Author: Tim Grey

Today’s Question: My external hard drive Photos folder contains 16,633 photos in a couple of dozen folders. However, when I browse that folder the notation at the top-left of the filmstrip says “16,596 of 16,633”, which indicates 37 photos missing. From the menu I selected Library > Find All Missing Photos, but the dialog box came back with “No Missing Files”. What am I doing wrong, and what could be the problem?

Tim’s Quick Answer: The issue here is that some photos are hidden from view within Lightroom Classic, but the source photos are not actually missing.

More Detail: When photos are “missing” in Lightroom Classic that means that the source photo can’t be found where it is expected. For example, if you renamed a folder outside of Lightroom Classic then the folder (and all the photos within the folder) would appear missing because the folder has a different name than is expected within the catalog.

If you use the Library > Find All Missing Photos command and no photos appear missing, I’d say that is a cause for celebration. After all, many photographers have ended up with photos that are missing (or disconnected) in the context of their Lightroom Classic catalog.

Of course, I understand that you still want to uncover the cause for the photos that appear to be missing even though they aren’t truly missing in the context of the catalog.

In this case the most likely cause for the photos being excluded from the count is that the photos are part of a stack of photos that has been collapsed. When photos are in a collapsed stack, the photo count will only include the top photo in the stack, not the photos that are hidden from view by virtue of being in a collapsed stack. If you expand the stack the photo count will increase accordingly.

So, for example, you could navigate to one of the folders that shows a shortage of photos, and then go to the menu and choose Photo > Stacking > Expand All Stacks. This will expand all stacks within the current folder location, updating the count for how many photos are being displayed out of the total that are actually in the current folder.

Another possibility is that there is a filter applied that is causing only some of the photos in the folder to be displayed. You may have a filter set based on star ratings, color labels, or other metadata. To ensure there aren’t any filters applied go to the Library Filter bar at the top of the grid view display in the Library module and choose “None” so that no filter is applied.

The point is that in this case while you aren’t seeing all the photos that are actually contained in the current storage location, that doesn’t mean the photos are actually missing. Rather, it means that not all photos that are in the current folder location are being shown on the filmstrip or within the grid view display.

Today’s Question: I have a follow-up on this. On March 25 you answered a question about moving a catalog and said, “Next, be sure to quit Lightroom Classic, because there is a risk of the catalog being corrupted if it is copied (or moved) while it is in use.” Is there a difference in manually copying the catalog vs the system/software doing it (GoodSync, Backblaze, etc.)?

Tim’s Quick Answer: While there isn’t a risk of corruption of your Lightroom Classic catalog by backing up while the catalog is in use, and most backup software will cache files prior to backing them up so there won’t be issues if the file changes during the backup process. That said, in general it is best if files are not being updated while a backup is running.

More Detail: The primary concern related to copying (or backing up) files that are currently in use is that the files will be corrupted at their destination. In other words, if you copy the files the source version would be fine, but the destination copy could be corrupted. If you move the files while they are in use, there is a risk that the files will be corrupted during that process. The chances of such a problem are relatively slim, but there is still a risk.

When backing up files you are copying the source files, but there isn’t any real risk to those source files. Rather, there is some degree of risk that the backup copy will be corrupted.

Most backup software uses caching and checksums to avoid these types of problems, and so it isn’t something that you really need to worry about. That said, out of an abundance of caution I recommend that files not be in use when they are being backed up.

Of course, for software such as Backblaze (https://timgrey.me/onlinebackup) it isn’t exactly easy to quit the applications you’re using while the backup is running, since the backup basically runs continuously in the background. In addition, for large files Backblaze only updates the backup every 48 hours, which for many photographers would include the catalog files for Lightroom Classic. Therefore, it would be virtually impossible to time your use of Lightroom Classic to match an online backup such as with Backblaze.

So, while there are minor issues involved with files being in use while they are being backed up, this isn’t a significant enough issue that I would alter your backup workflow to avoid those issues. The more important thing is to make sure you’re backing up your photos and other important data regularly.

Today’s Question: I understand that we should be deleting our Lightroom Classic backups periodically to save disc space. Could you explain how to do this?

Tim’s Quick Answer: You can delete older backups of your Lightroom Classic catalog by deleting the folders associated with those backups, which by default are stored in a folder called “Backups” within the folder that contains your catalog.

More Detail: Deleting catalog backups is one of the few situations where you actually need to work outside of Lightroom Classic, rather than within Lightroom Classic. The first step is determining where your catalog backups are being stored. You can get this information in the Back Up Catalog dialog.

Start by selecting Edit > Catalog Settings from the menu on Windows, or Lightroom Classic > Catalog Settings on Macintosh. Go to the General tab and from the “Back up catalog” popup choose “When Lightroom next exits”. Close the Catalog Settings dialog and quit Lightroom Classic, and the Back Up Catalog dialog will appear.

In the Back Up Catalog dialog you’ll see a reference to the Backup Folder location. By default, the backup folder will be a “Backups” folder within the folder that contains your catalog.

Within the operating system navigate to the folder that contains the backups of your catalog. There you’ll find folders for each of the backups, with a folder name that includes the year, month, day, and time of the backup. This information can be used to determine which backup folders to delete.

I recommend retaining at least a few recent backups, a backup from perhaps a month or so ago, and a backup from several months ago. As long as Lightroom Classic seems to be behaving normally, all other backups (especially older backups) can be deleted. Simply select the backup folders you want to delete, then right-click and choose “Delete” from the popup menu on Windows or “Move to Trash” on Macintosh.

Note that on Windows deleting these folders will move them to the Recycle Bin, and on Macintosh the folders will be move to the Trash. You’ll need to empty the Recycle Bin or Trash to actually free up the space that had been consumed by the backups.

Today’s Question: I have two cameras that number the files from 1 to 9,999. I shoot many flying birds. When I download all the photos, the computer stops when an identical filename is encountered. These photos are not identical since they are shot on different days. I have come up with several clunky solutions, such as loading them into separate folders. Do you have a different, simpler solution in Lightroom Classic?

Tim’s Quick Answer: I recommend importing the photos directly into Lightroom Classic and using a file renaming structure that will ensure there is not any duplication of filenames for different photos being copied to the same folder.

More Detail: The first issue here is that the photos are being downloaded into the same folder directly from multiple media cards where there are duplicate filenames among different photos on different cards. As a first step I recommend downloading as part of the process of importing these photos into your Lightroom Classic catalog. This enables you to apply renaming to the photos during download and provides a more streamlined solution for dealing with any duplicate filenames.

You can define (or refine) a template for renaming photos in the File Renaming section on the right panel in the Import dialog. Turn on the Rename Files checkbox, and then choose “Edit” from the Template popup. In the Filename Template Editor that appears, you can choose an option that seems like a good starting point for a file renaming template from the Preset popup. You can then customize the template using a series of tokens representing metadata along with text you can enter.

To begin with, the file renaming template can use a sequence number that is up to five digits, whereas most cameras only include a sequence number of up to four digits. That enables you to have up to 99,999 photos with the same basic filename structure but with a unique overall filename, compared to only 9,999 such filenames from the camera.

Note that you’ll need to set the sequence number value individually for each import. So for the first import for a given folder you might set the value to “1”, but after importing 3,000 photos, for example, you would need to set the sequence number for the next import manually to “3001”.

Since you’re shooting with more than one camera you could also include the camera serial number as one of the components of the filename. You might also want to include the date of capture as part of that structure, such as with a “YYYY-MM-DD” format.

These are just a few examples of details you might include to ensure that when you download photos during the process of importing them into your Lightroom Classic catalog, all files will more than likely have a completely unique filename. You can obviously define your own structure based on the details that would be most helpful in the filenames for your photos, especially in the context of ensuring unique filenames.

However, you’ll also be happy to know that even if there are duplicate filenames because you used the same structure with the same starting sequence number for two imports, Lightroom Classic is smart enough to work around this automatically. When you import a photo into the same folder as another photo with the same filename, Lightroom Classic will automatically add a parenthetical number (such as “(1)”) to the filename for the newer photo.

Today’s Question: In Lightroom Classic, how can you selectively and subtly blur words in an image so they are not legible, while retaining clarity and sharpness everywhere else? Example: an image taken in a cemetery where out of respect you don’t want the names on headstones to be legible.

Tim’s Quick Answer: You can blur a specific area of a photo in Lightroom Classic with the masking feature, defining a mask for the area and then using a negative value for Sharpness to apply a blur. You can then duplicate the mask as needed to strengthen the blur effect.

More Detail: The masking feature of Lightroom Classic includes the ability to define a mask for the area you want to apply a targeted adjustment to, and then apply adjustments that only affect the area defined by the mask. To blur the area you’ve defined you can use a negative value for the Sharpness slider.

The first step would be to create a mask that defines the area you want to blur. Click on the Masking button (the dashed circle icon) on the small toolbar below the histogram on the right panel in the Develop module. Choose the type of mask you want to create based on the area you want to blur. In this case the Brush option may be best, so you can simply paint on the image to define the areas you want to blur.

Once you’ve created a mask for the area you want to blur, within the adjustment controls for the Masking feature on the right panel you can reduce the value for Sharpness. More than likely you’ll need to reduce all the way to the minimum value of -100, and even that likely won’t be strong enough.

To strengthen the blur effect, you can duplicate the mask on the Masks panel, which will duplicate both the shape of the mask as well as the adjustments applied for the mask. On the Masks panel click the ellipsis button (the three dots) to the right of the mask you created and choose the “Duplicate” command from the popup menu. Note that the name of the mask will be included with the command, such as “Duplicate Mask 1”. Depending on the nature of the area you are selectively blurring you may need to duplicate the mask several times.

Today’s Question: I just closed Lightroom Classic and had it back up the catalog. However, the backup folder for today only has one ZIP file in it. It used to back up the catalog, a review file, helper file, etc. Did something change or am I not getting a full backup?

Tim’s Quick Answer: When you back up the catalog in Lightroom Classic only the actual catalog and the related catalog data file (with version 11 or later) are backed up. Those files are included in the ZIP file that is created when you back up the catalog.

More Detail: It is worth keeping in mind that the backup feature in Lightroom Classic only backs up the catalog, and not all the “helper” files associated with the catalog. It also doesn’t backup other files, such as presets and settings.

Obviously the most important file in the context of a workflow that revolves around Lightroom Classic is the actual catalog. That is the file with the “.lrcat” filename extension, and as of version 11 of Lightroom Classic the file with the “.lrcat-data” file is also important to include.

The other helper files associated with the catalog are not generally critical to include. For example, the previews files aren’t critical because previews can always be rebuilt based on the source images again if needed.

However, there are other files beyond the Lightroom Classic catalog that can be important to back up. That includes any presets you’ve created or purchased, for example. It can also be helpful to back up the various other files related to preferences within Lightroom Classic.

I consider the included backup feature in Lightroom Classic to be very helpful for backing up the catalog. I highly recommend using this backup feature because it includes options for testing the integrity of the catalog and optimizing the catalog. However, backing up the catalog doesn’t back up all important data related to your Lightroom Classic workflow. Most importantly, that backup doesn’t include your photos.

So, it is important that you have a complete backup workflow that includes all files you care about. For example, I use the Time Machine feature of the Macintosh operating system to back up my internal hard drive. I also use GoodSync software (http://timgrey.me/greybackup) to back up my hard drives locally, and I use the Backblaze service (https://timgrey.me/onlinebackup) to create an additional backup of my important data in the cloud for offsite storage.

Today’s Question: Is it possible to search on words within a keyword to find photos in Lightroom Classic? For instance, I would like to find all photos that contain Manhattan as part of their keyword. Would it find the photo with the keyword “Johnny-Manhattan-01152022”?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes, you can search for all images that include specific text within keywords, so that for example searching for “flo” would return images that have either “Florida” or “flower” as a keyword. You can also search only for photos that include a specific keyword in its entirety.

More Detail: In Lightroom Classic there is quite a bit of flexibility when searching on the Text tab of the Library Filter bar above the grid view display in the Library module. Note, by the way, that if the Library Filter bar is not displayed you can press the backslash key (\) on the keyboard to reveal it.

On the Text tab of the Library Filter bar you can start by selecting Keywords from the first popup if you want to search specifically within the Keywords field in metadata. If you want the search results to include any images with keywords that include the partial text you’ve entered, you can select “Contains” from the second popup.

With these settings established, for example, if I enter the text “Manhattan” in the textbox the search results will include photos with the keyword “Manhattan” as well as photos that include the keyword “Manhattanhenge”.

If, on the other hand, you want to search for a specific word within the Keywords field without including keywords that contain the word you’ve typed, you can use the “Contains Words” option from the second popup when searching with the “Keywords” option.

With “Contains Words” selected, for example, if you enter “Manhattan” into the textbox the results will only include photos that have “Manhattan” as a keyword. Photos that only have “Manhattanhenge” in the Keywords field (and not the keyword “Manhattan”) will not appear in the search results.

Today’s Question: I’m wondering why you don’t use the cloud service built into GoodSync?

Tim’s Quick Answer: I use Backblaze (https://timgrey.me/onlinebackup) for my cloud-based backup, and GoodSync software (http://timgrey.me/greybackup) for my local backups. The primary reason I don’t use GoodSync for my cloud-based backup is that the storage cost is considerably higher than with Backblaze.

More Detail: I have been using GoodSync (http://timgrey.me/greybackup) for a number of years to back up my hard drives locally. I maintain two backup copies of each external hard drive, so that I have a primary drive (such as a “Photos” drive) along with a “Photos Backup 1” drive and a “Photos Backup 2” drive.

More recently I started using Backblaze (https://timgrey.me/onlinebackup) for my cloud-based backup, which makes it easy to have a backup that is stored offsite. I’ve been very happy with the Backblaze service, and feel more comfortable knowing I have a backup of my important data stored at a remote location.

GoodSync also offers a cloud-based storage option, enabling you to back up your data to a remote server location. I would be perfectly comfortable using GoodSync for this purpose, since I have been so happy with their backup software. However, their cloud-based storage is considerably more expensive than Backblaze.

The Backblaze personal backup service starts at $7 per month, which comes out to $84 per year. You can get a lower annual cost by paying for one or two years at a time. The Backblaze subscription provides unlimited backup storage.

GoodSync, by contrast, charges based on how much storage you use. Based on my storage needs, I would need to opt for their 8TB plan, which would cost about $700 per year. Therefore, I continue to use Backblaze as my cloud-based backup solution.

Note that GoodSync is not more expensive at all storage levels. For example, if I were only backing up the internal hard drive on my laptop I would only need to opt for the 1TB storage option, which would cost about $100. But as a photographer of course I want to back up much more data, so Backblaze represents the better value.

Today’s Question: Is there a way to find the source for images that Lightroom Classic will not let me import anew because they are already in the catalog, yet I cannot find them?

Tim’s Quick Answer: In this case I recommend importing a second copy of the duplicate images into a temporary holding folder, and then using those duplicates to track down the source photos. The duplicate images could then be deleted.

More Detail: I generally recommend keeping the “Don’t Import Suspected Duplicates” checkbox turned on when importing photos into Lightroom Classic. This checkbox is found in the File Handling section of the right panel in the Import dialog. With the checkbox turned on if Lightroom Classic determines that some of the photos you’re attempting to import are already in the catalog, those duplicates won’t be imported.

In this case, of course, this beneficial feature is causing a problem. If you’re not sure where the original versions of the images that are being flagged as duplicates are located, you obviously can’t review those existing photos within your catalog.

You could, of course, review the metadata of the images you’re trying to import to help you locate the originals. For example, you could look at the capture time in metadata and then use a filter for that capture date while browsing the “All Photographs” collection in the Catalog section of the left panel in the Library module.

However, this process can be streamlined by importing the photos even though they are duplicates, and then using those imported copies to locate the originals.

So, during the import turn off the “Don’t Import Suspected Duplicates” checkbox. Just be sure to turn it back on for future imports. I suggest copying the photos to a folder that will be obvious as a temporary holding location, such as by importing to a folder called “Duplicate Search” on your desktop.

After the photos have been imported, navigate to the folder where they were copied to, and make sure that one of the photos that you believe has a duplicate is selected. Then select the “All Photographs” collection from the Catalog section of the left panel in the Library module. Switch to the grid view and set the sort order on the toolbar below the grid view to “Capture Time”.

At this point you’ll still see the selected photo, and all other photos will be displayed (as long as you haven’t applied a filter) and they will be listed in order of capture time. This should cause the duplicate to appear right next to the photo you selected from the most recent import. You can then right-click on the source photo that was a duplicate and choose “Go to Folder in Library” to automatically navigate to the folder that contains the source photo.

Once you’ve located the source images and have moved or otherwise managed them as needed, you can delete all of the photos that were imported as duplicates from within your Lightroom Classic catalog.