I use blue painter's tape on all my CF cards with a tab hanging off the back. But even then I know I'm risking image loss if something bad happens. I've done it before on afternoon shoots where I shoot a lot and I'll be back in a couple hours. Keeping all of your images on one large media is risky, hazardous and honestly. In other words, keep the images in multiple locations, even when those locations are your pockets, the camera, the backpack, another drive, etc. If the camera is lost or stolen, I only lose a portion of the images. Why? If one card is failing, I only lose a portion of the images. If I travel for more than a couple days, I take my Nexto media drive "backer-upper". I'll swap cards at least every day while travelling (depending pictures value and number of shots). I'll swap cards after an hour or two of an important shoot. Most of my cards are no larger than 32 GB and I very rarely fill them up. I would rather have 4 x 16 GB cards than one 64 GB card. Especially if I'm travelling or it's a big shoot or a very important shoot. I want to add one other habit I try to use. Maybe just a few select images are kept for portfolio. The need for an extensive database is not as great. a wedding) and the images can be discarded or archived away after the job is done. Other branches of photography may be much more specific job oriented (e.g. I can also round up all the pix taken of a given species (non-salmon, far few pix per sp.) (or other key-worded trait) - I just did this having just returned from HI - and evaluate them (such as which ones to put on my web site), verify ID, etc. Also I use the images as data when planning photo trips since salmon do more or less the same thing each year on a similar schedule. This useful for finding an image to show or deliver to someone. With LR I can extract pix of salmon doing various things since it is all key worded. My LR library is over 400K images and takes up three 6-TB HDs. I have tens of thousands of pix of some of the species taken over multiple years. I shoot mainly under water and mainly salmon. #3 is what I do - it fits well with what I do in photography. I DON'T do it that way but this is one way people tend to use Lightroom. Now I think it should cost about $25 for what it does in today's more robust software ecosystem.ģrd - Lightroom does have the tendency/ability to allow folks to just let everything dump into a "big bucket" of files and let the LR catalog sort it all out for you. PhotoMechanic is fine but I think it was much more necc and relevant about 5 years ago. Thank goodness that the PhotoMechanic folks pissed me off because they saved me a lot of money and helped me find a BETTER SOLUTION for what I needed. I found a very good (actually BETTER) alternative in FastRawViewer. For what PhotoMechanic does (and does pretty well), it is waaay over priced. Ģnd - I almost purchased PhotoMechanic a year or two ago but after a bad experience with the individuals that run that company, I was motivated to look for other options. You can always search for it or re-edit your 100,000 files if that happens though.ġst - Here is a (somewhat old but still relevant) thread about "Delete photos after Import" discussion. It adds the information into a sidecar which is easy to lose and get disconnected from the original file. Its practical use is for key wording files. Photomechanic is not a photo editor, or at best a weak one. I don't use aperture, but I doubt that it stuffs photos into its own file structure either. Its a very secure and reliable way of handling photos. Twice the number of files greatly increases the possibility of a glitch, but you can always re-edit your 100,000 files. You can change the settings to have it create sidecar files with the data in them and stored with the images. What Lightroom does do is to create a database with a list of the photos and the location where I put them. Lightroom will not delete photos from the card either. It puts photos where you tell it in your own file structure. It sounds like you do not understand Lightroom at all.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |