What on Earth is LR up to?

[Deleted member 68495]

I am just changing PC's and am doing a backup of all my stuff prior to reinstalling on the new one. I haven't backed up the LR catalog before nad I am very surprised at what my system is trying to back up.

I am using Microsoft Synctoy and it tells me what changes have been made since my last backup and it is telling me that there are 1500 new folders and 12,000 new files in the LR catalog!! Can this be correct? If so, why does the LR catalog require so many folders and files, it's almost one folder per ten pictures?

 

[Chappers]

These are all the preview and data files I suspect, which probably reflects what you have as far as images. Lightroom will back itself up using the backup commend. It will generate a copy of the necessary files, plus give you an option to check the database integrity. Just get it to do this to a specific folder and then transfer this to the appropriate location on your new computer.

I'd also recommend backing up the Lightroom database on a regular basis. If your system crashes, you may have a back up of your images, but all the hard work you put into working on them will be lost. You'd hve to start from scratch, including the import.

 

[JonathanRyan]

Why do you care what LR is up to......?

Synctoy is being a little overhelpful. The LRCAT is one very big file. The Previews "file" is actually a bundle of lots of files (this is all on a Mac but the PC version should be the same as AFAIK the file format is the same). Depending on your settings, you may also be generating lots of XMP files (one for each raw file). Just let your backups run and don't worry too much about how many files/folders there are.

Notes:
1. It's always safe to delete the Previews folder/file as if LR doesn't have this it will just create a new one. All it will cost you is time. For this reason, you may not want to back it up.

2. LR's file format is a little shaky. Probably because it's built on a database that was never really intended for editing pictures.

3. The backup system in LR is somewhat more shaky indeed. It works fine if you only have 1 catalogue but it works really badly if you have several. Some people recommend NOT using LR backup at all and making your own backups.

4. If you make your own backups then Adobe say don't do it while LR is running. They probably use the words "catastrophic data loss" to make their point

 

[neil_g]

4. If you make your own backups then Adobe say don't do it while LR is running. They probably use the words "catastrophic data loss" to make their point

indeed.

while it is databased based the record locking is non-existant (another reason for not letting you put the cat on a network drive or have multiple users per cat) and prone to corruption if anything tries to use the same data at the same time.

 

[Deleted member 68495]

Why do you care what LR is up to......?

Synctoy is being a little overhelpful. The LRCAT is one very big file. The Previews "file" is actually a bundle of lots of files (this is all on a Mac but the PC version should be the same as AFAIK the file format is the same). Depending on your settings, you may also be generating lots of XMP files (one for each raw file). Just let your backups run and don't worry too much about how many files/folders there are.

Notes:
1. It's always safe to delete the Previews folder/file as if LR doesn't have this it will just create a new one. All it will cost you is time. For this reason, you may not want to back it up.

2. LR's file format is a little shaky. Probably because it's built on a database that was never really intended for editing pictures.

3. The backup system in LR is somewhat more shaky indeed. It works fine if you only have 1 catalogue but it works really badly if you have several. Some people recommend NOT using LR backup at all and making your own backups.

4. If you make your own backups then Adobe say don't do it while LR is running. They probably use the words "catastrophic data loss" to make their point

Thanks for that Jonathan, but it doesn't fill me with confidence about Lightrooms ability to look after my stuff in the event of a drive failure and I'm slowly going off it altogether.

I have just changed PC's as my old one was getting on a bit and I've lost my original LR4 so an upgrade to 5 (or more likely, 6) will cost me full price. I have tried again Nikon's NX-D and it's starting to grow on me especially as while I used LR4 I imported a few pictures and converted them to DNG and now find that no Windows programs automatically allow me access to them. I'll probably move away from LR now.

Perhaps this all seems a bit irrational but sometimes one gets a feeling that something is not right for them and LR seems to have become that thing.

I think my problem with LR is that it -- like many (most) other programs on today's modern computers -- takes all control from the user and does it's own thing. I, on the other hand, used to be a computer engineer wherein knowing exactly where one's stuff was and what systems were doing with it was paramount to a healthy system and perhaps I can't let that go; I need to know how my data is being used and handled and LR is obfuscating my information. I think I'll stick with Nikon's software and backup as I know best; shame, LR has some wonderful editing points.

 

[Byker28i]

What settings do you have in Lightroom, how often do you housekeep? I have mine set to backup every week, but there's no option to tidy up after so many backups so you will have many backup sets. These do need the occasional housekeeping manually.

I have about 130000 images in my Lightroom catalogue. Don't have any issues backing up with third party apps, nor robocopy.

 

[JonathanRyan]

Thanks for that Jonathan, but it doesn't fill me with confidence about Lightrooms ability to look after my stuff in the event of a drive failure and I'm slowly going off it altogether.

You're right - that's irrational You need to remember that LR doesn't (in general) touch the originals. So it has to store a lot of deltas. PS (for example) adjusts the pixels so it only has to store the modified master. Up to you which you think suits your needs better.

 

[Chappers]

I've been running Lightroom since the early Beta programme , and its been a stable programme. I started off on a PC and then converted to mac and was able to transfer files and and data no problem. I have had a corruption of the database once, but that was I believe a result of a dying drive. I had a backup and was able to recover everything in a few minutes. I have found it to be reliable piece of software. I have set Lightroom to offer to back up after every session, although I don't always do this. Time machine does this automatically for me anyway, but it's better to be safe than sorry.

 

[neil_g]

You're right - that's irrational You need to remember that LR doesn't (in general) touch the originals. So it has to store a lot of deltas. PS (for example) adjusts the pixels so it only has to store the modified master. Up to you which you think suits your needs better.

this.

I've been running Lightroom since the early Beta programme , and its been a stable programme. I started off on a PC and then converted to mac and was able to transfer files and and data no problem. I have had a corruption of the database once, but that was I believe a result of a dying drive. I had a backup and was able to recover everything in a few minutes. I have found it to be reliable piece of software. I have set Lightroom to offer to back up after every session, although I don't always do this. Time machine does this automatically for me anyway, but it's better to be safe than sorry.

and this.

as long as you take regular copies of your CAT you cant go far wrong.

 

[Byker28i]

130,000 plus images in my catalogue currently. There are performance benefits with where you store the cache, catalogue, backup files etc. Free space and fragmentation is another consideration.