Comments on: The Great Photo Organization Project http://photodoto.com/photo-organization-project/ Photography is for everyone. Tue, 14 Feb 2012 09:17:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Denver Photographers Pink Fog Studios http://photodoto.com/photo-organization-project/comment-page-1/#comment-208945 Denver Photographers Pink Fog Studios Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:50:24 +0000 http://photodoto.com/?p=1679#comment-208945 Excellent post. I have been putting off organizing my photos for sometime. Common taxonomy for my tags makes a lot of sense. -dz Excellent post. I have been putting off organizing my photos for sometime. Common taxonomy for my tags makes a lot of sense. -dz

]]> By: Stew http://photodoto.com/photo-organization-project/comment-page-1/#comment-208476 Stew Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:11:44 +0000 http://photodoto.com/?p=1679#comment-208476 I'm with Rick. Lightroom has solid features for things like hierarchies, aliases and prompting you with the current tag values (so you don't have to remember if you previously said "bird" or "Birds"). Since it also uses XMP by default and you believe that's the future, why not be forward, rather than backward-compatible? It's also supported by Adobe Bridge, so you're not locked entirely into Lightroom. Finally, Lightroom can show you just the photos that are un-tagged, which helps you find what you need. Unfortunately, as soon as you add the first tag, those shots will disappear from view (since they're now tagged), which can be a pain at times. If that's a problem, I'd filter for untagged, select a mess of them and press "B" to put them in the Quick Collection. Then you can jump to the QC (press Ctrl-B) and you don't have to use the "not tagged" filter any more. Tag a mess of them and when you're happy with them, select and press "B" and they're cleaned out of the QC. Keep working until the QC is empty. Good luck, Stew I’m with Rick. Lightroom has solid features for things like hierarchies, aliases and prompting you with the current tag values (so you don’t have to remember if you previously said “bird” or “Birds”).

Since it also uses XMP by default and you believe that’s the future, why not be forward, rather than backward-compatible? It’s also supported by Adobe Bridge, so you’re not locked entirely into Lightroom.

Finally, Lightroom can show you just the photos that are un-tagged, which helps you find what you need. Unfortunately, as soon as you add the first tag, those shots will disappear from view (since they’re now tagged), which can be a pain at times.

If that’s a problem, I’d filter for untagged, select a mess of them and press “B” to put them in the Quick Collection. Then you can jump to the QC (press Ctrl-B) and you don’t have to use the “not tagged” filter any more. Tag a mess of them and when you’re happy with them, select and press “B” and they’re cleaned out of the QC. Keep working until the QC is empty.

Good luck,

Stew

]]> By: Sean Phillips http://photodoto.com/photo-organization-project/comment-page-1/#comment-208218 Sean Phillips Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:42:05 +0000 http://photodoto.com/?p=1679#comment-208218 I should mention that there are also several sources of free Keyword lists out there, but they are nowhere near as complete as Controlled Vocabulary. Here's one from Nick Potter: http://www.nickpotter.net/lightroom-keywords I should mention that there are also several sources of free Keyword lists out there, but they are nowhere near as complete as Controlled Vocabulary.

Here’s one from Nick Potter:
http://www.nickpotter.net/lightroom-keywords

]]> By: Sean Phillips http://photodoto.com/photo-organization-project/comment-page-1/#comment-208217 Sean Phillips Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:38:51 +0000 http://photodoto.com/?p=1679#comment-208217 You really need to check out Controlled Vocabulary. They have hierarchical keyword collections available for all the major photo management software programs. http://www.controlledvocabulary.com/products/index.html You really need to check out Controlled Vocabulary. They have hierarchical keyword collections available for all the major photo management software programs.

http://www.controlledvocabulary.com/products/index.html

]]> By: Tagging progress… | Photodoto http://photodoto.com/photo-organization-project/comment-page-1/#comment-208208 Tagging progress… | Photodoto Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:38:46 +0000 http://photodoto.com/?p=1679#comment-208208 [...] great photo organization project continues. I’m not in what you’d call a “habit” yet exactly as far as my [...] [...] great photo organization project continues. I’m not in what you’d call a “habit” yet exactly as far as my [...]

]]> By: Kev http://photodoto.com/photo-organization-project/comment-page-1/#comment-208181 Kev Thu, 24 Sep 2009 07:26:18 +0000 http://photodoto.com/?p=1679#comment-208181 My sorting workflow is based on Adobe Bridge: 1.i find that it's better to have a root-keyword with sub-keys like (year[root]:1999, 2000, 2001,...,[keys]), (Photo Type: People, Automotive, Nature,...,), (Month: January, February,...,), (Location#1: Country), (Location#2: City) etc. 2.Adobe Bridge has a better keyword system than LR because it has some kind of keyword-tree available and you can search your entire archive with just a right-click. 3.Do all your keywording in Bridge after each Camera-photo-download. Hope that helps! My sorting workflow is based on Adobe Bridge:
1.i find that it’s better to have a root-keyword with sub-keys like (year[root]:1999, 2000, 2001,…,[keys]), (Photo Type: People, Automotive, Nature,…,), (Month: January, February,…,), (Location#1: Country), (Location#2: City) etc.
2.Adobe Bridge has a better keyword system than LR because it has some kind of keyword-tree available and you can search your entire archive with just a right-click.
3.Do all your keywording in Bridge after each Camera-photo-download.

Hope that helps!

]]> By: John Watson http://photodoto.com/photo-organization-project/comment-page-1/#comment-208164 John Watson Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:18:55 +0000 http://photodoto.com/?p=1679#comment-208164 I don't *want* to tag 30,000 images. I definitely wish I'd done it all along (like I'm doing now). :) Thanks for sharing your workflow. Being consistent is a key tip. I don’t *want* to tag 30,000 images. I definitely wish I’d done it all along (like I’m doing now). :)

Thanks for sharing your workflow. Being consistent is a key tip.

]]> By: Woodie http://photodoto.com/photo-organization-project/comment-page-1/#comment-208163 Woodie Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:07:42 +0000 http://photodoto.com/?p=1679#comment-208163 I'm not sure why you would want to tag 30,000 images one at a time but everyone has a different workflow. Anyway, in an earlier post I mentioned apps I use for cataloging but not how I use them. I use a hierarchical structure that you mentioned. Here's an short example. I have 500 photos shot at a polo match. When I ingest from the card(s)(I use Photo Mechanic [PM] for speed) I add all the common info: location, photographer, copyright, etc. I also add the common hierarchical keywords that apply to all or most images: animals.horses.polo ponies, sports.polo, etc. and rename. Once copied all 500 now have some IPTC info. (PM will ingest to two locations so I copy to an internal and external drive at the same time giving me three copies of the images at this point) Next I cull, rate and label images. Next, I check (a Photo Mechanic function)the images that need no additional keywording and view only those that need additional keywords. Maybe names of individuals, or something else unique to the photo or groups. I select all images that need the same additional keywords and add that. I repeat until all photos have appropriate keywords. I then rename again. Why? I use a sequence number as part of my filename. I'm compulsive or something like that and I don't like missing sequence numbers. If a number is missing, I don't know if it should be missing or it was deleted by mistake. Once this is completed I synchronize with the external hard drive so I now have the culled, keyworded, rated, labeled files two places and the originals still on the card. I now read the files into IDimager for cataloging. I could use IDimager for all the upfront work but PM just works better for me (FAST). IDimager recognizes the keyword structure animals.horses.polo ponies as hierarchical and creates (if it's not already there) the catalog entry. If I search animals, I get all animals. If I search horses I get all the horses. A polo ponies search gets only those images. I can also search for horses not polo ponies and get all other horses. Most catalog apps have trials available so I encourage you to try a lot of them until you find the one(s) that work the way you do. The one thing that I cannot stress enough no matter what apps you use or what is your workflow. Be CONSISTENT with your keywords. Automobile, automobiles, auto, autos, car, and cars are all DIFFERENT to the app. Bob and Robert aren't the same. Lastname, firstname is not the same as firstname, lastname. Did I say it already: be CONSISTENT. A final word and I'm out of here. If you plan to submit to a stock agency, do yourself a favor and use the agency's keyword structure. Sounds obvious but it's sometimes overlooked. Over and out. I’m not sure why you would want to tag 30,000 images one at a time but everyone has a different workflow. Anyway, in an earlier post I mentioned apps I use for cataloging but not how I use them. I use a hierarchical structure that you mentioned. Here’s an short example. I have 500 photos shot at a polo match. When I ingest from the card(s)(I use Photo Mechanic [PM] for speed) I add all the common info: location, photographer, copyright, etc. I also add the common hierarchical keywords that apply to all or most images: animals.horses.polo ponies, sports.polo, etc. and rename. Once copied all 500 now have some IPTC info. (PM will ingest to two locations so I copy to an internal and external drive at the same time giving me three copies of the images at this point) Next I cull, rate and label images. Next, I check (a Photo Mechanic function)the images that need no additional keywording and view only those that need additional keywords. Maybe names of individuals, or something else unique to the photo or groups. I select all images that need the same additional keywords and add that. I repeat until all photos have appropriate keywords.

I then rename again. Why? I use a sequence number as part of my filename. I’m compulsive or something like that and I don’t like missing sequence numbers. If a number is missing, I don’t know if it should be missing or it was deleted by mistake. Once this is completed I synchronize with the external hard drive so I now have the culled, keyworded, rated, labeled files two places and the originals still on the card.

I now read the files into IDimager for cataloging. I could use IDimager for all the upfront work but PM just works better for me (FAST). IDimager recognizes the keyword structure animals.horses.polo ponies as hierarchical and creates (if it’s not already there) the catalog entry. If I search animals, I get all animals. If I search horses I get all the horses. A polo ponies search gets only those images. I can also search for horses not polo ponies and get all other horses.

Most catalog apps have trials available so I encourage you to try a lot of them until you find the one(s) that work the way you do. The one thing that I cannot stress enough no matter what apps you use or what is your workflow. Be CONSISTENT with your keywords. Automobile, automobiles, auto, autos, car, and cars are all DIFFERENT to the app. Bob and Robert aren’t the same. Lastname, firstname is not the same as firstname, lastname. Did I say it already: be CONSISTENT.

A final word and I’m out of here. If you plan to submit to a stock agency, do yourself a favor and use the agency’s keyword structure. Sounds obvious but it’s sometimes overlooked.

Over and out.

]]> By: banj http://photodoto.com/photo-organization-project/comment-page-1/#comment-208145 banj Sat, 19 Sep 2009 14:37:50 +0000 http://photodoto.com/?p=1679#comment-208145 Funny how everyone seems to come to the same 'problem' at the same time- I'm in pretty much the same situation, I've just started assembling and organizing all my photos from many different sources, and I'm beginning to see that finding and importing them into Aperture was by far the easiest part of the project!! Tagging my (30 000) photos is going to be a totally mammoth task, and aperture doesn't exactly streamline the process - I'd kill for a program that simply displays each photo one after another and lets you click on applicable tags and/or add new ones. But the architecture design of the photo library is what really (actually) keeps me awake at night... I think in terms of hierarchy, so the flat nature of keywords is a little disconcerting for me. If i create a tag for one of my friends and nest it in the 'friends' tag, then ideally every keyword leading to 'friends' would also be applied to my picture. I really don't want to have to define all those paths by hand for each and every photo... Funny how everyone seems to come to the same ‘problem’ at the same time- I’m in pretty much the same situation, I’ve just started assembling and organizing all my photos from many different sources, and I’m beginning to see that finding and importing them into Aperture was by far the easiest part of the project!!

Tagging my (30 000) photos is going to be a totally mammoth task, and aperture doesn’t exactly streamline the process – I’d kill for a program that simply displays each photo one after another and lets you click on applicable tags and/or add new ones.

But the architecture design of the photo library is what really (actually) keeps me awake at night… I think in terms of hierarchy, so the flat nature of keywords is a little disconcerting for me. If i create a tag for one of my friends and nest it in the ‘friends’ tag, then ideally every keyword leading to ‘friends’ would also be applied to my picture. I really don’t want to have to define all those paths by hand for each and every photo…

]]> By: amnesix http://photodoto.com/photo-organization-project/comment-page-1/#comment-208143 amnesix Sat, 19 Sep 2009 06:27:11 +0000 http://photodoto.com/?p=1679#comment-208143 Using Ubuntu allows you to use Digikam, although it is a "KDE" program. It is, I believe, a really good program. Using Ubuntu allows you to use Digikam, although it is a “KDE” program. It is, I believe, a really good program.

]]>