Aperture and Lightroom Libraries?

[Richard Lane]

Despite having a MacPro desktop with 8TB of internal drive space, I'm starting to run out of disk space. I use 2TB for Snow Leopard, 2TB for Time Machine, 2TB for Windows 7, and 2TB for a Storage Drive that contains Archives and Backup Hard Drive Images. I also have an external 1TB Western Digital. I use the MacPro for an Audio Server using a Logitech Transporter in the Living Room, and a Video Server connected to a few Tivos scattered throughout the house., then if you add thousands of RAW images, you hopefully get the picture.


Anyway, now that you have the background information, here is my question.


As of now, I upload my photos to the MacPro, I then put them in their own folder and then I import them into Aperture, choosing the store files in their original location. However, when I delete an image, it only gets deleted from the Library and not from it's original location. When I chose to set it up that way it seemed like a good idea at the time, however it's too much trouble to then go to the original folder and delete those unwanted files as well, so I just seem to accumulate a lot of unwanted files. Is there a setting in Aperture and/or Lightroom that will delete the original as well? I like the idea of being able to archive my images, separately from the Aperture or Lightroom Library, but I would like to be able to archive them after I have already gone through them and deleted the non-keepers.


I recently purchased LR3 and I would like to set up Aperture and LR similarly, in that I can delete the original files from their folder as I'm reviewing them in the library and yet still archive the keepers in their own folder. I understand that I can import them into the Library and then export the keepers, but I'm trying to avoid the extra step of importing and then exporting.


I've never liked the way the iTunes Library stored my Music by scattering it into different folders, so I was hesitant to let the Photo Libraries do all of the archiving on it's own. I also fear that a Library or Catalog could become corrupted. What's your current backup method for Libraries or Catalogs?


Would there be any disadvantage or advantage to letting Aperture and LR Libraries handle all of this? I would also like to be able to allow both programs to use the same image folders so that I don't have duplicates, but I'm not sure if that will mess up the stored processing of the images.


Perhaps a little explanation of Libraries vs. Catalogs, and how they store the information would help me understand it better.


I think I will take my data from my 2TB internal "Storage Drive" and move that to an external drive and then start fresh with that internal 2TB drive and use it just for photos only.


Thank You in advance!


Rich

[DLS]

Hi Rich

Is there a setting in Aperture and/or Lightroom that will delete the original as well?

Sorry I can't speak for Aperture but for LR3, when I'm viewing imported photos in the Library module (not in the collections panel), I quickly fun through "picking" ("p" key) and "rejecting" ("x" key) the keepers and the non-keepers. When I'm done, I filter for the rejected ones and just hit delete - a dialog comes up asking me if I want to 1. remove from catalog only or 2. remove from catalog AND hard disk.


LR3 allows you to specify a backup folder location. I'm pretty sure its in "Preferences" under the "file handling" tab (can't be sure as I'm at work anddon't have LR3 in front of me). LR3 is pretty new to me still so I could be wrong here.There's also a preference you can set where it automatically backs-up once a week (the default is actually once a week, I think).


I LR3 back my Catalog up once a week onto my internal HD. I can then copy that catalog to an external for redundacy.


Lightroom 3 is really just a database - it stores, by default, (and you can change this if you want) all your changes to the photo IN the catalog so if you were to open the photo (from the original file location) none of your changes would be applied in the new program. There is a setting that you can change that will write all changes to a RAW or DNG photo in LR3 to an XMP file so if you WERE to open the photo in another program your LR3 changes would be applied.


Hope that helps.


As I mentioned to Denise, there's a great set of videos at www.lynda.com on LR3....


Damian

[Trowski]

I also use a MacPro to store my photos and all my other media files, and I feel your storage pains. I only have 4TB of internal space at the moment, and I've been considering upgrading. Unfortunately now that means removing a smaller disk in favor of a larger one. I might move to a external RAID drive, but that's a whole other topic...


I use Lightroom for storing and categorizing all of my photos. When importing photos I use Lightroom similarily to DLS. I copy the photos directly from my memory cards into the Lightroom catalog, allowing Lightroom to organize the photos into folders based on the date the photo was taken. This saves me from trying to organize the files on the disk in some other way, and to me sorting by date makes sense. I then mark non-keepers as rejected, filter, and delete the rejected photos from the catalog and disk. I have several collections I sort the photos into, and of course sometimes I make a new collection.


As far as I know, if you only add a photo to Lightrooms catalog (not copying it), you can then only remove it from the catalog, not the catalog AND disk.


I turned off Lightroom's backup feature, since I let Time Machine take care of backing everything up. Occasionally I copy the Lightroom folder that contains all my photos and the Lightroom catalog to another external drive that I store offsite.


Solving your current problem might be difficult since now you have a bunch of photos sitting on your hard disk that is not found in any library. You can export Lightroom catalogs with the files, and hopefully it would also copy files that are only linked. Perhaps you could use this feature to export your current catalog (which exports a folder containing a Lightroom catalog and a folder hierarchy of photos), delete where you have your photos sorted now, and then use the exported library as your new Lightroom catalog. This should eliminate all those photos no longer contained in your library, but also will require a massive amount of drive space to store the new library before you can delete the old one.


I haven't used Aperture, so I have no idea how it stores photos. I would hope you could link it to the same folder hierarchy that Lightroom uses and also have the ability to delete files there. However, you might just have to pick one program to have the ability to actually delete the files from the disk.


Out of curiosity, what are your motivations for wanting to use both Lightroom and Aperture?

[Richard Lane]

Hi Rich

Is there a setting in Aperture and/or Lightroom that will delete the original as well?

When I'm done, I filter for the rejected ones and just hit delete - a dialog comes up asking me if I want to 1. remove from catalog only or 2. remove from catalog AND hard disk.


Damian

Thanks for the detailed explanation, Damian!


This is exactly what I won't to be able to do, which is delete the rejected ones from the Original Hard Disk Folder (in order to save space), as well as from the Library. Then I will be able to archive the original keepers folder to an external drive offsite, as well as backup the Library with the stored processing settings and keyword searches.


I do have a fear of Library corruption, and it makes me feel more secure seeing the actual image files separate from the Library, because you can't actually see what's going on in the Library.


Has anyone ever had Library Corruption?


Does anyone else know if Aperture will delete the originals from the Hard Disk?


Rich

[Trowski]

I do have a fear of Library corruption, and it makes me feel more secure seeing the actual image files separate from the Library, because you can't actually see what's going on in the Library.

With Lightroom, you can see the image files separate from the library (catalog). The Lightroom catalog is just a database of file locations and modifications to those files. When I import (copy) files from my memory card to the Lightroom catalog, those files are also easily accessible from the Finder. I'm guessing Aperture makes a package much like iPhoto, and you can't see the files in that library. (Actually you can see the contents of these packages, right click on the file and select 'Show Package Contents.' Apps are packages too, try this with some random .app file. Just don't modify things in there if you don't know what your'e doing.)Perhaps someone with some Aperture experience can speak up to how Aperture handles photos actually stored in its library.

Has anyone ever had Library Corruption?

I've never experienced library corruption, but with Time Machine, I don't really worry about such things. I'm assuming you're using Time Machine just as I am, and you can always restore from a back up where the library was not corrupted. Again, with Lightroom this would also be limited to just the catalog. Losing the catalog would be bad, but at least you'd still have the photos. But with Time Machine backing up the catalog, I doubt you'd ever actually lose it.

[DLS]

You're welcome Rich.


I think Trowski is right, though, when he says....


"As far as I know, if you only add a photo to Lightrooms catalog (not copying it), you can then only remove it from the catalog, not the catalog AND disk."


I'm curious......I'm going to have to see later when I get home. Maybe this only applies if you're importing straight from a CF card....whereas I first download to my HD then import to LR3...I'll have to see

I will be able to archive the original keepers folder to an external drive offsite

Yup, but keep in mind that if you're going to keep the edited photos in your catalog AND move the originals, you need to tell LR3 where you have moved them to.


I thought I lost a whole whack of photos a while back when I moved (not copied but moved) the originals to an external HD to free up space on the internal HD. When I went back into LR3 to edit some more, there was a little question-mark in the top right hand corner of the thumbnail in the Library module basically saying "Lightroom can't find the photo because the photo has changed locations". After a bit of a freak-out, I found that right-clicking on the thumbnail and choosing "show in finder" a dialog pops up that will help LR3 find the new location and all will be good.

Has anyone ever had Library Corruption?

I haven't but I really haven't been using LR3 that long - just a few months.

[Richard Lane]

I only have 4TB of internal space at the moment, and I've been considering upgrading. Unfortunately now that means removing a smaller disk in favor of a larger one. I might move to a external RAID drive, but that's a whole other topic...


As far as I know, if you only add a photo to Lightrooms catalog (not copying it), you can then only remove it from the catalog, not the catalog AND disk.


Solving your current problem might be difficult since now you have a bunch of photos sitting on your hard disk that is not found in any library. You can export Lightroom catalogs with the files, and hopefully it would also copy files that are only linked. Perhaps you could use this feature to export your current catalog (which exports a folder containing a Lightroom catalog and a folder hierarchy of photos), delete where you have your photos sorted now, and then use the exported library as your new Lightroom catalog. This should eliminate all those photos no longer contained in your library, but also will require a massive amount of drive space to store the new library before you can delete the old one.


Out of curiosity, what are your motivations for wanting to use both Lightroom and Aperture?

Thanks Trowski!


I would recommend upgrading your internal Disks to 2TB, or the new Western Digital 3TB drives. It just keeps everything neater and more efficient, less cables and no extra power supplies. Internal Drives are cheaper too. You can image the old drive and then restore it onto the new one. You can use the externals for offsite backup.


I may have misinterpreted Damian. I would like to copy the original images to the Library (not just add or mport them only) and be able to delete them from their original folder and library simultaneously. Perhaps this can not be done?


I think I will export the current Keepers from my Aperture Library as you had suggested. I don't mind doing this once, however I was trying to avoid this technique every time I import a new project.


You're right, I really have no desire to use both Aperture and LR3 for the long term, I just thought it would be nice to use both until I get all of this sorted out (pun intended) and I feel comfortable with LR3. I also recently purchased CS5 on sale, so I thought I would go with Adobe all of the way. I originally chose Aperture because LR2 at the time couldn't handle Video Files.


Rich

[Richard Lane]

I'm guessing Aperture makes a package much like iPhoto, and you can't see the files in that library. (Actually you can see the contents of these packages, right click on the file and select 'Show Package Contents.' Apps are packages too, try this with some random .app file. Just don't modify things in there if you don't know what your'e doing.)


I've never experienced library corruption, but with Time Machine, I don't really worry about such things. I'm assuming you're using Time Machine just as I am, and you can always restore from a back up where the library was not corrupted. Again, with Lightroom this would also be limited to just the catalog. Losing the catalog would be bad, but at least you'd still have the photos. But with Time Machine backing up the catalog, I doubt you'd ever actually lose it.

Yes, Aperture makes a package like iPhoto, that's why I selected the option to store files in their original folder location, and just have the Aperture Library store the changed processing data.


Yes, I use Time Machine too, however keep in mind that Time Machine is not to be used for Archiving, since any errors or corruption will be copied to Time Machine. Now, if you catch the corruption before your Time Machine Drive gets overwritten then you are fine, but if not then you're in trouble. Archiving is permanent as long as their isn't a drive failure, so that's where duplicate drives come in handy. I have actually had hardware RAID configurations fail more than once and I'm not talking about RAID 0 striping, where you are twice as likely of having a drive failure, since 2 drives are spinning, however I had archived Data so I never lost anything. That's why I'm a little paranoid.


Rich

[DLS]

Hi again Richard,


I've double-checked if you can delete photos from the Catalog and original download location on an internal HD...

This is exactly what I won't to be able to do, which is delete the rejected ones from the Original Hard Disk Folder (in order to save space), as well as from the Library. Then I will be able to archive the original keepers folder to an external drive offsite, as well as backup the Library with the stored processing settings and keyword searches.

I forgot to ask you about your importing workflow. Do you transfer the .CR2 files from your CF card to a folder on the internal HD first, then import into LR3? Or do you import right from the CF card? I'm pretty sure you


If you import right from the CF card you are not given the option to "add" when importing to LR3 - just "copy as DNG" or "copy". If you import from a folder in the internal (or external) HD, you have all four import options available.


That being said...


Yes - even if you've imported the originals using the "add" option in the import dialog, youcan delete a photo from the catalog and the hard disk. You must be viewing the photo, however, from the "Folders" pulldown menu in the Left panel in the Library Module. If the photo happens to be in a collection and you are viewing it from there, and you hit "delete" there will be no delete dialog giving you a choice....it will just delete the photo from that particular collection - the photo will still be in the catalog.


I'm rambling.....hope this makes sense


Damian

[deltasun]

Another option would be to decide your keepers/losers through DPP. I don