# recommend a folder structure



## Pindy (Oct 26, 2007)

I migrated from Aperture to LR last month. I was using Aperture to manage all the photos (as opposed to using "referenced masters") so any kind of folder strcture was irrelevant. Now, I have to be smart about how my folders are laid out, since LR uses those folders as a direct way of accessing images.

Previously, I had all photos from a given year inside a single Aperture Project. I would make sub-folders to sort family photos from "photography" etc.

How do you like to organise your folders? I'm beginning to feel like a folder-per-year is a bit too broad, but I don't really dig importing photos into a folder-per-date either.

Any suggestions?


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Oct 26, 2007)

For my personal photos, I tend to have year/month, and I use collections and keywords to sort them into categories.  There's no reason you couldn't sort in the same way as you did before though, using categories as your folders.  I decided against that option as the folders started to get a bit big to view in other programs, but if it works for you, that's great!


----------



## sandman (Oct 26, 2007)

Pindy;2'56 said:
			
		

> How do you like to organise your folders?



Year
  |_ Month
  |_ Month
  |_ etc
Year
 |_ Month
 |_ Month
 |_ etc


----------



## Pindy (Oct 26, 2007)

Thanks. I typically search by keywords but maybe I could keep the year folders do months too. Since I'm mostly a hobbyist, I'm not sure how meaningful it is to set up my folders in terms of "shoots", which don't apply to me as often as it would a pro.


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Oct 26, 2007)

Pindy;2'72 said:
			
		

> Thanks. I typically search by keywords but maybe I could keep the year folders do months too. Since I'm mostly a hobbyist, I'm not sure how meaningful it is to set up my folders in terms of "shoots", which don't apply to me as often as it would a pro.



Here is how I do it which seems to work well:
Year (2''7)
Month ('6)
Day with brief description (11 Flowers)


----------



## joebarrett (Oct 29, 2007)

*I have a hard disk called "Photos" and I have three simple top level Folders.*

I have a hard disk called "Photos" and I have three simple top level Folders. 

Objects, People and Places.

Underneath I will have a much finer granularity

*Places*
 - _UK
   - Scotland
   - Wales_
   ..
 - _Europe_
*People*
_- Family
 - Friends_
*Objects*
etc

I don't find structuring by date useful and Lightroom will find or display your images by date using the metadata browser.


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Oct 29, 2007)

joebarrett said:


> I have a hard disk called "Photos" and I have three simple top level Folders.
> 
> Objects, People and Places.
> 
> ...


Joe, LR will also find your images by your names etc using keywords which makes a date folder structure just as relevant.


----------



## Pindy (Oct 29, 2007)

joebarrett said:


> I have a hard disk called "Photos" and I have three simple top level Folders.
> 
> Objects, People and Places.
> 
> ...



Interesting, in that I use the nested keywords browser to do that same heirarchy. I agree abut the dates?it gives me the same dread as when I tried to find photos in iPhoto's folders.


----------



## Sean McCormack (Oct 30, 2007)

Mine is not too dissimilar to Joe:

Band
___Venue
         -----Band Name
Commercial
--------Client name
           ------Job
Studio
--------Client name
           ----subfolders for different shoots

Landscape
--------Ireland
            ----Connemara etc
--------UK
Etc


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Oct 30, 2007)

So then Sean, how do you use collections? So for me I have collections for people>family>mum etc


----------



## johnbeardy (Oct 30, 2007)

Unless you use a strictly date-based structure, there is always the risk of your pictures either being duplicated or falling between the cracks and being controlled only in your imagination. Where, in Sean's example, would one put a shot that fits more than one category - a portrait in a bleak Connemara landscape. In  bands, or in Connemara? Why not in both? Or should it depend on the size of the person relative to the landscape. A second set of considerations is reconstruction - imagine a catastrophic system failure and what makes rebuilding easier. A subject hierarchy or simple date based folders? In other words, using your folder system to analyze your work is a dead end - that's what metadata is for.

John


----------



## Richard Earney (Oct 30, 2007)

For me Date is the 'obvious' way to go.

So 2''7 > Quarter > Date

with the date in 2''7.1'.3' order (ISO stylee)

Keywords and Collections on top of that to give the structure context.


----------



## billg71 (Oct 31, 2007)

I use the date using LR's "By Date: 2''5/2''5-12-17" preset on import and add a short 1-word description to the folder in LR. This is starting to get a little unwieldy as I spend more time shooting so I'm thinking of adding a "Month" sub-folder and moving the individual day folders into them. The plus is that I don't have to scroll thru a long list of folders for the year, the minus is that I have to open the monthly sub-folders.

Keywording and renaming aren't exactly my strong suits but I can usually remember that "I shot that in Spring of 2''6" so the date arrangement suits me fine. I'm not a pro, I don't do 3 or 4 shoots every week and don't have to keep up with hundreds of thousands of images. If I was, I'd definitely do things differently. The files for my business are set up by customer/job so I can appreciate the needs of the working pro, I just don't shoot enough that it all runs together.

Anyway, this is what works for me. YMMV!


----------



## Sean McCormack (Oct 31, 2007)

Kiwigeoff said:


> So then Sean, how do you use collections? So for me I have collections for people>family>mum etc



Collections are used for everything Geoff. You think I want to look at all the images I've taken? I hold onto old images unless they are really bad. I'm getting better at deleting though. 

Collection contain my Picks, variations in colour/tone, general albums, mixes of many different images that have some relational value. 
My earlier stuff was by date, but even if I'm outside Lightroom using a file browser, I can still get to a folder quicker than remembering roughly what date it was.


----------



## Sean McCormack (Oct 31, 2007)

As to John Beardy.. You mean you don't think I have a People in the Landscape section?

You know that in reality if I created a collection based on each import, files could go anywhere and it wouldn't matter a damn (bar OS folder limitations). To paraphrase John 'Metadata is what matters'.  

If I need to find by date, I have the Metadata Browser. I stopped using date as top level sort, (If I've multiple shoots of the same thing/person, then the sub folder is by date), because I might have dawn landscapes, morning nudes, afternoon portraits and a band shoot in the evening. I'd rather they went by type than date. Just a preference. 

The key to any organisational method is the ease of finding any image. Any system that allows a user to find a specific image quickly is as valid as the next. If I was really concerned I could just start Exporting Originals using the year/Month hierarchy from the Metadata Browser.


----------



## Mark Sirota (Oct 31, 2007)

For me, the date it was shot is the only unambiguous thing about an image.  Landscapes might include people, for example.  So I use Lightroom's YYYY/YYYY-MM-DD scheme, though I'd really like a YYYY-MM in the middle (and yes, I submitted a feature request).

I also name my files by date, YYYYMMDD-OrigFileNumber.  That scheme could break if I ever shoot with more than one camera on the same day, in which case I'll introduce another element.

Then I populate the Location/City/State/Country fields, and do some minor keywording.  Keywords are all about the _content_ of the image.  I could be better about keywording...

I use Collections to represent things about the photo that are not represented in the content, like disposition.  I have a Collection of images that I've put on Flickr, for example, and another of images of my kids that I've sent to their grandparents so I don't have to try to remember which I've sent and which I haven't.

If I were like Sean and had four completely unrelated shoots in a day (rarely gets to two, for me) I might do it differently.


----------



## rcannonp (Oct 31, 2007)

Have you guys heard this podcast? They are arguing about some of the same things.

LightroomNews ? Blog Archive ? Podcast #42 with Jay Maisel, Greg Gorman and Seth Resnick


----------



## Sean McCormack (Oct 31, 2007)

Heard it as soon as George published it. Interesting and colourful!


----------



## I Simonius (Oct 31, 2007)

as yes a good thread..

The problem as I see it is that these suggestions work, _provided one uses LR for everything_, as soon as one triesd to revert to Bridge (or the Finder) for anything , it's a maze...:frown:  I worry about not having a structure that allows for any way of finding things except through LR (don't know why - guess I just like to worry:shock

Until LR I had used subject hierarchies for my Structure, because there is no way with mu memory and sense of time  that I could rmemeber _when_ I shot things, so time of shooing is only usefult o me as a way of breaking the quantity of images down into a manageable number

I lie the collections idea a sbeing the main way as I still relate to subject heirarchybetter than anything eldse and also that gives me time to get keyword organised (for later)

A challenging topic


----------



## Tim Broyer (Oct 31, 2007)

Mark Sirota said:


> I also name my files by date, YYYYMMDD-OrigFileNumber. That scheme could break if I ever shoot with more than one camera on the same day, in which case I'll introduce another element.



I routinely shoot with three cameras and I use a similar file naming convention.  It's important to have the times synched on your camera's as best as possible.  Once I sort each camera's shots for picks and duds, I combine all the picks into one folder and sort by capture date.  Before handing to the client, I "F2" a name change to sequence the picks.  This seems to work very well for me.  The struggle comes when an assistant hands me a card from their camera with a time stamp 13 hours off.  LR makes it easy to change that too.


----------



## johnbeardy (Oct 31, 2007)

Sean

"Any system that allows a user to find a specific image quickly is as valid as the next." No, that's close to the Aperture 1 black hole approach - why even bother renaming files - and seems great in theory until you consider the long term. People change front ends, or search requirements change over time. The folder system is only about storage, access speed, security, reconstruction after catastrophe, data migration - about physical issues, not describing the contents.

You don't know how many times I've encountered photographers with hierarchical folder systems that they're smart enough to maintain. Hm, only last week I was sorting out a wildlife guy's archive that was organized by species - he thought it worked like a dream except where two species were in the same shot, and one family of species was outgrowing its drive. That led to more mucking around moving files between his folders and screwing up his backup when he tried to prevent it picking up those moved files. Sooner or later, a hierarchical system ends in tears. It's an amateur approach. That's OK - it's billable. 

John


----------



## Clicio Barroso (Nov 1, 2007)

johnbeardy said:


> You don't know how many times I've encountered photographers with hierarchical folder systems that they're smart enough to maintain



I don't know if this will help or not, but my system has been working very well for the past two years.
Structure:
Pictures/YYYY/MM/categories/files.DNG
Where "categories" are what I most shoot: Advertisement, Editorial, Catalogs, Personal, Travel, Workshops
Naming of the files: YYMMDD_client_'''1.DNG
If it is personal or the client is a model, in place of the "client" goes my name or the model's name.
:idea:
Regards,


----------



## I Simonius (Nov 2, 2007)

listened to the podcast and glad to hear none of thoseguys got close to agreeing either:lol:


----------



## Pindy (Nov 2, 2007)

johnbeardy said:


> Unless you use a strictly date-based structure, there is always the risk of your pictures either being duplicated or falling between the cracks and being controlled only in your imagination. A subject hierarchy or simple date based folders? In other words, using your folder system to analyze your work is a dead end - that's what metadata is for.
> 
> John



John, you've just about convinced me. Excellent points.

The question is, how can one take a folder full of photos already imported into LR and have the computer organise them into a YYYY/YYYY-MM-DD -type structure?


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Nov 2, 2007)

Pindy said:


> John, you've just about convinced me. Excellent points.
> 
> The question is, how can one take a folder full of photos already imported into LR and have the computer organise them into a YYYY/YYYY-MM-DD -type structure?



Sort them by capture time and then create folders within LR for the date structure you want, starting with year folders then month folders etc.


----------



## Pindy (Oct 26, 2007)

I migrated from Aperture to LR last month. I was using Aperture to manage all the photos (as opposed to using "referenced masters") so any kind of folder strcture was irrelevant. Now, I have to be smart about how my folders are laid out, since LR uses those folders as a direct way of accessing images.

Previously, I had all photos from a given year inside a single Aperture Project. I would make sub-folders to sort family photos from "photography" etc.

How do you like to organise your folders? I'm beginning to feel like a folder-per-year is a bit too broad, but I don't really dig importing photos into a folder-per-date either.

Any suggestions?


----------



## Pindy (Nov 2, 2007)

Kiwigeoff said:


> Sort them by capture time and then create folders within LR for the date structure you want, starting with year folders then month folders etc.



True?I was angling for a more automated solution!


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Nov 2, 2007)

Have you done much work on these files Pindy?

If you aren't worried about keeping virtual copies, history, snapshots or collections, you could select all, write the metadata to files, and then import them into a new catalog renaming as you go.  But I'd do a backup first!


----------



## Pindy (Nov 2, 2007)

Victoria Bampton said:


> Have you done much work on these files Pindy?
> 
> If you aren't worried about keeping virtual copies, history, snapshots or collections, you could select all, write the metadata to files, and then import them into a new catalog renaming as you go.  But I'd do a backup first!



I don't have any important collection, snapshots, but massive keywording and IPTC. I think I'll try a backup and import into another catalogue in case the results frighten me. Thanks for the tip.

So LR will see the sidecars auto-magically?


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Nov 2, 2007)

Keywording and IPTC should be written to the files when you do the Metadata > Write Metadata to Files (Ctrl-S / Cmd-S - what platform at you on?), so in theory it should work ok.  Definitely backup the library and files before you try anything quite so major though - nothing worse than it crashing half way through!!!

LR will read any sidecars when you import.


----------



## joshua (Nov 2, 2007)

Since lightroom automatically makes folders for each day, i've had it set up like that by default. Is there some way to have it so that lightroom puts them in a hierarchy that would be year/month/day?

Thanks!


----------



## joshua (Nov 6, 2007)

have i really stumped you guys? I find that hard to believe!


----------



## Mark Sirota (Nov 6, 2007)

There is no way to customize the date hierarchies used on import.  I wish there were, and I've filed a feature request.  Personally, I want YYYY/YYYY-MM/YYYY-MM-DD.

In the meantime, it is possible to do this outside of Lightroom, but it's cumbersome because you need to do some manual reorganization after every import.  At least, I haven't found any completely automated way.  So for now I'm using the built-in YYYY/YYYY-MM-DD until, hopefully, this feature gets implemented in a future release.


----------



## joshua (Nov 6, 2007)

ok, that's good to know. just thought i was missing something.


----------



## Kiwigeoff (Nov 6, 2007)

joshua said:


> ok, that's good to know. just thought i was missing something.



What I have done is create a folder structure for the year on my HD with year/year-month, then upon import select the year-month folder and LR imports with year-month-day and I have a three level structure. Is this what you are looking for?


----------



## joshua (Nov 6, 2007)

Hmm... that should work!



Kiwigeoff said:


> What I have done is create a folder structure for the year on my HD with year/year-month, then upon import select the year-month folder and LR imports with year-month-day and I have a three level structure. Is this what you are looking for?


----------



## thg (Nov 7, 2007)

Even if I work on a french system, I use a year/month/day folder structure as well. The advantage is that you can have 2 different folders with the same date but a different name, quite useful if you shoot different subjects during the same day.


----------



## johndeck (Nov 7, 2007)

johnbeardy said:


> A subject hierarchy or simple date based folders? In other words, using your folder system to analyze your work is a dead end - that's what metadata is for.



I agree and I would add that archiving a folder structure which is based on a subject structure can be difficult. As my notebook hard drive fills in, I have to archive some older part of my pictures, not a full subject folder.

As metadata hierarchies are possible with LR, I understand I can have a subject hierarchy using metadata. But what about other software which don't have metadata hierarchies or which are not compatible with the way LR stores them in the metadata? How to avoid to lose the hierarchy?

How to differentiate "publishing" and "organizational" metadata? When I publish pictures, I may want to export "Tour Eiffel, tower,..." but not my "holiday > mini-trips > Paris 2''5" which I used for my subject organization.


----------



## johndeck (Feb 15, 2008)

I try to "up" my last message from this thread...

If pictures are organized in date based folder as they should, I understand we can use metadata to describe the shoot (Holiday/Paris ''7, Family/Anniversary/...).

If we use the metadata hierarchy feature of LR to build a logical (subjects) organization of the pictures, I don't see how others softwares will understand LR hierarchical keyword vs their flat keyword list if we have to share or migrate.

IPTC keyword does not seem to define the usage of a hierarchy.

As an amateur, I look maybe at the wrong solution for the problem. So, does someone have an idea?


----------



## troyhark (Feb 18, 2008)

If files are always organised by date then any programme and any OS can deal with and maintain your file structure. Essential for anyone who intends living at least another 5 years! New software will appear, old software will disappear. That is ineveitable, you just won't know what will survive.
So if you add keywords to images as well and keep them with the files and not just in LR's or Aperture's database, then any other decent  software *should* be able to read the keyword metadata. Besides it's quite easy to export LR's Keywords as it's just a text file. Again any decent software *should* be able to import something that basic to maintain any keywording heirachies you've made.

The major and oft ignored problem with relying on keywords to find stuff is that it takes an awful lot of effort to meaningfully keyword one's images, whereas importing by date and labelling folders as well is very easy indeed. LR and Bridge can easily do that for you and that's the important bit, *being easy *as then you'll actually do it.
Keywording in LR is a big step up on before, but it's still a lot of effort and time consuming to do, so it won't always get done. Besides, if you repeatedly shoot the same subject, as most people do, words like landscape, tree or kids will simply bring up 1's of 1'''s of images which kind of defeats the purpose. Also if you tend to file by date, you tend to start remembering when things occurred better than before, so it gets easier with usage.

Date heirachy is content agnostic and expands logically. A content/descriptive heirachy is unwieldy and breaks down if you have items that can go in more than one folder. I used to use it and it's fine for small collections, but falls down too quickly.

Somethings can stay outside of date folders, Client jobs may be better served by a client heirachy and things like wedding shoots may be best done by couple's names as that's probably all you ever need to reference the work. Though any possible portfolio shots should be marked/labelled as you go along.


----------



## johndeck (Feb 18, 2008)

Thank you, Troyhark.

I do agree with you for the sample you give. But looking for keyword logical organization, I was thinking about something more finer grained.

Let's suppose:

I organize pictures by date on the file system. I use keywords like they used to be and it allows me to find something useful by combining some of them (e.g. : tree, sunset,... + 4star).

I add to this another keyword node hierarchy. I will be used to organize pictures by subjects. I agree it is the wrong way to do on the file system level. 

But it could be useful to retrieve a shoot looking for an event, a subject as we are not always able to retrieve things by date. I agree some training will help but not everybody have a time line in mind (my wife does, not me,...). So we have a virtual organization of subjects using the keywords:

Family
   Weddings
     John&Mary
     ...
   Anniversary
     John 3'
     ...
Home
   Garden
   DIY
   ...
Holiday
   Paris ''6
   ...
Museum
   Auto-show ''6
   ...
We may have shots that are describe in two events. "Holiday in Paris" + "Auto-show ''6", so we are not forced to choose between them as it occurs when subject are organized on the file system.

You see, if the hierarchy is lost during a migration, a recovery,... these keywords does not organize anything. That's why I want to evaluate the correctness of the solution and by what amount it is future proof.   

Currently, Some softwares do not support keyword hierarchies (iView, Aperture just for display). I only know Bridge and LR with such behavior with their keyword hierarchies. Which I find great.

Thank you for reading


----------



## troyhark (Feb 18, 2008)

If you file by date and then add keywords in a heirachical manner [that makes sense to you], then you have the best of both worlds.

Places/Location/Europe/France/Paris/Île de la Cité/ would be a good way of describing via keywords some images shot on a visit to  Paris [in Folder structure  2''6/2''6-'7 July/2''6-'7-16 Paris walkabout]
As would
Places/Type/River/Seine
Places/Type/Island/
Places/Type/City
2''6/July
Season/Summer


----------



## Bernd (Feb 18, 2008)

first of all: I am not a pro, I am not taking pictures every day, just occasionally.


=== Files name ===
YYMMDD_MMSS_[description]_[camera type]_[counter from camera].dng

Doing so, all images are always sorted chronologically. And  I can seen (even from outside of Lightroom) when I have shoot the images. When using 2 cameras, I use different presets, so I can choose during import lets say between d2''-preset and coolpix-preset. Very convenient for me.

=== Folder structure ===

/lightroom
-----/2''3
-----/2''4
-----/2''5
-----/2''6
------------/2''6_'7_roskilde_musicfestival
------------/2''6_12_xmas
-----/2''7
------------/2''7_'2_vacation_france
------------/2''7_'4_businesstrip_munic
------------/2''7_'7_roskilde_musicfestival

This way I can keep all pictures from one event (holiday, xmas,...) in one folder and the folder are sorted chronologically.


----------



## Pindy (Apr 21, 2008)

Can you do this?:

1. Export  your entire library as a catalog (no digital negative files)
2. Create a new catalog, which will become your master
3. Import From Catalog, selecting the import panel to copy the files into the new, desired hierarchy?


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Apr 21, 2008)

1.  Yes
2.  Yes
3.  Erm.  That's a good question.  Someone may be able to think of a workaround, but for now I'm going to say no.  Copy in the Import from Catalog dialog reflects the existing structure.

Alternatives.... why not set up your new desired hierarchy in your existing catalog and drag/drop the files into it?


----------



## Pindy (Apr 21, 2008)

Victoria Bampton said:


> Alternatives.... why not set up your new desired hierarchy in your existing catalog and drag/drop the files into it?



Simply because there are 7''' photos to sort through, leading to the creation of hundreds or possibly thousands of folders. No thanks! Can you imagine if iTunes made you look after the folder structure of your music library? I prefer to have an automaton do this for me.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Apr 21, 2008)

Ok, do you have virtual copies, collections, or history that must follow the files?  My other thought is to write all settings to xmp (select all > ctrl-S) and then start a new catalog and import normally (set to copy to a new location) rather than import from catalog.  That will allow you to set a date based structure automatically, but it wouldn't transfer the virtual copies, collections or history with it.  (Can anyone remember whether VC's are now written to xmp?)


----------



## Richard Earney (Apr 21, 2008)

Mark Sirota said:


> There is no way to customize the date hierarchies used on import.  I wish there were, and I've filed a feature request.  Personally, I want YYYY/YYYY-MM/YYYY-MM-DD.



I only import into LR once I have used ImageIngester to get stuff off the camera. I find it more flexible that the Lightroom Import.


----------



## Pindy (Apr 21, 2008)

Victoria Bampton said:


> Ok, do you have virtual copies, collections, or history that must follow the files?



I do have VCs that need to follow, which would have made a catalogue import very handy.

I think the ImageIngester solution is the best so far. The only bummer is that it makes copies. I don't have room for copies to be made, I simply want something to move the files into folders FOR ME!


----------



## Brad Snyder (Apr 21, 2008)

Victoria Bampton said:


> (Can anyone remember whether VC's are now written to xmp?)



No, I don't think so. Our friend Lee Jay, the XMP fanatic, still refuses to use VCs simply because they aren't reflected in the XMPs. 

VB, in much the way you return XMPs only to your retouch clients, LJ, prefers to use XMPs only for his catalog backup/transport strategy.


----------



## Pindy (Apr 21, 2008)

Are there any ImageIngester fans who can talk me through a folder-reconfiguration?

I have II set up to make folders how I want them in the prefs. Do I simply have to choose the folders containing disorganised files in order to make II copy them in nice new folders to a new location? i don't want any metadata nonsense or any renaming, JUST folderization.

Thanks


----------



## Pindy (Oct 26, 2007)

I migrated from Aperture to LR last month. I was using Aperture to manage all the photos (as opposed to using "referenced masters") so any kind of folder strcture was irrelevant. Now, I have to be smart about how my folders are laid out, since LR uses those folders as a direct way of accessing images.

Previously, I had all photos from a given year inside a single Aperture Project. I would make sub-folders to sort family photos from "photography" etc.

How do you like to organise your folders? I'm beginning to feel like a folder-per-year is a bit too broad, but I don't really dig importing photos into a folder-per-date either.

Any suggestions?


----------



## Pindy (Apr 22, 2008)

Well, I started moving forward. I have II set up to name the folders based on the EXIF date not the modification date. II does it's job fine. What i don't like is that LR is not very pro when it comes to file relinking. If I move all the files into subfolders, LR should be smart enough to be able to find them by searching. Synchronize Folder is an imperfect command, because it treats all files it thinks are offline as ones to be removed and the same files in the new folders, as being new imports.

God, this is stupid.

LR should simply relink the files in a dialog, because if I remove/re-import the same files, I lose VCs, stacks, etc. That's just very hastily implemented and a clear win for other apps like Aperture. I'm forced to click the question marks, manually locate the photo which helps LR locate all the photos in that folder. For one year, you could do this a hundred times or more, since you have to search for every day (I do anyway).

Clicking on photos and relinking them one by one is fine for a few. For more than a hundred folders, it's criminal.


----------



## Sverre (Apr 22, 2008)

This situation is a very good example to my request for saving all info in the library to XMP.

I'm also reluctant like Lee Jay to use functionallity that's only stored in the catalog.


----------



## Richard Earney (Apr 22, 2008)

Pindy
Well I use II to grab the Raws of the card to 1 place, backup to another and convert to DNG. The DNGs are the ones want to import, but I haven't yet worked out how to make II have Lightroom as the viewing app. It seems to use the Raw backups as the folder. I asked Marc for help, but have no answer.


----------

