[SpecialK]

Move files with File Manager from card to hard drive.
Use FastStone to chimp, then modify individual filenames with short description.
Use Flexible Renamer to substitute the yymmdd for IMG prefix
Process with Elements 13
Move files to "yymmdd Description" folder within Year folder.
Copy jpgs to temp folder and resize them to 2000 pixels.
Upload resized jpgs to SlickPic album under correct category.
Delete resized jpgs.
Copy all RAW files to temp directory and export exif to a file using Breeze Browser.
Copy exif list into master exif spreadsheet.
Delete RAW copies.
Periodically backup all files to 2 portable HDs.

---

Last edited by SpecialK; 07-09-2016 at 12:55 PM.

[Oakland Rob]

IMatch looks great. Sounds like Photo Mechanic is similar. They can read and write hierarchical keywords which as emalvick notes, are more flexible than folders. And more universal (at least in their flat form). Both PC and Mac find finding utilities can search keywords so even photo specific software isn't required.

Note that Lr will continue to work with both finding and keywording after a subscription ends, BTW, if you wanna use it for free for just that.

And the Any Tag plugin makes keywording even easier in Lr.

[emalvick]

I still prefer IMatch. What I like there is that in will map the hierarchical keywords to standard flat keywords (I think LR can do that much).

But, I can also have it exclude certain levels in the flat keywords.

For example. In LR I might have a keyword tree that is:

Who.Family.Smith.John

LR, will map the hierarchy to standard keywords as Who, Family, Smith, John.

With IMatch, I can tell it that I don't want Who (and perhaps Family) in the flat keywords, so I end up with Smith, John

I can keep lower parts of my tree without worrying about having a lot of photos with the keyword "Who"... or "What" or "Location", which I often use to anchor my hierarchy, but not what I want in my galleries. No one is going to search for "Who" as a keyword.

Further, I like that I can exclude keywords at other parts of my tree. For instance, I can eliminate "Smith" while leaving Family and John in place. It doesn't matter where in the tree I am. I use this feature quite exhaustively. It does require maintaining a Thesaurus for this purpose. It took a bit of work at the beginning, but it works well once it is in place. There are nuances, especially if you want to move keywords around the hierarchy. It isn't quite as simple as renaming a folder in your File Manager (Windows Explorer) for instance.

As long as I keep using LR for developing, LR can utilize the keyword hierarchy for browsing.

Another thing multi-lingual users might like is that its thesaurus (keyword catalog) can be setup in multiple languages so not only can you define synonyms, but you can also define what language the synonyms are in.

It's definitely worth a trial, but realize that a month (or whatever the trial limit is) will probably only scratch the surface. You might browse its forums for a bit, try the software with some limited number of images, and see what you can do.

[Urnamaster13]

Lightroom does that. You have all kinds of folder renaming options, although I gotta say folder names are a rather limiting and inflexible way of organizing photos compared to other methods. But they do need SOME name obviously.

DxO and Nik both tout better editing tools for some chores than Lr. Some find them worth it, some don't. Try 'em and see if they work for you.

The reason i am looking at a downloader software is because i agree with 2 posters on 1st page. I do not want to lose the catalog in case the software i use is no longer supported or actively updated. I doubt it will happen with LR, but not sure of rest.
However, i believe the file and folder organization of windows explorer is unlikely to be obsolete so easily. hence i want a downloader, which can auto import pics by dates and other small parameters i define. Like, i just connect my card and the software imports and organizes the RAw files in 1 or 2 locations in my computers Hard drive.

I tried to do it with LR6 but it seems the auto import works only if the folder is empty. And i am not sure how it will organize the imported pics. I would prefer by dates or by "event" .

I like idea of IMatch. Gonna try it out later.

[Oakland Rob]

The reason i am looking at a downloader software is because i agree with 2 posters on 1st page. I do not want to lose the catalog in case the software i use is no longer supported or actively updated. I doubt it will happen with LR, but not sure of rest.
However, i believe the file and folder organization of windows explorer is unlikely to be obsolete so easily. hence i want a downloader, which can auto import pics by dates and other small parameters i define. Like, i just connect my card and the software imports and organizes the RAw files in 1 or 2 locations in my computers Hard drive.

I tried to do it with LR6 but it seems the auto import works only if the folder is empty. And i am not sure how it will organize the imported pics. I would prefer by dates or by "event" .

I like idea of IMatch. Gonna try it out later.

You won't lose the Lr catalog (unless you delete it yourself, or the photos it references).

And as far as metadata, you can store it in the files or sidecars, as we've been discussing. So again, unless you choose to delete them, you don't lose that. I assume you have a backup in any case.

And no, don't assume folder organization is forever. Just one example is a corrupted drive. You can recover from it, but often only the files are recovered, NOT the folders, and NOT the original filenames.

In any case, as I already said Lr can create those folders on import. It doesn't matter which application creates those, in case that's your fear. Folder names are folder names wheter IMatch, File Explorer, Lr or Billy Bob's Downloader creates them. Lr can also put a second copy of the image somewhere, although doing that on the same drive is rather a waste of space.

Lr can import into new folders, or existing ones, or pretty much anywhere in your folder tree. You set the destination. I'd suggest you take a look at some tutorials; sounds like you haven't familiarized yourself with how it works. Might as well utilize what you've got before plunking down money on new stuff.

---------- Post added 07-11-16 at 07:46 AM ----------

I still prefer IMatch. What I like there is that in will map the hierarchical keywords to standard flat keywords (I think LR can do that much).

But, I can also have it exclude certain levels in the flat keywords.

For example. In LR I might have a keyword tree that is:

Who.Family.Smith.John

LR, will map the hierarchy to standard keywords as Who, Family, Smith, John.

With IMatch, I can tell it that I don't want Who (and perhaps Family) in the flat keywords, so I end up with Smith, John

I can keep lower parts of my tree without worrying about having a lot of photos with the keyword "Who"... or "What" or "Location", which I often use to anchor my hierarchy, but not what I want in my galleries. No one is going to search for "Who" as a keyword.

Further, I like that I can exclude keywords at other parts of my tree. For instance, I can eliminate "Smith" while leaving Family and John in place. It doesn't matter where in the tree I am. I use this feature quite exhaustively. It does require maintaining a Thesaurus for this purpose. It took a bit of work at the beginning, but it works well once it is in place. There are nuances, especially if you want to move keywords around the hierarchy. It isn't quite as simple as renaming a folder in your File Manager (Windows Explorer) for instance.

As long as I keep using LR for developing, LR can utilize the keyword hierarchy for browsing.

Another thing multi-lingual users might like is that its thesaurus (keyword catalog) can be setup in multiple languages so not only can you define synonyms, but you can also define what language the synonyms are in.

It's definitely worth a trial, but realize that a month (or whatever the trial limit is) will probably only scratch the surface. You might browse its forums for a bit, try the software with some limited number of images, and see what you can do.

So IMatch has the option of non-exporting keywords, like Lr, but on a case by case basis, instead of globally? I have organizer keywords too, like "_Animals" eg, that I don't want to export. But I'd like to be able to export that in some photos but not all, and in Lr I have to turn it off and then back on if I want it to export on one photo but not others.

And BTW, does IMatch handle "Smith, John" better than Lr? one of my frustrations with it (shared by others) is how Lr handles spaces (as OR, not AND).

[automorphism]

Here is my workflow for what it's worth:

1. Download pictures for each day into folder, rename as yyyy-mm-dd-briefdescription.
2. Import into Darktable (I use Linux), rate and tag
3. Edit sufficiently good ones (3 stars and above)

I use sidecar files. This way, if something happens to the database, I still have all the edits. Actually once something did happen to the database, and nothing of value was lost, except caching.

I use several export presets: full size, which just goes into the same folder (perhaps I should have an "export" subfolder), and print, which goes into a current print folder queue so that I can just drag and drop to the printer, whichever that may be. For exporting for printing, I get Darktable to automatically rename the file to contain the date and folder name so that I know approximately where and when it came from.

For me its important to have a consistent rating scheme:
1 Star: Default rating
2 Star: Correct focus
3 Star: Correct focus, and interesting
4 Star: Something I consider showing someone else. So correct focus, great composition, and something really interesting
5 Star: I can't stop looking at it. Near perfect or perfect.

I've been lazy with tags but tags are useful as your collection grows.

[kadajawi]

I move the files to a temporary folder on my hard drive. Then I drag them into Lightroom, and let them be moved into the corresponding folder. I've got a folder for each camera I have photos from... over the time the number has gotten quite large, for example cause I borrowed gear. I have _all_ my photos, from any camera, in my Lightroom catalog. It can handle them (216000 photos). For cameras that I use regularly, I create subfolders for each year. If that is not enough, subfolders for the country where the photos were taken. The photos are renamed by adding the date in front of them, usually that is enough to find what I am looking for. They are also converted to DNG within Lightroom, as it is compresses more efficiently than the camera. Photos I don't care so much about/don't want to do more extreme edits with get compressed as lossy DNG. The quality is still really good, while files are really small. (High ISO files don't profit from lossy DNG, so for those I always use lossless).

Good photos get stars, when they are edited they also get a flag. That way I can easily filter the photos that I like... I only ever export if I need to copy the file elsewhere for example, or want to post it in a place I don't have a plugin for. If I need the photo again, I'll export it again, according to the settings I need.

I rarely delete, as who knows, a photo that I might consider crap now might become my favorite photo in the future... or there may be ways to salvage photos that were thought completely lost. So unless it is really terrible and won't even pass as abstract art, or a duplicate perhaps (burst), I won't delete it. I'll flag it so I can filter them.

The photo folder and Lightroom catalog, along with a couple of other folders like my videos, is automatically backed up to CrashPlan. I intend to one day build a NAS to keep the photos, and to have them mirrored. Until then I manually keep a duplicate.

Oh yeah, and Lightroom is set to automatically store the edits in sidecar files/in the file itself.

I use tags mostly for people... started using face recognition, unfortunately it doesn't work that well, so I also tag manually.

---

Last edited by kadajawi; 07-21-2016 at 09:57 AM.

[Oakland Rob]

I move the files to a temporary folder on my hard drive. Then I drag them into Lightroom, and let them be moved into the corresponding folder. I've got a folder for each camera I have photos from... over the time the number has gotten quite large, for example cause I borrowed gear. I have _all_ my photos, from any camera, in my Lightroom catalog. It can handle them (216000 photos). For cameras that I use regularly, I create subfolders for each year. If that is not enough, subfolders for the country where the photos were taken. The photos are renamed by adding the date in front of them, usually that is enough to find what I am looking for. They are also converted to DNG within Lightroom, as it is compresses more efficiently than the camera. Photos I don't care so much about/don't want to do more extreme edits with get compressed as lossy DNG. The quality is still really good, while files are really small. (High ISO files don't profit from lossy DNG, so for those I always use lossless).

I'm curious: why so many folders?

I find folders the most minimal form of organization, and really only necessary for organization outside of applications like Lr. I have just dated folders, and only that because it works better with my backup software. In the past I had client folders, since I had to limit access to them and they weren't really mine, and you can only do that at the filesystem level.

But with maybe 5 cameras used on a trip (since I get photos from others) I just use the metadata handle which camera is which since the camera adds that info. Why should I?

And I once did use folders for locations, and still archive some photos there, since I often have to transfer folders full to others (like from say "Cleveland vacation"). But I don't rely on that, since it isn't recorded in the photos. I use the location IPTC fields and geolocation, and keywords too. The locaation tag is better since you can distinguish location SHOWN from location TAKEN. Probably only useful for landscape shots, but I do a lot of those.

You must have a WAY better memory than me: I'd never remember which camera I used for a photo! If I don't enter a wide variety of metadata I'd never find anything. Apple is supposedly working on photo content search a la what Google and Flickr do online, but available on the desk. That would be VERY helpful.

[gatorguy]

You must have a WAY better memory than me: I'd never remember which camera I used for a photo! If I don't enter a wide variety of metadata I'd never find anything. Apple is supposedly working on photo content search a la what Google and Flickr do online, but available on the desk. That would be VERY helpful.

I've changed my photo storage a bit in the past few weeks. I've always kept photos locally but I found myself frequently needing one while at work or on the go. So I've made Google Drive my LR backup, and for those 5 star modified images images that I like to show off saving to Google Photos along with every image taken with my smartphone. In all cases (unless taken with my smartphone) I'm saving in original quality as I have 2TB of cloud space at my disposal, and all free for the next year+. Still cheap after that, so very much worth it for the convenience.

[kadajawi]

I'm curious: why so many folders?

I find folders the most minimal form of organization, and really only necessary for organization outside of applications like Lr. I have just dated folders, and only that because it works better with my backup software. In the past I had client folders, since I had to limit access to them and they weren't really mine, and you can only do that at the filesystem level.

But with maybe 5 cameras used on a trip (since I get photos from others) I just use the metadata handle which camera is which since the camera adds that info. Why should I?

And I once did use folders for locations, and still archive some photos there, since I often have to transfer folders full to others (like from say "Cleveland vacation"). But I don't rely on that, since it isn't recorded in the photos. I use the location IPTC fields and geolocation, and keywords too. The locaation tag is better since you can distinguish location SHOWN from location TAKEN. Probably only useful for landscape shots, but I do a lot of those.

You must have a WAY better memory than me: I'd never remember which camera I used for a photo! If I don't enter a wide variety of metadata I'd never find anything. Apple is supposedly working on photo content search a la what Google and Flickr do online, but available on the desk. That would be VERY helpful.

Because otherwise file names would have repeated themselves. I only started adding the dates to the file names not too long ago. The K-5 folder is 78000 photos strong, and the camera only counts until 9999...

Also, sometimes I may not want to use Lightroom to find a photo, and with that folder structure I can still find the photos. Call it a failsafe just in case something is wrong with Lightroom, or I am accessing my files from a computer that doesn't have Lightroom.

I also geotag my photos. And I don't use a dozen of cameras at the same time... usually it's just my DSLR and my smartphone.

[Oakland Rob]

Because otherwise file names would have repeated themselves. I only started adding the dates to the file names not too long ago. The K-5 folder is 78000 photos strong, and the camera only counts until 9999...

Also, sometimes I may not want to use Lightroom to find a photo, and with that folder structure I can still find the photos. Call it a failsafe just in case something is wrong with Lightroom, or I am accessing my files from a computer that doesn't have Lightroom.

I also geotag my photos. And I don't use a dozen of cameras at the same time... usually it's just my DSLR and my smartphone.

I have tons of photos with the same file name. Again, I share photos and sometimes it isn't a good idea to change the file name if you need to refer back to it in conversations with the owner. Lr stores the original file name in XMP so that helps.

Filenames aren't as robust an info storage mechanism because they rely on the filesystem. Info stored in the file itself, in metadata, is more permanent IMHO. I've had to use file recovery tools on damaged disks and they can sometimes recover files, but without the names. But if the metadata is inside, as long as the file is recoverable at all the data is there. Even if I have to rename exports for say sequencing purposes in a presentation I preserve that info elsewhere in the file (I use Photo Mechanic to do that, since I want the info in the titles as well). Just paranoid I guess. But since every operating system can find photo metadata it's pretty reliable. Or if I don't have Lr. I use a Mac and it's super easy to find images by date in the Finder with Spotlight, easier than finding the dates in filenames since Spotlight doesn't recognize those as dates. YMMV.

[kadajawi]

I have tons of photos with the same file name. Again, I share photos and sometimes it isn't a good idea to change the file name if you need to refer back to it in conversations with the owner. Lr stores the original file name in XMP so that helps.

Filenames aren't as robust an info storage mechanism because they rely on the filesystem. Info stored in the file itself, in metadata, is more permanent IMHO. I've had to use file recovery tools on damaged disks and they can sometimes recover files, but without the names. But if the metadata is inside, as long as the file is recoverable at all the data is there. Even if I have to rename exports for say sequencing purposes in a presentation I preserve that info elsewhere in the file (I use Photo Mechanic to do that, since I want the info in the titles as well). Just paranoid I guess. But since every operating system can find photo metadata it's pretty reliable. Or if I don't have Lr. I use a Mac and it's super easy to find images by date in the Finder with Spotlight, easier than finding the dates in filenames since Spotlight doesn't recognize those as dates. YMMV.

I just add the date to the beginning.

I'm using Everything to search my files, which is very fast without having to catalog my drives, but which can't search through metadata.

Anyway there are many different ways, and they are all sensible. I mean, the metadata in the file contains the date too, so even if I have to recover the files I still have that info. All the other info is stored in the metadata.

[emalvick]

To chime in again, I do keyword and geotag all photos (that aren't at home) but I do tend to use folders to navigate a bit even within Lightroom or my DAM. I rarely shoot things multiple times but I do use multiple cameras. My file naming allows me to blend photos from each camera into one folder that is date organized with one or two words to give context... e.g. Folder = "20150925 - Telegraph Hill" or "20120915 - Reykjavik". While folders aren't the best way to organize at a high level they still work for me. Of course, using IMatch, I have categories that organize by Country/State/City/Sublocation (e.g. the GeoTags and Location tags in XMP), but I don't use them as often as I thought I would.

My people keywords, however, help immensely since I photograph family members and friends everywhere at all sorts of times, and I am not great at remembering when they were photographed. Conversely my memory on when I was in a specific place is actually quite good. So definitely, it depends on the user, what works. I imagine if I didn't rename my files, my system wouldn't work at all or I would need more folders.

[YankeeDan]

What Pentax software, if any, does a K1 user need with a Mac and iPad? I use LR6 mainly and am a bit uncertain about what all the Pentax software choices would do. There is Tethered Capture Plug-in, Image Transmitter 2, Image Sync (iPad app), Digital Camera Utility, more? I understand that Pixel Shift processing requires use of Digital Camera Utility 5. Anyone have some experience or recommendations? Thanks much.

[UncleVanya]

What Pentax software, if any, does a K1 user need with a Mac and iPad? I use LR6 mainly and am a bit uncertain about what all the Pentax software choices would do. There is Tethered Capture Plug-in, Image Transmitter 2, Image Sync (iPad app), Digital Camera Utility, more? I understand that Pixel Shift processing requires use of Digital Camera Utility 5. Anyone have some experience or recommendations? Thanks much.

I would suggest putting this into a thread by itself in the K-1 forums - you are likely to get better responses.
I'm afraid as a K-3 user without a K-1 I don't have anything else to contribute other than speculation. I can say that the Image Sync app is for controlling and transferring images from camera to phone/tablet. I can also say that Pixel Shift doesn't require DCU5 but works better with it than without it. Using Pixel shift without it is possible but there were reports of poor output with odd artifacts etc. But I'm just going on what I have read - so experts should be consulted...