallery - built into Vista and Win 7, supposedly has keywording and organization features, just not a true DB really....and free so how good can it really be? (Not intentionally MS bashing...I rather like Vista. )
   

 

Any others I should be looking at, any commentary of the ones listed, or should I just man up and force myself to learn LR? (I am trying the v3 beta and find it rather apocryphal...and I do finite element analysis for electromagnetics with a $50k commecial software tool as my day job!!) I do understand "you get what you pay for" but that doesn't mean there aren't bargains out there I'm just not aware of, yet.

[Steve Williams 0]

Sorry partner, I'm going to have to stick with Lightroom. If you get a chance watch this Video from Adobe TV. It might help with some of the issues your having.

 

http://tv.adobe.com/watch/the-complete-pic...in-lightroom-2/

 

One note as to your shooting frequency. I found that the more I understand how to process images and what is possible the more I shoot. I"m actually making some images on land, if you can believe that.

 

There are a bunch of really good videos if you have the time to check them out.

 

Cheers,

Steve

[TimG 62]

Another vote for Lightroom - I use it on my MacBook Pro. It's a winner.

 

Anyone had much experience of the Beta v3.0?

[segal3 0]

Any others I should be looking at, any commentary of the ones listed, or should I just man up and force myself to learn LR? (I am trying the v3 beta and find it rather apocryphal...and I do finite element analysis for electromagnetics with a $50k commecial software tool as my day job!!) I do understand "you get what you pay for" but that doesn't mean there aren't bargains out there I'm just not aware of, yet.

Richard - Check out IDimager. A very full-featured program, expanding on a lot of functionality that iView Media Pro and Expression Media provided.

[CompuDude 0]

Richard - Check out IDimager. A very full-featured program, expanding on a lot of functionality that iView Media Pro and Expression Media provided.

Speaking of iView Media Pro, since they were purchased by Microsoft, I wonder if the "next version" of iView, MS Expression Media, is worth looking into at all? It was hard to find; it doesn't really look like it's even a current product anymore. Thus endeth the iView legacy?

[Autopsea 7]

folders.

 

exemples :

 

/photos/2009/september/

and in september:

1- one folder by session or dive or day, plus one folder for random photos, named date+location. In this folder, only RAW and jpegfromRAW.

2- all the "small" version. flickr sized, from the whole month.

 

so you get 3 version of each photos you like (RAW and large jeg in the "day" folder, and small jpeg in the month folder).

keep the orginial name as it helps to "refind" a raw from the small jpeg.

 

I found it really easy to navigate and find back anything, can't think to anything better, especially on a mac.

[CompuDude 0]

folders.

 

exemples :

 

/photos/2009/september/

and in september:

1- one folder by session or dive or day, plus one folder for random photos, named date+location. In this folder, only RAW and jpegfromRAW.

2- all the "small" version. flickr sized, from the whole month.

 

so you get 3 version of each photos you like (RAW and large jeg in the "day" folder, and small jpeg in the month folder).

keep the orginial name as it helps to "refind" a raw from the small jpeg.

 

I found it really easy to navigate and find back anything, can't think to anything better, especially on a mac.

I do it similarly, although I add the location to the folder name with the date, and it's broken down by year:

 

pix/2009/2009-12-20 Marineland

pix/2010/2010-01-02 Wreck of Star of Scotland

pix/2010/2010-01-17 Oil Rigs

pix/2010/2010-01-30 Anacapa

pix/2010/2010-01-31 Anacapa-Santa Cruz

 

This is good for organizing the images themselves, but doesn't make it easy to find that shot you took a couple years ago of a ling cod by an orange puffball sponge.

 

Keywording my photos to enable searching, and getting them in a form I can put online for my own access and reference, is a big part of why I'm looking into products like Lightroom and Aperture (at least for the first part of that... getting them online in a similarly searchable form is a whole different headache).

Edited February 4, 2010 by CompuDude

[davehicks 99]

I am Windows and Nikon centric, and have not been too impressed by Lightroom so far. I experiemented with it couple of years ago and it did not handle my volume of pictures well. Perhaps it is better now??

 

I do most of my organization in well structured file folders and then use Nikon View & Windows Live Photo to view and organize. The Live Photo app is very good at this and easily handles my 50,000 picture library. I uses the built-in Indexing features in Windows, so it really DOES have a true database backing it up. The tagging, sorting, and viewing options are quite good. I use Nikon Capture NX2 for my editing, which is pretty hard to beat for Nikon RAW images.

 

 

 

At the risk of resurrecting a slightly older topic, any suggestions for a NON Lightroom 'organizer' program, for Windows use?

 

I know LR is likely to be the best option, but its a bit pricey and frankly probably overkill for my shooting frequency. One-at-a-time developer/editors with almost no organization however aren't quite cutting it for me anymore.

 

[*]Windows Photo Gallery - built into Vista and Win 7, supposedly has keywording and organization features, just not a true DB really....and free so how good can it really be? (Not intentionally MS bashing...I rather like Vista. )