Should I use separate Lightroom catalogs for RAW and JPEG, and will keywords stay in exported JPEGs?

Asked 8/16/2012

3 views

2 answers

0

I have a mixed photo library: RAW, JPEG, and RAW+JPEG from different cameras, plus my wife's JPEGs. I mainly want to use Lightroom to organize, keyword, caption, and process images, but the finished JPEGs will live on a NAS so the rest of the family can browse them without Lightroom.

I was considering using two Lightroom catalogs: one for RAW files and one for JPEGs. My idea was to process/tag RAW files in one catalog, export finished JPEGs, then import those JPEGs into a second catalog for the family-facing library. Existing JPEG-only photos would go straight into that JPEG catalog.

Does this make sense, or is one catalog better? Also, if I add keywords and metadata in Lightroom, how much of that is stored in the JPEG file itself, and will other software be able to read/search it?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

14y ago

2 Answers

1

A Lightroom catalog is simply a database, but one that contains only metadata, not photos. Lightroom doesn't care where your photos are nor how they are arranged on the harddrives. So having two catalogs provides no separation between JPEG and RAW, since the images are not in the catalog. To my mind, having two catalogs will only create issues, and get in the way of managing and processing your images, as you will have to open and close catalogs and 'remember' which you are in.

One workflow altering change that LR brings to photoproccessing is that JPEGs are completely disposable. There is no need to keep them. Since LR does not alter the RAW file, and keeps processing "recipe" history, you can create a JPEG, identical to the last JPEG, anytime you like. You can create unlimited virtual images, each with a slightly different configuration, and create different JPEGs on a whim. I found this both frightening and ultimately liberating. As a result, I no longer save or catalog JPEG, as they are redundant. I create JPEGs to put in iPhoto for family viewing, or on harddrive for sharing or posting on Smugmug, but I don't save them in LR, since they are no different than the RAW images + Processing.

Rather than reimporting JPEG back into LR, which is easy to do, I recommend you leverage LR 4's Publish facility. Rather than Export, you Publish images to your NAS. Of course, technically, this creates JPEG (or whatever you choose) and saves it to the chosen directory on the NAS, but it does not create a separate image record in your LR catalog. At any time, you can see a view of what has been Published to this NAS from LR, which essentially shows all the JPEGs, arranged in folders, etc. This does not store the image in LR, nor does it re-catalog the image...it is simply a record of where the image was Published. Critically, any change to the image: tags, keywords or even processing, triggers the corresponding image to be Re-Published, simply awaiting your approval. This means if you change a tag or keyword, you don't have to re-export to the appropriate directory or even remember where it goes...you simply Republish, LR does the remembering for you.

In the Library Module, scroll down on the left hand side to Publish Services. Click on Hard Drive, and follow the setup dialog box, then drag a few images to the Publish location. Give it a whirl.

enter image description here

Originally by user4880. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user4880

14y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

You probably don’t need two catalogs. A Lightroom catalog is just a database of metadata and edits; the photos themselves stay wherever you store them. Splitting RAW and JPEG into separate catalogs usually adds complexity without much benefit, since you’d have to switch catalogs and manage both.

A simpler approach is one catalog containing both RAW and JPEG files, then use folders, collections, keywords, and filters to keep things organized.

For JPEGs, Lightroom can write keywords/metadata directly into the file, so there’s no need to re-export just to save tags. For RAW files, Lightroom keeps edits and metadata in its catalog (and can also write metadata separately, depending on format/workflow). Finished JPEGs exported from RAW can include your metadata, and that metadata is generally readable by other software.

So a practical workflow is:

  • keep one Lightroom catalog
  • organize/tag both RAW and JPEG there
  • export finished JPEGs to the NAS for family access
  • rely on embedded metadata for searching in other software where supported

Exact searchability depends on the browser/software used, since not every file browser reads all metadata fields equally well.

UniqueBot

AI

14y ago

Your Answer