Zum Hauptinhalt gehen

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived. The information contained here may no longer be accurate or up-to-date. ⚠️

Keeping RAW files local and jpgs on the cloud

Kommentare

6 Kommentare

  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    What is you exact concern? A too complicated workflow, missing something in the backup, or what else...

    You backup the raws locally at least, right? If you are not talking big numbers of photos, maybe  you can backup the raws to the cloud too?

    Also can you tell us if you are using catalog (or multiple catalogs), or sessions.

    0
  • Del

    Hi BeO. Thanks for helping.
    My concerns are:
    I have 100GB cloud storage in current plan that auto syncs with my local storage - I don’t mind getting more but not if it’s because I’m just piling up files in an uncurated way. Hence keeping RAWs local until they’re reviewed - then probably export them and trash the RAWs.

    Coming to your second point re workflow - I think my plan above makes for an ugly workflow :-)

    As you've suggested, maybe I just need to bite the bullet and upload the RAW files. One thing with RAW is that I can upload them but they’re not that portable - I regard them more as source files than consumable (stating the obvious there).

    I’m not using sessions but am using catalogues - albeit tentatively for now while I figure out the best way. Kind of mirroring my folder structure for now but intend to plan better on that.

    0
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    Ansel Adams made prints from his negatives, and his later prints actually where different from his earlier ones even from the same negatives. His art evolved.

    Why would you want to trash the digital negatives / raw files? Your way to look and develop at an image might evolve too, or at least your raw converter, and it certainly makes a difference if you develop a jpg for web or for print, also for different printing papers.

     

    1
  • Del

    Hmmm very good point. I tend to mentally group photos that are similar, leaving the keeper and trashing the rest.
    That said, they’re not the same - there are elements in those other photos that I like and would like to pull out at some point. So, it’s balancing that with having a collection that’s still focused.
    I think the answer to my question may will be - chill out and keep the negatives and backup with everything else.
    The important thing is to have a solid, reliable, consistent workflow.
    Re collections, I’m still watching the tutorials on that so I fully understand the subtleties of that.

    0
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    there are elements in those other photos that I like and would like to pull out at some point. So, it’s balancing that with having a collection that’s still focused.

    I know, sigh, that's the hardest action for me, determine the throw-away images (apart from some obvious ones).

    I actually keep the raw files (from those images I keep) and only seldom the exported jpgs or tiffs. The weak point in my workflow is that I cannot regenerate them exactly as I don't remember the export adjustments (i.e. output sharpening), but until now that hasn't been a real problem. I need the flexibility of the raws e.g. when I create a photo book I sometimes like to harmonize the color appearance of those images adjacent to another, whereas as a single photo the color appearance / white balance can be different.

     

    1
  • Del

    Yes, me too (throwaways vs keeps). As I said at the start, I’m always conscious of just piling images in and my collections being bloaty.
    Thanks very much for your help and thoughts.
    I think the best plan is to stick with my existing structure (broadly general and photo projects - then broken down by dates etc etc) and not treat the RAWs differently. Catalogue next but plenty of info and threads on that timeless conundrum :-)

    0

Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.