Buckets, achiving, and DNG's changing

[jfiddler]

I'm trying to understand when to archive my dng's to DVD, given that the dng's may change later.   I'm just moving to dng's and lightroom now, from nef's and photoshop.  In that world, I know that the nef's won't change, so they get archived immediately.  Derivative files, like psd's and tif's, are working files and live in working directories, which I back up with chronosync.

With LR, though, the negative and the derivative file are pretty much one in the same.  With the kind of work I do, I might go back at any time and do some work on an old image, which changes the dng because the editing would be stored as xmp data in the dng.  If it's already archived, I now have a choice of changing the file in the original bucket and then re-archiving the whole bucket, or making a copy of the dng as a working file.

How do others handle the change of old dng's, and keeping backups and archives consistent?

[David C. Buchan]

Hi,

When something goes into my archive it's because I don't expect it to change. Subsequent modifications would result in a derivative file. DNG's in the archive can change after I've burnt to DVD but that's ok. I plan on having another backup to disk to handle that.

David

[peterkrogh]

Jfiddler (please use your real name)
I have a slightly different take.  Here's how I think about it.

1. I get images good enough to proof before I create the DNG.  THis means, that I have made a quick judgement about how much I like an image and I do a bit of work to the file to make it look pretty good.  Then I can put it away.

2. If I've done this well enough, most of the images will need no firther adjustment (at least as the technology stands to day - more on that later).

3. At the present time, almost all images that will get readjustment are getting this because I need to make a Master File out of the image.  While changes made to the DNG on the way to becoming a master file are currently not backed up for me, this is generally okay fro two reasons.  Forst, the changes necessary to bring the image into a Master File workflow are generally ones that are less appropriate for proofing (like lowering contrast and sharpening), so I don't consider it acceptable that these changes are not saved into the DNG or ito backups.  Second, once I make a Master File, that is probably the one I will want to return to if I need to do something with that file in the future.  So  the embedded preview is much less important.

4 As to the future, well it gets a bit more interesting.  With Lightroom (and other Metadata Image Editing applications, we will start to see more of our work done in the MIE application, and less in Photoshop.  We certainly *are* moving to a world where *very* few images will end up needing raster image processing. 

But as this technology gets better, it gets easier to save this work out.

So, for instance, if you were to bring a bunch of images back through Lightroom to make a MIE-based master file, there would be no PSD master to save separately, and it would become more important to save those image edits.  It would also become easier to save the adjustments without re-backing up the DNG by simply saving and backing up the Lightroom Database. 

So just as it gets more important to save those Metadata Image Edits, it also gets lots easier.

I hope and expect that the ability to intelligently handle the harvesting and saving of other application's metadata will become a normal part of all asset management software.

Peter

[jfiddler]

4 As to the future, well it gets a bit more interesting.  With Lightroom (and other Metadata Image Editing applications, we will start to see more of our work done in the MIE application, and less in Photoshop.  We certainly *are* moving to a world where *very* few images will end up needing raster image processing. 

But as this technology gets better, it gets easier to save this work out.

So, for instance, if you were to bring a bunch of images back through Lightroom to make a MIE-based master file, there would be no PSD master to save separately, and it would become more important to save those image edits.  It would also become easier to save the adjustments without re-backing up the DNG by simply saving and backing up the Lightroom Database. 

I agree that raster / pixel editing will be the exception, rather than the norm, and that most editing will be adjustment rather than separate files such as psd's.  That's why I'm concerned about saving dng's with those adjustments whenever they change.  I though that those adjustments live in the xmp portion of the dng file, but you seem to be saying that they live in the LR database.  Is that correct?  Are they in both places, or only in the db?  If they really are in the db, and can be backed up regularly and recovered if necessary, then it really is easier to stay protected.

Thanks much for the help!

Jerry Fiddler

[johnbeardy]

Jerry

The XMP adjustments are stored in the database. They can also by written out to the DNG file - you can use a menu command or set a preference so it happens automatically.

John

[peterkrogh]

Jerry,
Yes, you can back up the database, but i the v1 implementation. The multi-computer, multi-database information interchange will be a bit clumsy in v1.

It certainly is easier to back up the database than backing up all changed DNG files.  And it will only get easier.
Peter

[danaltick]

This is going to be a nice addition.  I'm assuming the 4.1 beta does not support multiple databases/libraries so John would not be able to do what he's doing with libraries in 4.1 correct?

Dan

[johnbeardy]

Dan

Wrong assumption - it's even easier with v1. I'll blog this over the next few days, but you can set LR up so the by default it asks you which library to open.

John

[danaltick]

John,

I'll take a look at that.  However, I don't see how in 4.1 to create additional libraries.  I see where to create new shoots and collections, but not libraries.  Can you tell me how to do that?  Thanks.

Dan

[johnbeardy]

Dan

Hold down Alt/Opt *immediately* after starting LR.

Or move your existing library and its folders, restart LR and let it create a new library, and then save that elsewhere as your blank library - copy/paste it for new ones.

John

[johnbeardy]

I should have added that you can double click the LR library file in Finder/Explorer.

John

[danaltick]

John,

Thanks.  So is this now added to the menu's in v1?

Dan

[johnbeardy]

Dan

I said I was going to blog it....  

Basically there is a "default library" preference - one option being "Prompt me when starting LR". Once you've set this, restart Lightroom and you get a dialog asking which library to open and including a "create new" option. You might have expected Adobe to have a Library > Open dialog and mask the closing of one and opening of the other....

John

[danaltick]

Thanks for the info.  I see you inferred that above.  You're right, you would think Adobe would create an "Open" command for that.  I'll check out your blog for further info when you get it up.

Dan

[johnbeardy]

Dan

All my existing blog posts on Lightroom and Aperture are here.

John