For almost every photographer who shoots bulk works of images, Lightroom is an essential tool. But we often make the costly and frustrating mistake of letting our Lightroom catalogs grow too large.
When running an outdated computer system, speed issues are the clearest signs that you've let your Lightroom catalog grow too large. Most commonly you'll experience lagging while processing your photos.
General computer speed is one of the biggest performance problems photographers face. Typically Photoshop is the culplit for eating up RAM, but Lightroom can cause issues as well. With Lightroom, poor performance can be caused by a number of factors (available RAM, hard drive space, GPU power, LR cache size setting, etc.). Having at least 16GB of RAM will likely be enough to circumvent this issue, and that's what Adobe recommends in order to run Lightroom. It's also a good idea to also keep at least 20% of your hard drive space free.
Depending on your computer's processing power, a bloated Lightroom catalog could reduce your speed and efficacy. The past consensus is that once you're over 10,000 images (or if you shoot over 10,000 a year) it's best to start fresh with a new catalog. Nowadays however, computers have become much better at handling processing needed for quite large catalogs.
This may not apply to hobbyists, but for event photographers and other professionals who often shoot several hundred (or more) images in a single day and experience slowness, chances are you'll benefit from a new catalog when the time comes. How do you know if it's time to start a new catalog?
To keep tabs on your catalog size, go to your Library module and under Catalog on the upper left-hand side, check the number next to "All Photographs."
My "All Photographs" display in Lightroom currently shows under 2,000 images in my catalog. Looks like it'll be good for a while.
Other Reasons for Working With Multiple Catalogs
Organization: Although you have Lightroom Collections at your disposal as Lightroom's ultimate organizational tool, catalogs can be used for archiving purposes as well. You can start a new catalog each year and name it accordingly (example: 2019.lrcat). For bulk images you can keep separate catalogs for your different photography genres or clients (example: 2018_nature.lrcat). This structure will make finding older archived work across multiple catalogs much easier.
Storage and Sharing: Although Lightroom catalog files don't contain the actual images they're referencing, over time they can become relatively large files. If you need to transfer catalog files (plus the source images) to team members or clients, you're making it easier for your associates when you don't send them bulky catalog files.
Disadvantages of Multiple Catalogs
There are, however, some potential tradeoffs in using multiple catalogs. As I noted earlier, a hobbyist or low-volume shooter might be best off with a single catalog because of the ease of access with a single catalog. Having to open and search through multiple catalogs can be laborious. So if you're someone who only picks your camera up occasionally, you may as well keep everything in one place.
But even if you shoot low-volume and make a catalog for each year, you're creating a relatively simple system.
"What year did we vacation in Grenada? It was 2017?"
Boom. Open your 2017 catalog and you will find what you need.
I hope that this article has you thinking about how multiple catalogs can not only improve Lightroom's performance, but also help with organization instead of becoming a burden on your archiving. Please share your cataloging habits in the comments section below.
Photo by Samuel Zeller on Unsplash
Author's note: Some readers have commented that this issue affects them, others not at all. It seems that processing power has progressed so that the 10,000 image figure could be well into the 30, 40 or 50 thousand plus per catalog. I urge you to experiment yourself and take note if Lightroom is running slowly.
I did mention cache in passing in this article, but I definitely could have elaborated. Clearly it's a bigger hinderance than catalog size these days.
I'm not buying this. My catalog is over 80,000 photos, with no issues. The Lightroom Queen says there is no limit and some users have reported over 500,000 in a catalog.
This is outdated and bad advice. Catalog size has zero efffect on speed. And having multiple catalogs are a recipe for data corruption.
I can think of reasons for multiple catalogs. But, none of them are in this article. If I am doing a one off event that will never repeat then I will do a catalog just for it. Other than that one big catalog for me.
As a software developer, I can assure you that the Lightroom database file (catalog) can easily handle all the photos you throw at it. Databases are designed to handle 100,000's of records, some even millions. If you do notice a slowdown, it's not from the number of photos.
True statement. No surprise that the article makes these claims without any objective testing or sources other than anecdote and speculation. Now hundreds of people are going to waste time splitting their catalogs up, risk corrupting data, and see zero benefit.
I just noticed my Lightroom imports are INSANELYYYY SLOWWWW. Im not sure if its the new Nikon Z6 that is causing the issues or something else? Probably takes an hour to import 50 photos as minimal. Brand new catalog too.
I've tried to explain this to people way too much. But the best way I can put it to anyone who's not a computer whiz is that a computer is best left to do indexing, and searching for files, and specifics, and applications are best left to do their jobs which is UI level stuff, not computer level stuff (file indexing, etc.) If a single catalog is being used, then you are relying on the Application to do base level stuff that the computer CPU should be doing. Whereby if a multiple catalog system with a logical order is used (yearly, monthly, etc) then you've simplified it GREATLY, increased processing time overall, and searches for files are on the OS, not the APP.
Thank you Tony. Most people's systems seem to handle it but I can see why a system with low processing power might struggle.
How do I keep seeing instructions for Lightroom CC Classic, but hardly ever see anything for LR CC. Especially for the catalog issue, I cannot figure out for the life of me how to create new catalogs for LR CC 2019.
For years now, I've been thinking of switch to using multiple catalogs, one per job. It might be about time! Thanks for the nudge.
There is no perfect solution or workflow, you have to find what works for you. Personally, i use a catalog per shoot/project.
Pros:
- For me this works better because when i'm done with a project i rarely go back. Once the client has the work, i move on.
- I do most of my work via laptop, i cant store all my work on a laptop. Its a lot easier to make a project folder, within that folder i have a folder for images and the catalog. I can move that project folder to any system or drive and open it within lightroom. Lightroom will know where the images are, i dont have to relink anything.
- Backup: i drag the project folder, with images and catalog to my backup system and i'm done. If i do need to come back to it.. i just drag it back to my laptop or desktop and its ready to go.
Cons:
- If i ever see everything i've ever done this makes it a little more difficult.. but not impossible. i guess i'd just have to create a master catalog and import each sep catalog into it..
- i dont get to see all my work.. (do i really need to go back 10 yrs? )
I just maybe the odd man out here, but this whole Lr thing has me puzzled.
As with a couple of coments of this thread, I shoot sports. Sports is kinda unique in that we're dealing with 1000's of images evert time we step out to work, and it's on a wire schedule or deadline. I won't go into the clumsy brushes or the slightly ham-handed way Lr deal with the very minor adjustments we are allowed to make to sports images. Nor will I go into this whole 'catalog' thing... It's senseless to me.
If your a DOS/Windows based person, you're familiar with file structures, placements, naming etc... Photo Mechanic (which is introducing a catalog/search feature in PM6) take your keepers and import to Ps.. levels adjustments, save... done. period.
You can use ANY file backup systems of hardware/software combos... and it's just plain olde done. I see very very few people in media rooms slogging away with this useless product, and most people I know -- are of the same thought. This started out to be a program for people just too stupid to want to learn Ps -- and I guess by that measure, they've succeeded.
I have 650K RAW images on my catalog with a 45MP camera and no slowdown at all, and the mobile workstation I use have 64GB RAM all with an internal RAID with 2 NVMe SSD 2TB each plus another SSD with 4TB
It seems your system is an efficient workhorse, not in need of much help!
I think the issue with speed is more people not spreading their data over drives other than the same drive the catalog is on, and filling up their storage. Rather than the actual size of the catalog.
I can't imagine having multiple catalogs, it'd be a pain for updating portfolios, doing and end of year highlights reel etc. Most of the power of LR is in it's catalog and file management system.
If people *do* find a slowdown, then a better option IMO, would be to have a working catalog for the current year and a master catalog for all previous years. Then at the start of 2020, you could import the 2019 catalog into your master cat. Thus keeping your ability to search the entire back catalog using keywords etc. Whilst maintaining speed for your current years editing.
I currently have a Lightroom Database of 360k+ images. It contains my life's work, and keeps getting larger courtesy of the ease of shooting massive numbers of digital images! I use one catalogue. I have a reasonably fast computer Mac Mini i7 Quad Core 64Gbs RAM (btw. I elected for 64Gb RAM because I work with massive file sizes and do extensive Photoshop retouching work). I have tried smaller separate catalogues but always end up frustrated that I don't have access to broader information contained in my Master Catalogue.
I work all day on my Lightroom catalogue currently as lockdown has given me the opportunity to get a grip on my massive photo collection and really try to make it work for me. Lightroom is incredibly powerful if you use all the features. And a feature i use extensively is the Filter Bar which is so powerful and useful. Also combined with other sorting attributes and Smart Collections it is possible to really drill down to minute level looking for images or comparing images, also reviewing or searching for Common Photo Attributes (Exposure Lenses, Focal Length, ISO etc), Dates, Location, Keywords pertaining to relevant information and creating Collections. I extensively use Presets in all areas of Lightroom to speed up and enhance efficiency.
I am constantly discovering new features that are helping my job of taming my photo collection.
The only benefit i have found to use a smaller catalogue is when I have a folder / hard drive of old derivative (psds. Tiffs, jpegs) images with loads of duplicates which I need sort out. For good reason LR doesn't encourage duplicates, but sometimes you have a mess that you need to clean up, and so a fresh empty catalogue is good for that, then once you have sorted through all the duplicates and files with messed up filenames, THEN I merge that catalogue back into the Master. Because it is the master catalogue that provides all the power in Lightroom and access to all your keywords, Presets, Collections, Smart Collections, Customised Filter Bar and all the other customisation Lightroom offers.
There is also a benefit to using separate (temporary) Lightroom catalogues, when you are travelling, or working away from home. And sometimes for a certain job, client or project. Some people separate personal from work, or DSLR from iPhone photos etc. But I still think in most cases it is useful to eventually merge these back into the Master Catalogue once you have finished with them.
I use multiple 5Tb hard drives, separating all my RAW DNG files from my processed derivative files, always using Year Month Date re-naming to help keep order in my catalogue.
The bottom line is that if you have a reason to really use Lightroom to find, sort, evaluate, create collections and Publish or Export, then a single Lightroom Database is by far the best. Because it contains SO much information that is at your fingertips and can really speed up efficiency and control over your images.
So it is not so much an issue of HOW many images you have in your database (within the realm of your Computer power available) BUT, I would say, how do you want to USE Lightroom. How much do you want Lightroom help manage your Photo Collection? That is really the determining factor as to why you would seek to use one single Master Catalogue.
Lightroom's real power (other than a brilliant Develop module) is it's sorting power and ability to make and use Collections, Presets based on user applied metadata and camera EXIF metadata etc which can be very rewarding and a lot of fun in itself, whatever level you are.
But yes, I do concede there is a learning curve to understand and use LR to its fullest potential. But putting in the time is, for many, really worth it.