Jump to content
chris_rabe

I so took the wrong approach to processing my images previously...

Recommended Posts

First, while I had my wildlife and nature nicely categorised in Lightroom, I tried to be very general and loose with categorising everything else - one big collection for lakes and dams, one big collection for sunrise and sunset, London (really Chris?). I though this would make it easier to keyword, but it really did just make my life harder I found.

 

So step one was to re-organise all my non-wildlife stuff.

 

Since doing so, it has greatly improved the rate at which I can get through photos - I was just never catching up on my backlog.

 

Another thing I was doing was to just takes small selections of a particular subject, to keep things varied. But, when getting through a backlog, this slows things down as well.

 

So, re-organising into specific subjects, and bulk processing, has massively increased the rate of getting through photos. In about a year previously, it took me nearly a year to not even reach 1500 photos - I have gotten through about 250 already this week.

 

Plus, this is making it easier to cull rubbish photos.

 

While I had categorised the wildlife nicely, I had still not been bulk processing, which I will get to once I am through general stuff. At least once I have cleared my backlog, the new images processed will be varied simply be being easier to get through as they happen :)

 

So, I guess this is just a heads up to anybody who may be finding it a pain to get through things - have a think about your approach - there may be a better way :)

 

Heres hoping I have another 100+ ready to go by tonight!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in about a week was able to get myself over 2000 images up 😊

 

Catalog is now a lot tidier and started sorting wildlife. More photos, but a bit easier to get through - apart from some id's... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chris_rabe said:

So in about a week was able to get myself over 2000 images up 😊

 

Catalog is now a lot tidier and started sorting wildlife. More photos, but a bit easier to get through - apart from some id's... 

Just be careful with those tags. Pitlochry isn’t in the Cairngorms really, it’s in Perthshire. River Tummel isn’t either, though it’s close to the ‘Cairngorms National Park’, but not in the ‘Cairngorms’ mountains, which is what someone would be searching for using that term.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch those similars as well - how many pics of that bridge do you actually need?  Also, there's 2 pics of a building with the sun shining through the branches of a tree - they're very similar.  Too many similars will hurt your ranking.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sally said:

Just be careful with those tags. Pitlochry isn’t in the Cairngorms really, it’s in Perthshire. River Tummel isn’t either, though it’s close to the ‘Cairngorms National Park’, but not in the ‘Cairngorms’ mountains, which is what someone would be searching for using that term.

 

Ah, I thought it was in the bottom part of the national park. 

 

I'll correct those - thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Colblimp said:

Watch those similars as well - how many pics of that bridge do you actually need?  Also, there's 2 pics of a building with the sun shining through the branches of a tree - they're very similar.  Too many similars will hurt your ranking.

 

Yeah, I know I have a few offenders for repetition. 

 

Morris dancers and royal guards come to mind in my collection. 

 

I guess I can get caught up in wondering what particular view of something someone may want and including more than necessary at times. 

 

Does Ctr really have bearing on where a person's images appear? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chris_rabe said:

Does Ctr really have bearing on where a person's images appear? 

According to Alamy legend, yes it does, and it may well be an ingredient of the secret sauce.

But if you look at where your various own images fall in different searches, who knows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chris_rabe said:

 

Yeah, I know I have a few offenders for repetition. 

 

Morris dancers and royal guards come to mind in my collection. 

 

I guess I can get caught up in wondering what particular view of something someone may want and including more than necessary at times. 

 

Does Ctr really have bearing on where a person's images appear? 

IMO too many similars has more of an impact on how many of your images appear on the first couple of pages of a search, since you have no control over the order in which they appear.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm without job for a little bit, so made a hard push and not far from 4000 images up here. To get through things at reasonable rate, my captions are generally basic, but think my keywords are generally concise enough. 

 

As most of it is wildlife, having accurate naming is probably the most important thing. Not a lot of describing what doing, but would never get through it not processing in bulk. 

 

Probably not the best use of my time, being out of work, but just want it out of the way. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.