Lightroom Help

[realdereal]

I am attempting to edit a gallery of about 300 images and in the bar towards the bottom of the image in Lightroom it says
3394 images 1 selected

Which is every image I have taken this past year

At the top of the Lightroom tab next to the lightroom icon it says the name of the first shoot I have ever edited in Lightroom.

I have no idea what I am doing wrong here. I uploaded my images from my memory card onto my pc. I then imported the images to my external hard drive with the shoot name I believe like Smithgallery or some such thing.

I would love to know how in the world I am still working off of the first session and somehow there is thousands of images represented when I would really love to just be working off of the current gallery I am working on

Please help if you can and speak slowly in the simplest way possible

Thank you

[Polar01]

Kristen: I do not use LR, but Photoshop CC however I do fool are some with it to better understand so when someone asks a question I do not sound like a complete fool. This is what I believe is happening, 3394 is the total number of images in your library, and you have selected one. As for the other part of your problem I do not know, so I would at this point only prove that I am a fool if I tried to answer it.

Cheers: Allan

[Manfred M]

Like Alan, I am a Photoshop CC user, but often get to assist my wife who prefers Lightroom.

Lightroom started off life primarily as a cataloging tool, and every image you have every loaded into the current catalogue will be there and available for editing. You need to set up a filtering mechanism so only the shots you are interested in editing are visible.

In the Library module you need to set up a "Smart Collection" of the files you want to group together by some order, such as rating, capture date, etc. When you bring up that collection, it will only show the files that you are considering for the edit.

[russellsnr]

Hi, This may help you.
http://tv.adobe.com/watch/getting-st...g-your-images/

http://tv.adobe.com/watch/getting-st...g-your-images/

Russ

[DanK]

It would be helpful if you posted a screen shot of the left-hand panel in the library module.

If you are not using a selection tool, LR should show all the files in a given directory. If you created a separate directory for that shoot, then you should be fine. If you dumped all of your photos into one directory, then you have to tell LR which of the photos to select. YOu can do that by slecting with the find command, setting up a collection, or whatever.

I know that a lot of people would rather use tags and such to organize photos, but I find that it becomes impossibly confusing for me unless I put each shoot in a separate directory. If you do that, you can still get LR to select across directories. e.g. if you use keywords, and one of your keywords is "marigold," then if if you search for that keyword, it will select only photos that have it. If you do this at the top of your directory tree, you will get every photo with that keyword, regardless of directory.

I put all of my photos under one parent directory. Then I have subdirectories such as "flowers since 2014." under those I put directories for every upload, named with a date and sometimes other identifying information. That way, I can have LR search at any of those levels.

[NorthernFocus]

Others have already said it, Kristen. If you have simply opened LR and imported photos without making concious decisions about where they've been going, then they likely all got put into a single "catalog". Which doesn't necessarily mean one place on your hard drive.

If you are going to use LR you should do some reading on the "cataloguing" function. If you don't understand this aspect of it and do a lot of editing, you can lose all of your edits if you then move files around in Windows. The good thing about LR is that it doesn't alter the original image unless you intentionally "delete from disk". But it is possible to lose a lot of your editing work.

The good news is that you only have 3394 images. It is much easier to straighten out now than after there are a couple more zeros on that number...

[realdereal]

Ok. I wonder what the difference between a directory and catalog is in Lightroom?

[realdereal]

Others have already said it, Kristen. If you have simply opened LR and imported photos without making concious decisions about where they've been going, then they likely all got put into a single "catalog". Which doesn't necessarily mean one place on your hard drive.

If you are going to use LR you should do some reading on the "cataloguing" function. If you don't understand this aspect of it and do a lot of editing, you can lose all of your edits if you then move files around in Windows. The good thing about LR is that it doesn't alter the original image unless you intentionally "delete from disk". But it is possible to lose a lot of your editing work.

The good news is that you only have 3394 images. It is much easier to straighten out now than after there are a couple more zeros on that number...

Now I just have to figure out exactly HOW to organize them. And hopefully before my next big session : (

[Manfred M]

Kristen - I would do as Dan suggests and create a new catalog and just import the files that you want to edit.

While I understand why Lightroom was set up with the catalogue structure, it really is a PITA for people who do not want / need this feature the way it was designed. The issue, unfortunately, is that all your edits are stored in the catalog, so you need to maintain it in order to not lose your work.

[davidedric]

Ok. I wonder what the difference between a directory and catalog is in Lightroom?

I'll try. The Lightroom catalogue is NOT a directory. It has no influence at all on where your photos are physically stored.

It is where Lightroom stores all the edits that you make to your images, before you "output" them by printing, publishing or exporting. There are other ways of organising your images, but none of them have this function. If you are a Lightroom user, it is probably the most important file on your system.

It is also, of course, the basis for how Lightroom organises your images. That is a huge subject, but with a relatively small number of images, you can adopt a simple approach (which is what I do, with around 12,000 or so). There are lots of on line resources dealing with the Library module, including the free ones from Adobe by Julieanne Kost. If you want a thorough set of tutorials, I recommend George Jardine's at http://www.mulita.com.

Dave

[NorthernFocus]

Ok. I wonder what the difference between a directory and catalog is in Lightroom?

I'll also take a stab at a simple explanation. Not intended to take the place of educating yourself on the topic but rather to emphasize the importance of doing so.

A directory in Windows (not sure of iTerminology) is the way that the software associates information stored on the hard drive on your computer. As far as we are concerned as users, information is stored together in a directory. That isn't what is physically going on, but that's all that we typically care about.

As has already been stated, an LR catalog is where LR stores all of the non-destructive editing information that you create when you edit photos and keeps track of which directory the photos are located in. Kind of a cross reference between edits and actual digital image files.

For the simple minded like myself, now that I'm using LR, I use it in lieu of windows explorer to move photos around. Basically my image directory structure and LR catalog structure are one and the same. It's just less confusing for me that way. Then I don't have to worry about stray photos out there in different directories that I may accidently move around with Windows. I simply don't move things in my photography files with Windows. I do everything photo related through LR now. Again, for a simple minded guy who took weeks to understand the catalog/library function, it works and avoids mistakes.

We each have to figure out what works for us. I delayed using LR for a couple of years because I didn't want to tackle the library/catalog issue and reorganize all my directories. Now that I am finally using LR it has really streamlined/simplified my workflow. Wish I'd switched over long ago.

[Ady]

While I understand why Lightroom was set up with the catalogue structure, it really is a PITA for people who do not want / need this feature the way it was designed. The issue, unfortunately, is that all your edits are stored in the catalog, so you need to maintain it in order to not lose your work.

One way of mitigating against this is to look at the Metadata tab in Catalogue Settings, there are two settings that are of significance: 'Include Develop settings in metadata in JPEG, TIFF, PNG and PSD files' and 'Automatically write changes into XMP'. The first of these setting is very useful as it includes everything you do in the Develop module within the metadata in the listed file types, so if you import them into another LR catalogue or open them with ACR/Bridge you should see all the edits you made. This only works for the listed file types as Adobe are understandably reluctant to start writing extensive metadata into proprietary RAW files. The second option automatically writes all changes to an external XMP file with the same name as the associated image file.

I have no hesitation in suggesting you tick the 'Include Develop settings...', it's useful if you edit in both LR and PS (and anything else that’s capable of reading the develop metadata) and it means if everything goes irrecoverably wrong you can import the images into a new LR catalogue and you'll see all the edits and any other metadata that was added such as copyright info and keywords.

The option to 'Automatically write changes into XMP' effectively does the same for all file types, including proprietary RAW, it's able to do so because original proprietary files are not modified directly, only the associated XMP file. Be aware though that this setting has been reported as causing performance issues for some people. The evidence is rather vague as to the circumstances and it's not an issue I've seen myself so I can't offer any specific mitigation if you are one of those who suffers a performance hit. My advice would be to turn the option on when you create the catalogue, you can always disable it later if you run into performance problems.

Cheers,
A

[davidedric]

To continue with Ady's theme, be careful with your back up strategy.

If you rely on the catalogue to store your edits, then things are in principle simple. Your original files are never changed, so you just need to decide how to manage your sooc files, before and after culling, perhaps. Of course, if you step outside Lightroom and produce TIFF's, PSD's or whatever you'll have to think about those, too.

The catalogue then is hugely valuable, it contains all your work and a deal of intellectual property. You need to be very sure of its safety and integrity.

Dave

[Manfred M]

Unfortunately, the catalog is both the strength and the Achilles Heel of Lightroom; most users will eventaully lose all of their edits when their hard drive dies (and they always do), unless they have developed an non-standard workflow.

[Mike Buckley]

'Include Develop settings in metadata in JPEG, TIFF, PNG and PSD files' and 'Automatically write changes into XMP'...if everything goes irrecoverably wrong you can import the images into a new LR catalogue and you'll see all the edits and any other metadata that was added such as copyright info and keywords.

Given those facts, I really don't understand the vast amount of posts that have been written in threads explaining that almost everyone is at risk of losing their edits because they are also at risk of a corrupt catalog file or ineffective backup system. For me, that's like saying everyone is at risk of being stranded on the highway because they could forget to keep enough gasoline/petrol in their car; if we attend to the basics, we're perfectly safe.

I use cataloging software (not Lightroom) and I have always configured it to write all catalog information to the physical image files or in the case of RAW files their sidecar files. I do that because when everything that could possibly go wrong does go wrong including my backup system, I'm still protected. It seems to me from Adrian's post that Adobe has provided the user the same capability.

Good for Adrian for bringing these two highly important settings to everyone's attention.

[NorthernFocus]

Unfortunately, the catalog is both the strength and the Achilles Heel of Lightroom; most users will eventaully lose all of their edits when their hard drive dies (and they always do), unless they have developed an non-standard workflow.

How so? Will files recovered from an external HD backup not work? I've been going through a lot of trouble to make sure I'm backed up. I hope it isn't for naught. I guess I better run an integrity test.

[Manfred M]

How so? Will files recovered from an external HD backup not work? I've been going through a lot of trouble to make sure I'm backed up. I hope it isn't for naught. I guess I better run an integrity test.

Of course the external hard drive backups will work; BUT your directory structures of the image files as well as your Lightroom catalog files will have to be restored to exactly the same file structure as in the catalog, otherwise, you are going to have to manually re-link everything (assuming you can find them).

You almost need to duplicate your existing file structure and catalog on your backup to get a clean restore. I can't think of too many people that will do that. I do have backups of my images on external NAS equipment, but guaranteed that this file structure has been optimized for recovery; rather than how I organize things for image editing. Adobe really needs to fix up this aspect of the Lightroom architecture, in my view. I hate designs where I put all my eggs in one basket...

Having been someone that suffered from an unrecoverable catalog corruption issue with an earlier generation of Lightroom, I have been sensitized to the issue with the underlying downsides of the Lightroom data architecture.

[Glenn NK]

How so? Will files recovered from an external HD backup not work? I've been going through a lot of trouble to make sure I'm backed up. I hope it isn't for naught. I guess I better run an integrity test.

Pretty well every time I exit LR, I do a backup and integrity test - I have both boxes checked.

It takes quite a while for the whole process (at least twenty minutes or so), but probably worth the time.

Glenn

[Manfred M]

Pretty well every time I exit LR, I do a backup and integrity test - I have both boxes checked.

It takes quite a while for the whole process (at least twenty minutes or so), but probably worth the time.

Glenn

Glenn - that might help keep you up and running, but because your catalogs have to be stored on a local computer, a hard disk failure puts you at risk of losing all of you edits. All hard disks fail eventually.

[Ady]

...your directory structures of the image files as well as your Lightroom catalog files will have to be restored to exactly the same file structure as in the catalog, otherwise, you are going to have to manually re-link everything (assuming you can find them).

I can't think of a backup product or process for maintaining backups that I would trust where this wouldn't be the default scenario. I may be misunderstanding you here but the structure of my catalogues is a reflection of my file system. If I need to work on a logical groups of images that come from different parts of the catalogue/file system I use the collections feature in Lightroom, which is what it's there for.

Cheers,
A