convention for 'derivative' directory names and 'raw' directory names

[alanrew]

I'm having a problem deciding what to do WRT implementing the 'parallel directories' shown on page 67 of Peter's book in Figure 3-8.

Suppose each of my RAW files is 10MB. These get converted to derivative Photoshop master files which, with all the layers and masks etc intact, 16 bits per channel, can easily be 200MB in size (or more).

So the volume of derivative data can be up to 20 times the volume of RAW data.

So if my bucket size for RAW data is 4.7GB to fit onto a DVD, how does the directory naming system system cope with the volume of derivative data? The folder RAW_001_020722 holds 4.7 GB of original RAW files. The corresponding derivative folder holds 20 times 4.7GB.

If I want to use a bucket size of 4.7GB for backing up derivatives to DVD, having one folder called DVD_001 that corresponds to the RAW_001_020722 folder won't work. I'll have to have 20 'DVD' folders corresponding to each 'RAW' folder.

How should I name and number these derivative directories? Should I call them DVD_001_01, DVD_001_02, DVD_001_03 (etc)?

Or should I have a 2-level directory structure, e.g. DVD_001 at the top, with subdirectories 01, 02, 03 etc underneath it, each of which holds up to 4.7GB?

Or have I just misunderstood Peter's advice?

Thanks in anticipation for any help,

Alan Rew

[peterkrogh]

Alan,
There is no real correlation between RAW and Derivative buckets.  Trying to do so, as you are working through, simply does not work.

Use catalog software to correlate the two.

Although derivatives are much larger, if you use DNG, the need to mae derivatives will be dramatically reduced.
Peter

[alanrew]

Alan,
There is no real correlation between RAW and Derivative buckets.  Trying to do so, as you are working through, simply does not work.

Use catalog software to correlate the two.

Although derivatives are much larger, if you use DNG, the need to mae derivatives will be dramatically reduced.
Peter

Thank you for replying so quickly Peter, it's really appreciated.

I was confused by the caption for Figure 3-8: it uses the term 'parallel directories' which I misunderstood as a one-to-one mapping (because that's what would be easiest to understand). Maybe in the next edition you could add a note that although the structures are parallel there is no simple relationship between the two: they're just two sets of buckets.

Despite my confused question, your book is really useful for me in simplifying my existing system. I've previously been making the mistake of mixing derivative files up with RAW files, which as you say on page 67 makes procedures 'complicated and time-consuming'. I'm now going to restructure my system along the lines you suggest.

Unfortunately I don't use ACR as my RAW converter and don't use Bridge. I prefer the conversions from RawShooter Premium - I've never been happy with the colours from ACR. I do, however, convert my Canon RAW files to DNG as an insurance policy against future problems. I keep the CRWs and matching THMs as a further safety measure.

Kind Regards,

Alan

[RRandal]

Alan,
There is no real correlation between RAW and Derivative buckets.  Trying to do so, as you are working through, simply does not work.

Use catalog software to correlate the two.

Peter

Peter, I have your book, and have read about 2/3 of it and am thinking that I will follow your approach, but was having the same question about the bucket corelation.  I have the trial version of iView, and have it on order, but how would you do the corelation of the buckets in iView?

Thanks,
Rodney

[johnbeardy]

Rodney

Peter's saying that there is no correlation. There doesn't need to be, and it would be a nightmare to manage - you'd waste buckets of time doing so, and be burning some discs half empty. Treat them as different streams and don't try to correlate the numbering.

John

[Garth Wunsch]

John, thank you for the straightforward answer to this dilemma I too was having (one of many, but now that I have found this forum, perhaps I will be able to get a few issues cleared up after I look around the lists and then maybe I can ask an intelligent question or two.) My 2006 learning curve has been way too steep... went digital, bought Photoshop CS2, read the DAM book nearly three times and switched from PC to Mac in a matter of six months...
Cheers all
Garth

[Chris Bishop]

If we have one catalogue for all files, how do we duplicate the catalogue structure for the originals and derivatives. I can copy a structure between catalogues, but within the same catalogue has thrown me.
I want to be able to put the same catalogue references to the derivatives.
I have a photo shoot of my sisters flat, overlooing the River Thames (London) including a night panomara of Battersea Bridge
It is catalogued as:
Places, Lonodon, Charlottes Flat,
Places, London, Thames.
People, Family, Charlotte, Charlottes Flat
Landscapes, Nightscapes, Rivers, Thames
Landscapes, Cityscapes, London
Landscapes, Rivers
and so it goes on. Each comma aonther branch.
I now want to repeat it under derivatives along with hundreds more. Derivatives will also have other entries as well: Pano tiffs, psd's, flattened tiffs etc
I can only think of creating a second catalogue, transfering the data, then merging the catalogue back to the original. However the catalogue is dynamic not static, import doesn't stay alphabetical etc. New photos shouldn't take too long to do "live" -it's the older photos in the catalogue I'm thinking of.
Chris Bishop

[peterkrogh]

Chris,
When you say "Cataloged as", what do you mean? Folder Structure, Catalog Sets? Keywords?

If these are catalog sets, and you synced the annotations, then they could come in to the catalog in the same catalog sets.

This is one place where Stacks/versions/Virtual copies could really help.

Peter

[Chris Bishop]

Sorry, catalogue sets. However, I think the above is over doing it, and just putting the derivatives in the exisiting catalogue structure should do it. I watched your video again.
Chris Bishop