WayneS
Established Forum Member
Posts: 476 
Open to constructive criticism of photos: Yes
|
Post by WayneS on Nov 24, 2016 1:28:14 GMT
I've just installed PSE 15, and it is likely a good time to clean up and re-organize my album! I've had multiple versions of PSE, simply used a single album. The issue I'm faced with is I have 30,000+ pictures, and with a single album it is taking a lot of time to load.
I'm looking for ideas on breaking this into smaller catalogs that will be easier and quicker to work with!
Obviously since about 1995, with the arrival of digital, the number of pictures taken annually has increased dramatically!
I understand there are a multitude of ways to set up different albums, but I would like to keep it minimal and simple.
My leanings at this point is to set up albums in for example 10 year periods, like 1995 - 2005, and 2006 - 2016 and so on. Prior to the digital era I might run 20 or 25 years per album.
Any comments are appreciated
Thanks
Wayne
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2016 2:44:05 GMT
Hi Wayne,
I think this is a very subjective thing; in the end it comes down what works best for you.
I have mine organized by year and in each year I have further folders usually by event/trip/day out etc. I found that this works best for me, as I usually search either by event or a specific year, any more general and I don't think I would find what I was looking for.
I am sure others will have different systems that they can share with you.
|
|
|
|
Post by michelb on Nov 24, 2016 9:23:52 GMT
I've just installed PSE 15, and it is likely a good time to clean up and re-organize my album! I've had multiple versions of PSE, simply used a single album. The issue I'm faced with is I have 30,000+ pictures, and with a single album it is taking a lot of time to load. I'm looking for ideas on breaking this into smaller catalogs that will be easier and quicker to work with! Obviously since about 1995, with the arrival of digital, the number of pictures taken annually has increased dramatically! I understand there are a multitude of ways to set up different albums, but I would like to keep it minimal and simple. My leanings at this point is to set up albums in for example 10 year periods, like 1995 - 2005, and 2006 - 2016 and so on. Prior to the digital era I might run 20 or 25 years per album. Any comments are appreciated Thanks Wayne Wayne, To clarify it's important not to use the word 'album' when speaking about 'catalogs'. Albums are just one of the features of a given catalog: they are like audio play-lists; they don't contain any file, they are sorted lists of links to the items in their parent catalog. Then about the way to manage big catalogs, it's an old subject with perhaps new issues. www.johnrellis.com/psedbtool/photoshop-elements-faq.htm#_Splitting_and_rearrangingThe two key points are that you can't search across catalogs and the speed of working with catalogs is far from being proportional to the number of items (when you use a database). I don't see a speed difference for catalog actions with a 6,000 items catalog or my present 60,000 one. I am sure your catalog will grow to that size some day! I absolutely want to search my catalog for all dates; splitting by years would be a nonsense for me. What's new since John R Ellis faq? Well, I am just rebuilding a copy of my PSE15 library and catalog to work on an old XP PC with PSE6. Since backward conversion of catalog formats is not possible, I have reimport my library into a PSE6 catalog (that may interest some users). The differences are important in hardware, OS and PSE versions. An uptodate computer with 64-bits and lots of memory makes a big difference. However, the result is quite manageable on the old computer. The real new features in Elements which don't take advantage of the ability of a database to manage large number of items are face recognition and geotagging. They require small but numerous xml files; their management, as I see it, is really proportional to the number of items. To deal with that, the organizer has to index a big number of files, which may take days to be performed when starting a catalog. That may explain why there are many complaints on the forums about recent PSE versions being very slow. The key choice here is to use or not to use the face recognition feature, which is a nonsense in my case. For my family history and genealogy, I only use 'standard' keywords. Even if I have hundreds of people I want to tag, I absolutely don't want a robot to try to tag the thousands I don't care for. I don't allow this in my preferences and I am very happy. When speaking about organizing speed, it's important to state which action is 'slow'. That may be 'slow' until the initial indexing is done, That may be for some command, like deleting many files, That may be to write metadata to files, to update thumbnails, to backup and restore, to convert a catalog... Anyway, the time for a search should be very fast, even for multicriteria queries. It's also important to state information about the system, about the drive types, the scratch disks, the location of the catalog folders. |
|
WayneS
Established Forum Member
Posts: 476
Open to constructive criticism of photos: Yes
|
Post by WayneS on Nov 27, 2016 15:01:16 GMT
Thanks Storkington and MichelB, your comments and suggestions were appreciated. My terminology of "Album" was incorrect, and should have been catalogue. MichelB your comments and excerpts from John Ellis were very helpful.
WayneS
|
|
