Lightroom was built on SQL Lite, a relic of a database that does not allow concurrent access. While lots of people buy Lightroom and sales have grown, we are aren't given the funds or the time to execute a database change - it is all about new features, that sells products. - Adobe Development
Users have been asking for Lightroom to be multi-user capable for years. My understanding is the the core database architecture is SQLite. While it wouldn't necessarily be EASY, it really shouldn't be that hard for a company with the resources of Adobe to update the software architecture to be able to connect to a database other than the local single-user SQL database. With Lightroom being a workhorse for many working professionals with multiuser and enterprise requirements, it is completely unfathomable that Adobe isn't responding to customer demands for a workable solution to this issue. I for one have started my search to replace Adobe products in my professional workflow since you can't seem to get your act together on this issue.
I'm a part-time professional photographer who needs to be able to access a central catalog from multiple locations and share it with other photographers. I'm also a full time software engineer dealing extensively with database systems that scale from single user local implementations to enterprise-wide access across multiple locations with redundant and geographically diverse synchronized database servers. I am well aware of the issues that can be encountered with this type of system. I'm also well aware that there's an enormous body of knowledge and professionals available who can implement a scalabale architecture that can be configured to work with a simple database on the local machine or a more capable multiuser cloud-accessible solution. In my professional opinion it is clear that Adobe COULD meet customer needs on this issue if they chose to update from techniques borrowed from the last millennium.
And I see this as almost certainly being a management issue - not a developer issue - although if management continues to stick with the ancient architecture it WILL become a developer issue as the competent ones will leave for greener fields. C'mon guys, invest some of the monthly fees you are collecting from users while you still have them to update the product to at least keep up with technology!
Anyone know why catalogues have to live on local storage? Network storage helps when sharing catalogues in a LAN-based team environment.
Most of DAM solutions are targeted to enterprize level and toooo expensive for small groups or single photographers. But a few titles can be considered as candidates for including into your workflow:
- Apple FinalCut Server
- Canto Cumulus (mature and solid product, but a bit higher priced)
- Daminion Server (relatively new product)
The first product was discontinued by Apple, but probably it is possible to buy it on ebay. It is focused on videos but can be also used for images as well.
Move the LIghtroom catalog system towards a model that allows multiple people to access a catalog and images on a network attached storage device. Gigabit wired access makes data transfer reasonable and a shared storage system makes more sense for multiple people working on the same photo set.
Here is the script I use:
net use \\remote-pc "password" /user:username /persistent:no
IF EXIST "\\remote-pc\Lightroom Catalogs\*.lock" (
echo Lightroom running in remote-pc
xcopy "\\remote-pc\Lightroom Catalogs\*.lrcat" "this-pc\Lightroom Catalogs\" /Y /D
"C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Lightroom\lightroom.exe"
xcopy "this-pc\Lightroom Catalogs\*.lrcat" "\\remote-pc\lightroom\Lightroom Catalogs\" /Y /D
The same script should be used on the other PC.
I know that this is just a workaround, but it does make it quite easy for two (or more) PCs to use the same catalog and access the same images without having to carry external drives from PC to PC ... or whatever.
We use a gigabit ethernet and the performance is excellent.
I can't imagine I'm the first person to think of this, but I would love to be able to check a sync box next to collections (and hopefully smart collections and FOLDERS) on my main desktop computer and have them sync OTA to a second computer.. I'm often on the go and currently export/import satellite catalogs for active or current work. I'd love to just be able to check a few boxes and go to bed knowing that tomorrow what I need will be on my secondary computer waiting for me.
You need the following software: http://www.ntwind.com/software/utilities/visual-subst.html
Here are the steps:
- Create a drive letter mapping to the network share. This is necessary to make the share visible to the Visual Subst software.
- Download and extract Visual-Subst (http://www.ntwind.com/software/utilities/visual-subst.html)
- Run Visual Subst and click on the magnifying glass on the bottom right. Browse to the network mapped folder (or a folder above it) that you want to store your catalog in.
- Select a drive letter to associate with the folder and click the "PLUS" button.
- The drive will show up in Visual Subst and is now accessible as a catalog storage location in Lightroom. In Lightroom you simply select a folder on the drive that is mapped using Visual Subst.
"how to store a catalog on a network drive on Windows (I'm using Windows 10)"
For others who might read this, here's a summary of the last five years of discussion in this thread:
Beware that there is a large amount of uncertainty about the reliability of Windows and Mac workarounds for placing catalogs on network drives. An Adobe engineer did cursory testing more than six years ago and found, at least in one configuration, that catalogs could get corrupted. Since then, no one has reported any kind of extensive testing that would provide assurance about network catalogs.
The underlying database technology used by LR, SQLite, was not designed to run with database files located on network drives, and the SQLite developers have explained why many network-storage services are not suitable for SQLite. However, some network-storage services are likely suitable, but no one has reported the testing needed to establish any confidence.
The testing required to establish reasonable confidence is more than a few people running with network catalogs for a while in a few configurations. The technical problems would be expected to arise only in unusual circumstances on only some kinds of storage servers, e.g. when the network connection to the network storage fails, the server is very overloaded, etc., and even then, the failures could be infrequent.
So if you decide to use one of the Mac or Windows workarounds, make sure you have reliable (tested) backups!
The Lightroom Catalog is used as a newsroom photo system here. You need to make it a network catalog a.s.a.p. ! This has been asked 5 years ago and is long overdue!
(Adobe should create a newsroom system and realtime graphics machine. Hurry, there is much money to make and many graphists to please)
The internet might be ok if you're working at home or in your office, and you live/work in an area where there is reliable, fast broadband.
When travelling - in hotels or guest houses or cruise ship - it's just not feasible to even remotely assume that a suitably fast and reliable internet connection will be available. And don't forget there is the rest of the world might not have the coverage of broadband we're used to in our homes.