Would be great to get on your second catalog (on my macbook in my case) a collection named Mobile Sync where i can find all my synced files like on my iPad. There are certain things i would like to change that are not possible on the web app.
Please update Lightbox to allow for catalogs to work on Dropbox and other cloud type storage. Unplugging and plugging in a hard drive is not only asinine but completely outdated. Hard drives are not reliable and are on their way out the door. Carrying a hard drive around with you where ever you go is just asking for disaster. I honestly can't even believe it's not already available, I find it hard to believe my iOS apps & games are more advanced than Lightbox.
Just put path to your photos and catalogue files into a batch file and run as administrator - here is mine
mklink /D C:\Pictures\Lightroom \\your nas adress\pictures\Lightroom
mklink /D C:\Pictures\Autoimport \\your nas adress\pictures\Autoimport
mklink /D C:\Pictures\2016 \\your nas adress\pictures\2016
mklink /D C:\Pictures\2017 \\your nas adress\pictures\2017
Works great on 1Gbps network same as from local drive!
You cannot use windows picture folder in your user folder - if you open in on another pc the path will be different, you have to move it directly to c:\ or other drive.
Hope it helps
Regards from Czech rep
A feature many people would like to have is the ability to work from a Network drive.
Presently, Lightroom can read and write files on a network drive (for example, network attached storage). Although, we cannot save the catalog file to the NAS and work remotely from a different computer.
I can see that this type of request has been floating out here for about 6+ years already. Ideally I'd like for Lightroom catalog to be simultaneously shared and multi-user, however as a developer I understand the complications of that sort of implementation.
Alternatively, I would just like to be able to store a Lightroom catalog on a network share that allows only one user at a time to access it. This could be implemented through a locking mechanism that allows only one instance of LR to access the catalog at a time.
This would be a vast improvement over the current implementation and would likely satisfy many, many of the requests for some sort of a shared catalog concept.
When importing large numbers of images (4000+) from a folder structure on Synology NAS, Lightroom import stalls at somewhere past 90% on the progress bar. Same thing happens on Windows 10 and OSX High Sierra. Lightroom still appears active and is using 100%+ CPU on Macbook, 30%+ CPU on Windows 10
Have disabled spindump and tailspind on Mac to avoid deadly embrace when Lightroom uses a lot of CPU, so it's not that.
If I stop the import and try either import again or synchronize folder, it may add a few more images before stalling again. I don't think it is a particular image, because it happens on more than one source folder structure.
By way of example - I have a folder with multiple subfolders and around 7k images.
The screenshot shows the Lightroom data for the folder after import and for Adobe Bridge.
The Adobe Bridge data matches the output of a shell script query to find the numbers of each type of files. Lightroom thinks there are 1035 RAW files and 4369 JPEGs - adding the 1483 shown in the Lightroom Synchronise dialogue above would give 5852, which is close to the (correct) Bridge JPG count. However, if I click Synchronise, Lightroom shows a wait cursor for a while and then shows 0 files to import.
"Ignore suspect duplicates" in import is disabled and "treat JPEGs next to Raw Files as separate photos" is ticked in Lightroom preferences. (I get the same result if I try an Import/Add as I do if I try the synchronise.)
I get this on both Windows 10 PC and on Mac, although the import numbers on the PC differ slightly from the Mac, (PC finds 5508 images on the same folder structure as opposed to 5511, but also shows 1483 to be imported to synchronise).
I get this behaviour on a range of folder structures on the Synology.
I have tried selecting images, dragging and dropping from Bridge on the Lightroom import dialog and provided you do it a folder at a time, selecting images, Lightroom gets all the images. If you drag and drop a folder it goes back to the Lightroom image retrieval behaviour with stalling and missed images. This use of Bridge, may seem to offer a short-term workaround, but when working with many tens of thousands of images, as I am, in complex folder structures, it's not really a workable proposition.
On my Windows 10 Laptop Photoshop does not work properly unless i run it in administrator mode. Since i regulary load pictures there from Lightroom, i had to put lightroom in administrator mode as well. When in administrator mode, Lightroom won't acces the pictures on my NAS server. It shows the server as offline. There are no error messages and Lightroom does show the pictures, but only the previeuws. When i open Lightroom normally it works fine. Only then i have problems loading them in photoshop. Is there something i can do so i can acces my NAS when i am in administration mode?
I have what seems to me to be a simple request. I am a photographer. I maintain an on-line shop, through which I sell prints of my images and some specialty products using my images. I use two (2) computers - a 27" iMac and a 15" MacBook Pro. I work on content for my website primarily from the iMac, but there are times when I would like to do work via my laptop from another room. This involves the expenditure of considerable time spent copying catalogs back and forth so as to be working on the correct version of the catalog (s). My catalogs are stored on an external hard drive. It would be far simpler and far less time consuming were I able to simply access my external drive via wifi with my laptop. But LR Classic refuses to do this. Can you please write the software to allow network access?
Synology NAS drives now have a capability called Synology Drive, which lets you set up a local drive on your computer that background syncs to your NAS. You have a complete local copy of the files and should therefore be able to use that in the regular way.
But, you can sync that NAS content to another Synology Drive location an a different computer. So you have three copies on computers and the NAS, and The Drive software keeps them all in sync, and has versioning. You could add a third and a ......
I haven't tried this with LR but I have other apps that function this way
Anyway, if QNAP continues developing that quick and Adobe provides no solutions for local installation anymore, I won't use Lightroom anymore.
Cloud service does not provide GigaBit network traffic for affordable prices!
"Lightroom Catalogs can not be opened on network volumes, removable storage, or read only volumes." Why not?
After buying my new SSD to pop into my drive dock, and copying my catalog/previews files from Lightroom over to it to improve the system performance, I'm advised "NOPE!" Adobe needs to fix it. If I am going to continue to lease this software for $120/year then they should make my system handle my 150,000 + images much faster.
I've been running LR with catalogs on a NAS for years without problems. I've posted the scripts I use to manage this here: GitHub - kgorlen/lightroom: Windows bat and documentation for storing lightroom catalogs on NAS
According to SMB and SQLite specs, this is intended to work, so problems are the result of hardware failures and/or software bugs. Since accessing a network drive involves more of both than when accessing an internal or external drive, the risk of catalog corruption is a bit greater, but that's why making backups is important.Adobe could improve LR by (1) providing/hosting a list of compatible NAS products, and (2) allowing previews to be stored separately from catalogs so they could reside on a local drive with catalogs on a network drive.
I wonder if CaptureOne allows that, other than being much faster on 4k screens
The excuse I've always heard from the beginning was that this isn't/wasn't currently possible because Lightroom is built on top of SQLite. While I don't know if that's still the case, it was implied that it would require much more than a simple feature update and possibly a complete rebuild from the ground up.
I thought that the new Lightroom (not Classic) was going to be a start in that direction, but honestly I'm not enthusiastic about a library existing solely in the cloud or having to "sync" libraries and catalogues across different computers via the cloud.
What I want, and I think many people want, is a solution that has now existed in the Video Editing space for years at this point. Including Adobe's own Premiere Pro!
I would like the ability to host a catalogue and library of images (or libraries and catalogues) on a central, networked location (Server, NAS etc.) and a multi-user workflow that allows for multiple editors to be in the same catalogue and even working on the same images via Virtual Copies/Versions or image level locking.
The fact that this is the second highest "Me Too" requested Idea (1st highest if you note that the #1 is filed as "Not Planned") should give some indication to Adobe that "this is what we want above all else! We want this more than we want support for Centered Crop Overlay and ISO Adaptive Presets! We want this more than we want support for new cameras and lenses! We want this more than we want improvements to panorama editing and library filtering!"
The least Adobe could do would be to give some indication that it's Under Consideration, Planned or even Not Planned. Leaving such a popular request ambiguous is mean-spirited and disingenuous. Given the number of users who have sworn up and down (on this forum and others) that they would jump ship to the first editing platform to implement shared, network access; this feels more like a crowd-control measure. "If we tell you it's planned, we actually have to follow through! If we say it's not planned, we'll lose you all! So we're just going to leave it unanswered in the hopes that we'll be able to string you along as long as we can until we absolutely have to implement this feature."
And no, I'm not surprised that there hasn't been another company to implement this yet but I don't see it as a result of lack of interest. Adobe has been, and for a very long time will be, a market leader in this area. Many companies look to Adobe to see what to implement and what not to. The fact that Adobe is on top of the market further cements the idea that they won't implement this until they absolutely have to.
I would suggest that everyone who wants this feature push it to all the Capture One, Luminar, ON1, DxO etc. forums, community boards and feature request platforms that they can. Maybe the scent of a competitor working on this will be the spark that lights a fire under Adobe's butt.
One can only hope.
Recent upgrades to OneDrive sync engine will only send the changed bits. Before this change, it was sending the entire 6GB file back up to the cloud every time I opened Lightroom.
So far it works pretty well. Every once in a while OneDrive gets confused and makes a second copy of the Lightroom database, as it thinks the cloud version and the local version have both changed. That would happen if I edited from a different computer and my laptop, which I am not doing. Right now, only editing on my laptop and using OneDrive to keep a backup of my critical files. When this happens I just delete the older catalog file, and rename the copy back to the original name.
When will Adobe, make Lightroom available for multi-users? Now that my team work remotely (Covid-19 rules) they cannot access our extensive photo library catalogue through lightroom. Is there a work around for this? Everyone needs to be able to access the photos and the catalog for work. We use Lightroom Classic.