Lightroom Classic and CC: Allow Catalog to be stored on a networked drive.

  • 398
  • Idea
  • Updated 2 months ago
  • (Edited)
I'd love to make LR more multi-computer friendly. I have no doubt that there's probably database architecture issues and a host of other barriers... But I have to believe that the need for either multi-user or at at lease multi-computer use is widely desired. And yes, I know you can do the catalog import export thing but I find this less than ideal.
Photo of BenD

BenD

  • 25 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes

Posted 8 years ago

  • 398
Photo of Publications and Graphics

Publications and Graphics

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Lightroom 4 cannot access catalogues saved on a network! Our university catalog needs to be on a network so that the photographer and his assistants can access the SAME catalog. SOLUTIONS?! We need one fast.

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Catalogues on network.
Photo of Greg Hunt

Greg Hunt

  • 39 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
You should read the comments here. A bit of searching would have saved you some anguish.
Photo of Angelo Parisi

Angelo Parisi

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I too would like to see some form of shared capability with LR4. While the product itself is awesome, I still feel gimped in that in order for My wife, daughter and I to centrally store images in a unified catalog, I have had to build a separate machine to manage everything. While one employee of Adobe indicated that there is the ability to put everything on an external drive, that seems archaic in today's world. Most households maintain more then a couple of computers, most have a desktop, laptop + tablet.

This kind of integration would be a great leap forward in functionality for a lot of people and I would personally be willing to purchase it as a premium update.
Photo of Rodney L Wright

Rodney L Wright

  • 14 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
Excellent comment and directly to the point of this discussion.

The bottom line is that customers need a truly multi-user Lightroom that work over home and professional networks. Properly implemented, more than one person could concurrently access the database...that's what it is at its heart...while maintaining integrity using record-level locking. And customers in this case mean everyone from professional photographers in work groups to small business and family networks.

The only problem I see is that Adobe so far has given excuses as to why it would be difficult to achieve...but has left no hint that they really have decided to do so no matter how long it takes.
Photo of Greg Hunt

Greg Hunt

  • 39 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
Rodney,
What Adobe have said is that it is hard, and it is. Lightroom is a single user application, like MS Word is, and getting to a multi-user configuration involves architectural changes that would either make it MUCH more resource hungry (adding a multi-user database engine would make the memory usage go up sharply) or require them to produce a separate high-end application that in all probability would be relatively expensive. It looks like they are approaching this problem through Revel/Carousel, and we might talk about whether this is the right way to do it, my own view is that it is probably not, but that's a different conversation.

Your second paragraph seems to be complaining that Adobe have not given a commitment to spend unlimited time and money on giving you what you want. It seems unlikely that you will get that.
Photo of Rodney L Wright

Rodney L Wright

  • 14 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
A word processor is indeed a single-user application. But that is dictated by the type of work being done. When Word users work collaboratively the normal workflow involves sending the file to others via email for review and comment. At the end of that workflow, the owner of the file merges the comments to produce the final document.

Lightroom is right now a single-user implementation only because that is the way Adobe implemented it. The problem is that two or more people cannot work with the same catalog concurrently. If I want my partner to look at a photo or set of photos, I have to physically move the external drive to her computer. Then while she is working, I have no access to the catalog! Although editing a photo is a single-user function, using the catalog is not. What is needed is for the catalog to be make multi-user so we can both work concurrently. For Adobe, that means that they will need to implement some sort of record-level locking so that two or more users don't concurrently try to change the same file. But that's not so hard if a decent database underlies the application. It's been done for decades.

I think the comparision to a word processor is invalid. Lightroom is better compared to a database. The information stored in Lightroom are data about each image in that catalog. The original photos are linked to by Lightroom but the photos themselves are not contained within the catalog. Users generally only work on one photo at a time, so some sort of record-level locking could be used to ensure there is no conflict which would result when two people both tried to change the same record.

Since I'm not privy to Adobe's internals, I don't know whether a shared catalog version of Lightroom would then become much more memory intensive. I suspect that the additional overhead is manageable. That is an issue Adobe would have to evaluate when determining whether or not to do this. But there are lots of other database systems out there that work quite well on client workstations with "normal" memory. In any case, the whole hardware environment is shifting over to 64-bit systems (my desktops are 64-bit, and it is great that Adobe produces 64-bit applications that can use my available memory.)

I don't care how they do, it. I do care about support for networking the application. AND I maintain that this is needed by home users as well as photogratphic professionals who work with more than one person. How they decide to price it is their choice...but I sure hope they don't decide to jack up the price significantly.

You interpret my comments to mean that I'm asking for Adobe to give a committment to spending _unlimited_ time and money to give us what we want. All I'm asking is that Adobe commit to evaluating the problem and then to tell us whether it is likely to be done or not and in what timeframe. When I said "no matter how long it takes" I meant that I recognize this might take a while to achieve. I didn't mean they should not be fiscally responsible.
Photo of Greg Hunt

Greg Hunt

  • 39 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
I'm not disagreeing with you that it would be nice. It would just be a different product and I've suggested both how I think they might be approaching it.

Having worked with a multi-user text editor, I can tell you that it is possible and it does save all that having to copy documents or fragments of documents around (in much the same way that people sometimes say they want to share photos in Lightroom) but as a piece of software it was a fair bit more complex than just whacking a copy of Word on a desktop machine.

Photos can be located on shared storage for your partner to look at, its only the catalog that needs to be local. I suspect that photos can be in two catalogs at the same time with the photo and XMP sidecars on shared storage (its an experiment I will get around to in the next couple of weeks: virtual copies would be invisible, it will be interesting to see how that turns out).

There have been comments from Adobe staff about the issues and complexity involved in this and references to experiments done in the past, so they have said that they have been looking at it. If it were as simple as people keep saying I suspect we would have it now.
Photo of Kevin Rank

Kevin Rank

  • 4 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
Greg,

I work on single user documents shared on a network resource all the time. That is all many of us want. I don't want two people editing a photo at once. I bet there are requests for that, but for the most part, we are looking for a shared catalog. Editing would still be done as a single user.

Your example of a word doc is right on. We share them on a network, edit them locally off the network, and others can use it too. Why can't we do that as seamlessly in LR?
Photo of Greg Hunt

Greg Hunt

  • 39 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
It looks like you can treat an image just like a word document. Getting someone else to import and open a particular raw file on a shared storage device with their copy of Lightroom does work and opens the associated XMP so they they can edit the file (assuming that you have LR writing XMP files). What we cannot do is share collections, keywords, flagging and rating. Sharing the catalog would be much nicer, there is no doubt of that: keywords, ratings and I suspect virtual copies would be available too, but the simplest form of sharing, the kind that we do with Word documents, looks like it works.
Photo of Dan Tull

Dan Tull, Employee

  • 172 Posts
  • 38 Reply Likes
While I can't speak for when or how this turns into an actual Lightroom feature, I can say that the team is acutely aware of the constraints and awkwardness of multi machine (and device) workflows for Lightroom.

Honestly, providing a better answer to multi-machine (and now device) workflows been in the running for every version of Lightroom so far and has just tended to get pushed aside by other features. That said, (and to be clear here this isn't my call, so this isn't any kind of promise or claim about what will or won't be in the next version, so don't go reading it as such), I've pointed to this thread on more than one occasion to promote my position that this feature's time is (over)due. :o)

Note that even if I did know what is or isn't going to be in the next version (and I honestly don't), I couldn't tell you here anyway, so the only reason I say this is to make it eminently clear that (a) we are watching this thread and (b) we're not satisfied with the existing multi machine workflow options either. Most of the team are active users of the product and want many of the same things you all do.
Photo of Amy Martz

Amy Martz

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Adobe is so close to revolutionizing the workflow process with Lightroom, Adobe Creative Cloud, and Revel. I really hope that there is a plan for more integration and seamless workflow.

Organizing, editing, and sharing are what it's all about.

It would be absolutely fabulous if we could download photos from camera to one program______ (you fill in the blank).

Step 2: pick out our favorite photos on either Ipad or Computer.

Step 3: Tag, rename and organize files and have an automated Backup option like Lightroom.

Step 4: Then chose to edit photos on Ipad or Laptop or Desk computer without duplicates that sync across the board.

Step 5: Once photos are edited then share them across what ever avenue we want be it email, Revel, Muse, Facebook, ect.

This would be a perfect workflow.

You guys are SOOOOO Close. Keep rocking it! We are headed in the right direction!!
Photo of Rodney L Wright

Rodney L Wright

  • 14 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
Thank you Dan. I think that helps.
Photo of Mark Swink

Mark Swink

  • 20 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Lightroom needs to support a shared catalog over a network to make it friendly to professional and multiple users. Copying the catalog from machine to machine is not only time consuming but it destroys the edits made it the develop module. Until Lightroom can support multiple users connecting to a shared catalog on a network drive it is really nothing more than a cataloging application for professional users.

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
LR Network catalog option a requirement for hyperbole.
Photo of ben vella

ben vella

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
another vote for multi machine syncing.
Photo of Amy Martz

Amy Martz

  • 9 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I have done this by using Dropbox. I found this article and it has been working for me ever since! I'm sure this would work with Google Drive as well!

You just have to be careful to let Dropbox fully download before you use it on another computer otherwise it will create a duplicate file. Other than that it works great because Dropbox stores the file on your computer so it isn't considered an external hard drive. Enjoy!

Cloud based Lightroom Catalogues | work on the same Lightroom catalogue from multiple computers!

How to make Lightroom a net-workable application by storing it in the cloud.
Smart workaround if your planning to access the same Lightroom catalogue from multiple machines. We have set this up in our own office and it works beautifully on 3 iMac’s running Lion OSX, the only limitation is that only one computer can have the catalogue open at a time and you will need to mount the drive with your images for the additional computers.

1. Sign up for a free Dropbox account. Here is direct link to sign up to get a free 2GB Dropbox account. www.dropbox.com

2. Download and install the Dropbox application for your platform/operating system on all computers where you want to share your Lightroom catalogues. Check the box ‘Enable LAN sync’ in the preferences panel to take advantage of your home network speed syncing the Dropbox files to your other networked computers.

3. Either create a new Lightroom catalogue, in a new folder in your Dropbox, or move an excising catalogue there. We suggest using the minimal previews in the catalogue settings, for this method to save syncing time and Dropbox space.
if you don’t know where your Lightroom catalogues are click Lightroom on the top menu bar and click ‘catalogue Settings’. On top of the information panel you can see the path, click ‘Show’ and Lightroom will open the folder for you.

4. Now wait for the catalogue to sync through Dropbox to your other computers. When synced (you will know that the sync is finished, when folder has a green tick on it), open the catalogue in Lightroom on the second computer, if you get question marks on the images, meaning missing folder or files, mount the drive with your images either through finder on MAC or Explorer on PC, and your catalogue and files will be ready to use just like on your other computer in the library module.

5. And just as a reminder, to always close the Lightroom catalogue on one computer before accessing it on the other. Check in your Dropbox folder that it has the green check before opening just to be safe you got the latest updates synced as well. Lightroom does have a safety feature with .lock files so your files and catalogue will be safe even if you manage to forget. We have couple times, no harm done.

Now here is something else you can do to speed up your Dropbox synchronized Adobe Lightroom catalogues!

This feature removes the preview data from syncing resulting in a great deal less syncing time, and lots more space for your catalogues. Lightroom will rebuild the new previews much faster in the destination ends rather than syncing all the preview data through the cloud.

Dropbox Selective Sync.
1. Access Dropbox Preferences by clicking the blue Dropbox icon in your menu bar.
2. In the preferences panel go to the Advanced tab and click Change Settings for Selective Sync.

3. Click Switch to Advance View at the bottom of the dialog window.

4. When in Advanced View select your Lightroom catalogue folder and uncheck the .lrdata folder, this is where your previews are stored. By unchecking you stop the syncing of these previews and only sync the catalogue resulting in much quicker syncing! Press the update button to confirm.

5. Press update a second time; now repeat this process in your Dropbox preferences on your other computers sharing this Lightroom catalogue.

http://www.color-shop.co/share-lightr...
Photo of Arthur West

Arthur West

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks very much for your suggestion, I think it is great. In the process of syncing my two machines and wondered if you could help me. I am rather embarrassed to ask what is meant by “mount the drive with your images” This is mentioned in paragraph no 4. Please could you spell it out to me.

Regards
Photo of Arthur West

Arthur West

  • 17 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I feel rather foolish - I managed to mount the drive in the usual way - what confused me is that I thought Lightroom would not see the drive over the network, but it has, and now able to see the catalog on both of my machines. Thanks everyone for all your help.
Photo of S Nielsen

S Nielsen

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
I've been wanting to incorporate Lightroom into my company's image workflow for years, but the non-workgroup issue has been a solid shopstopper. That it didn't show up in version 4 was a genuine and unpleasant surprice.

Otherwise, Lightroom would fit perfectly: Our need is to tag pictures, so our large and still growing image library would be a true asset. It would be so nice to be able to search for "product x" in "sunlight" at "that place", something which right now resides in the heads of me and my colleagues.

But if that functionality is limited to one person on one computer, then forget about it. Lightroom without a shared database is limited to hobbyist/single photographer use.

Shame for all of us, both us who want to use Lightroom and Adobe. This isn't a nice-to-have like the rest of the feature request in the ideas forum - it's a very, very real barrier against the professional market.
Photo of Edward

Edward

  • 194 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
I'd really welcome this idea, for example tonight I want to carry on editing my pictures (which all sit on my main PC) while I sit in bed watching a bit of TV!

It's a pain being tied to the main PC, especially as I have Lightroom with matching settings on BOTH machines, so all it would require is the ability to edit across a network....

What say you Adobe? how about focusing on a real important issue rather than something "headline catching" but quite un-required like much of the new stuff in Lr 4!
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 386 Reply Likes
If all you want is to work on the same catalog from 2 different computers (not simultaneously) without dragging an external drive around, and you have a network, why not just copy the catalog to the network, then copy it to the next computer? If you want to automate it, then use one of the work-arounds like Amy Martz has mentioned above. Also there is a customizable script (Python) for sharing a catalog if you want:

http://www.robcole.com/Rob/ProductsAn...

Rob
Photo of Edward

Edward

  • 194 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
Its worth a look Rob, but it really worries me that if I was doing this type of manouvre I'd end up making some dumb mistake, and accidentally ruin my catalog.

the peace of mind of having it all "automated" at source by Adobe would really be a blessing

Thanks
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 386 Reply Likes
I understand your concern, but you can't corrupt your catalog this way, the worst that will happen is you lose some work done by forgetting to copy over. Perhaps follow a regimen of backing up locally before copying to network, so you can consolidate in case of mistake. I realize a main objective of your post is to communicate your desire to Adobe - mission accomplished. In the mean time, wouldn't a work-around be better than nothing? - It may take Adobe several years to implement a real solution, if they ever do...
Photo of Kenny Byrne

Kenny Byrne

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I've been waiting for a solution for multi-user and NAS solution for well over 2 years.... Sounds like an "Adobe Drive" (i.e. google drive, sky drive, dropbox) might be a solution... in addition to NAS storage of course.

The train is stopped... let's get this feature done and get out of the station! There are photos to be shared people! :)
Photo of Brett N

Brett N, Official Rep

  • 2258 Posts
  • 118 Reply Likes
We already have a product called Adobe Drive: http://www.adobe.com/products/adobedr...

It's not designed to work with Lightroom as it works with Version Cue servers, which in turn work with Creative Suite product. It is doubtful that Lightroom would recognize Adobe Drive as a viable location to store a catalog file, but I've never worked with it myself.
Photo of Sasha K.

Sasha K.

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Brett, while the name matches the letter of what Kenny wrote, the point of his comment, is that we ALL need a SOLUTION for Lightroom catalogs stored on the network
Photo of wblackwell

wblackwell

  • 4 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Photo of wblackwell

wblackwell

  • 4 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 386 Reply Likes
Reminder: on Windows, one can just map the network drive with catalog as local drive. *but* those who've done that said:

* it's slower (for the multitudes of random catalog accesses)
* it's less reliable (potential for corrupted catalog, even when only used by one user at a time).

I assume the same will be true of mounted dmg.

Don't get me wrong: if this works well enough for you, then more power to ya. But, keep your catalog backed up...

There is a reason why Adobe doesn't support this configuration (they are aware of it, Dan Tull of Adobe said so). Again, the purpose of my post is not to throw water on this idea, or overturn said apple cart, just be aware of potential for less than ideal behavior, and be prepared for it...

Rob
Photo of Sasha K.

Sasha K.

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Up to Lightroom 3.5 you could do this on Windows and Lightroom would be none the wiser, but now it sees through the mapping that underlying the drive letter is NAS.

There are plenty of databases (incl. mission critical) and file systems that work with NAS quickly and efficiently, and some SOHO / enterprise NAS such as those by QNAP enable you to connect two gigabit connections for double the throughput. This isn't some dinky "harddrive inside a wifi router with storage" NAS. It can keep up with the CPU doing image processing.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 386 Reply Likes
Fair enough - thanks for the update. Any dmg-mounting-like software available for Windows?
Photo of wblackwell

wblackwell

  • 4 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Mounted dmg has worked for me since version 1. I've probably accessed it thousands of times without corruption. Always over Cat6 GigE and a good industrial grade switch though. Latency is not an issue with a good hd on both ends. In fact, hd access can be faster than local when working of a networked macpro raid with gigE. Close to 90MB/sec sustained in duplex.

the images themselves can live anywhere

best,
walker
Photo of Sasha K.

Sasha K.

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
"the images themselves can live anywhere"

Indeed. It is a silly situation whereby Lightrooom without any tricks allows raw files and output to be anywhere on the network - but not the catalog.
Photo of Christopher Loffredo

Christopher Loffredo

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
My amature photo collection is growing like weeds. I am at 50,000 photos and 600gb and growing. Have all my photos on a secure network drive with RAID1 + 2 extra backups. I have both a PC desktop and a laptop. I like the desktop with the large monitor but truely I use the laptop more and more for photo editing. I am new to lightroom 4. Seems the lightroom catalog can't work on a network drive (error message). Seems teh recommended approach to put a portable drive with teh lightroom catalog and swap back and forth from laptop to PC and then have a separte backup routine for the catalog vs. the library. I am not PC technie. Just I guy who likes to take pictures and is looking for a safe and simple way to manage and edit images. i been using photoshop for years now and always believed it has way more more than most photographers need. I really thought Lightroom was supposed to be with photographers in mind. Seems to me this a a key point that the designers have missed. How do other bounce back and forth between PC and laptop? (maybe I go back to just using Bridge)

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Lightroom PC and Laptop & network.
Photo of Steve Fogarty

Steve Fogarty

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
+1 vote for simultaneous multi-user access to the same NAS-stored catalogue. Even in my small two-person studio, this current handicapped status of LR is terribly frustrating and difficult.

Someone mentioned a need for simultaneous access to the same photo. We don't need that.

However, we do need simultaneous access to the same NAS-stored catalog. While the ability to work on the same event/folder with dynamic record locking of each image would be ideal, even locking individual events/directories to the first user in would be an enormous improvement. THE CURRENT SITUATION IS SO CLUMSY & FRUSTRATING.

All the workarounds and kludges people have posted are just that - KLUDGES.

As a mom & pop wedding photography business up to our eyeballs in images, here's why we need this feature. While I'm editing new work, my wife wants to output earlier work for different audiences, say for vendors or blogs or magazines. From everything I've read, there is no clean way to do this right now. Every solution is a compromised kludge.

IT'S TIME TO ENABLE SIMULTANEOUS MULTI-USER NAS-STORED CATALOGUE ACCESS Adobe.

Thank you.
Photo of Svein Seldal

Svein Seldal

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I've found a workflow where I have all the images on a network mounted NAS drive (which LR supports), and then I have the catalogs in a local directory synced with Dropbox. This satisfies LR in respect of having the catalog local, and Dropbox handles syncing between the machines and/or users. You even get online catalog backup for free with that solution.

It does not, however, allow you to work simultaneously on the same catalog, so some kind of manual synchronization between your other users is required ("Hey! I'm using abc catalog right now!"). But if more than one user does use the same catalog simultaneously, Dropbox will just create a conflicted copy, so in principle nothing is lost.

PS! Just remember to disable syncing of the *Previews.lrdata directory, as its not required for sharing the catalog. And it also an idea to mount the NAS on a specific drive, like N: on Windows, to allow the catalog image references to be correct on all machines.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 386 Reply Likes
So, should the journal file be excluded from the sync? (along with the previews).

But then, could there be a problem when changed/downloaded catalog is used with old/previous journal file?

Anyway, it would take days (literally) to upload my catalog on my ADSL connection (4GB is .lrcat file alone). The 'A' stands for slow-upload, fast-download.

And it would take could take many hours to upload changes if much work had been done. So, this solution would not work out for me as well as using a local net, e.g. via LightroomStartupScript.
Photo of Dan Tull

Dan Tull, Employee

  • 172 Posts
  • 38 Reply Likes
No excluding the -journal could be very dangerous. The key thing is to make sure that you have a -journal and an lrcat that match each other.

The theoretical problem cases are of this form:
1. Machine A begins a transaction and writes a -journal file.
2. Machine A continues to update the lrcat file.
3. Lightroom is killed/stopped/crashes.
3. Dropbox uploads the (small) -journal file.
4. Dropbox starts analyzing and sending the lrcat file changes.
5. Machine B syncs up the new -journal file.
6. Lightroom (on machine B) launches and opens its existing lrcat file and applies the new journal to it, corrupting the catalog file and deleting the -journal when it is done.
7. Dropbox finishes syncing the lrcat file, creating a new conflicting version (on machine B) that requires the (now deleted) -journal file to be opened.
8. Dropbox propagates the deletion of the -journal file to machine A.
9. Lightroom is re-opened on machine A with an lrcat that can no longer be restored properly without its -journal file.

So now we have both machine A and B in a bad place with respect to their lrcat files. Usually such states should be highly transient (almost hard to hit), but knowing they exist is better than assuming that the worst you'll get is a conflicted copy of the lrcat.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 386 Reply Likes
Thank you Dan - useful info, yet begs the question:

What must one do to assure the catalog is never corrupted due to journal/lrcat mismatch?

e.g. would it be sufficient to always restart Lightroom on "Machine A" if it is killed/stopped/crashes, before syncing lrcat file?

I suppose this same potential for problem exists when restoring a backup lrcat file too, eh?
Photo of Dan Tull

Dan Tull, Employee

  • 172 Posts
  • 38 Reply Likes
Two things:
1. Make sure you always close Lightroom when you're done before switching to another machine.
2. Make sure that dropbox is fully up to date before opening the catalog.

These are things you would want to do anyway, but syncing catalogs this way makes it all the more important.

Even if it did crash on one system, the -journal recovery should work if opened on a different system, but if there's multiple people involved it could also be a sign that the other system is actively using the catalog since ordinarily Lightroom won't leave a -journal on quit.

Of course, all you folks religiously perform integrity checks and make backups. This is another good reason to do that.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 386 Reply Likes
Awesome - thanks Dan: good to know...

PS - I just updated LightroomStartupScript (v1.2) to check for journal file and handle appropriately.
Photo of Christian Van Hanja

Christian Van Hanja

  • 5 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
I know that most people like to have one catalogue for all their pictures but coming from film, i alway liked to have my different shoots organized by shoot event.
back in the day with film, you would do your edit on a contact sheet and put that contact sheet in a folder with the negatives. this is exactly how i do it.
All my images folder have the same structure:
SHOOT_NAME/ (4 folder = SHOOT_NAME_CATA, RAW, EXPORTS, VIDEO)
like this if I move an image folder, I will just need to reconnect the media of that particular folder, not all the library.

most of the time i do this folder on location when i shoot and then migrate it on the server as soon as i am back to the office for safety.

but as i might work on it several day after even being far from the office, i have to keep a copy on my laptop in order to be able to work on it.
If i do so, I have to dump and re- copy the whole folder on my server... to keep it up to date... MAJOR PITA

therefore it would be pure genius if i could open the catalogue file thru the local network, or even better thru the web, and have the SERVER at my office do the job. the client app would be just a web based app that can control the software on my server by something like screen sharing.

I could then edit , convert and ask the server to export 10 000 pictures with no worries, as it would just be command lines, the effective work being done by my server at the office.

the other benefit would be that at the office i could be working on my laptop while my assistant is doing a "pré-selection" on raw picture of the same catalogue.

the last and not the least benefit would be on photo pool shoot :

when I shoot for large event such as ESPN XGAMES, or FISE, or BMX MASTERS, I have to deal with several issue :

1) even if being on Lightroom , other photographers have their own workflow.
2) as lightroom is weird for captioning, most of the guys use Photomechanics
3) as all the photographer that i work with mostly works in RAW, some of them need to tweak their shot by themselves, no one can do it for them.
4)the photo editor of those event need the pictures right away and need to see all the photo of an event at the same time to make a choose within the whole range of picture of all the photographer. sometime he is oversea, and with the jet lag, he might not want to wait to much to go back home....
5) an editing software that can not import IPTC captioning template, you must be kidding me?

So by the time I am done with importing, editing, processing, captioning,exporting and submitting my shots, the others sport photographers who shoot available light at high iso with no strobe and with 10fps camera in jpeg, are already done and back to shoot ... and gess what : the editor alway tell me the same thing : your shots are great and maybe better, but we needed them 20 minutes ago...
the funny part is that we all get back from the shoot at the same time, and while we are doing the card download/process, the editor is just waiting for the first guy who will finish...

I am deeply confident that if the photo editor could have a Client APP that could connect to several "auto updating lightroom catalogues across the local network" and do a quick rating on each, i would not only save me time only working on the shot that he actually wants, but it would save his time because he will be able to start working as soon as we start dumping the cards on the computer.

and also i could ask to my assistant who is back at the office at the other end of the world to start the captioning for me on those, because for now it is impossible to charge customers for a plane ticket for an assistant.

with this system i could come back from the shoot and :

dump the card in the computer applying a "standard minimal caption" (based on an imported template prepared by my photo editor weeks ago on photo mechanics or any other software)

drink an expresso while the selection is being done, and start working on my own edit.

tweak the raw file for good looking on a few major shot , personalize caption on one photo of each different rider and press the "I'm done" button .

my assistant will be able to caption, copy/paste the settings to the rest of the selection, launch the export and the transfer for me.

that would save me 4 to 5 hour of work every day on those events.

I would mind to spend 900$ on that....

and even better, with the increase of bandwidth on WI_FI or 4G, i could send the pictures directly to a watch folder while i am working.

Big newspaper/agency/photographer/website would be amazed by this functionality

being able to remotely live-view , share upload and control the Lightroom catalogue would make the software bigger than ever.

think about this : my work is to shoot photo, every minute that i spend on a computer is less time taking photos... so less time making money to buy software...

lately one of my customers, hired a 17 year old fashionista/geek dude to do Instagram sharing photo with an iPhone... replacing one of the photographer of the team....

we cant just be beaten by this... we need a CONNECTED and SHARABLE software that allow us to get back on whats make us make money : shooting photo !!!!!!