Advice on using Time Capsule in conjunction with Lightroom

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by UnFlic, Jun 12, 2017.

  1. UnFlic macrumors newbie

    UnFlic

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    #1
    Hey guys.

    I'm looking to purchase an AirPort Time Capsule (2TB) to be used as a wireless external storage for my Lightroom photos. The photos are currently housed on my Macbook Pro, which is quickly running out of space. Ideally, I'd keep my recently imported photos on my Pro for faster editing and the older (mass majority) of photos on the Capsule, for easy wireless access and viewing.

    I'm asking whether this is possible, and if so what are the logistics involved? I basically don't want a to plug in a hard cable to view my storage of photos.

    Thanks in advance.
     
  2. admwright macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    Location:
    Scotland
    #2
    I am pretty sure you will be able to do this. Any NAS can be set up so that it just looks like an external disk and is then used as such by whatever application is accessing that disk. The main consideration is the speed of Wi-Fi access for read and write access. If you keep 1-2-1 previews and do not mind a bit of slowdown when you have to access the actual file it should be usable. If you are moving a lot of files then it will be noticeably slow.
     
  3. kenoh macrumors demi-god

    kenoh

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    #3
    Hi,

    My current setup is similar to what you are trying to achieve. I store my catalog locally on my hard drive but it references my images that are stored on my Synology NAS device.

    The main logistic issue is speed of transfer and the work flow of "archiving" new images to the older storage, you will have to export the catalog and move to the NAS.

    As I currently shoot a Sony A7Rii which generates large image files, I use a GBit hardwired network to the NAS to get the transfer speeds. Wifi is too slow for my needs and frustrates me. It is fine for a single image here and there but for a session editing a number of images, I need the hardwired connection as it is too slow loading them up.

    Hope this helps.
     
  4. Apple fanboy macrumors Core

    Apple fanboy

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Location:
    Behind the Lens, UK
    #4
    But what about back up? It's probably better to buy a NAS drive.
     
  5. UnFlic thread starter macrumors newbie

    UnFlic

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    #5
    Thanks for the responses guys.

    Kenoh, I'm actually shooting on an A7 myself so I'd be working with similar file sizes. I'll have to look into NAS devices then. What model of Synology are you using?

    I was hoping that there would be a wifi solution of sorts where I could have files copying over in the background while I'm doing something else. But if file speed is way too slow especially if moving over RAW then it might not be worth it.
     
  6. kenoh macrumors demi-god

    kenoh

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    #6
    The A7 is only 24Mp sensor. The A7Rii is 42Mp. My raw files are in the region of 65MB to 85MB yours will be around 34MB so not as bad but will still get a lag when loading them over wifi.

    One thing though is that I am not running at full N wifi speed - old house, thick walls... so if you have a good Wireless N connection to the Time Capsule then you may find it acceptable.
     
  7. MCAsan, Jun 12, 2017
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2017

    MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #7
    Why treat photo storage differently than the rest of your file system? My internal SSD has boot, OS, apps, and cache. All the libraries of pictures, videos, music, sit in a RAID set connected via fast TB2. Time Machine uses a seperate RAID array connected via fast TB2.

    Time Capsules are way too limited in their internal storage choices and their external ports....no USB 3, 3.1, USB-C...etc. Time Capsules are not a good value for money.

    BTW, make sure Lightroom create two records of your raw edits. The first is inside the Lightroom catalog. The second is have Lightroom also create XMP sidecars. That allows you a second copy of the edits should the database get corrupted. It also lets you send someone both your raw file and your edits in the XMP file.

    Note the third option in Catalog Settings.
     

    Attached Files:

  8. Apple fanboy macrumors Core

    Apple fanboy

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Location:
    Behind the Lens, UK
    #8
    Doesn't that just eat through memory?
     
  9. kenoh macrumors demi-god

    kenoh

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    #9
    Or you can just backup your catalog instead of duplicating the edits?
     
  10. robgendreau macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #10
    Yes, one can backup the Lr catalog, and it has a feature for doing so. I make multiple backups. It has a database, and relying on TM to back up an open database has issues, hence the option to backup on close. But TM can certainly backup those backups, if you will.

    I do what MCAsan does; I write metadata changes and such to files. Some don't; I prefer to do so because I use a lot of the images outside of Lr, and that way I can use Spotlight or other apps to find stuff (my keywords, captions, and so on work with Finder smart folders just as they do with Lr smart collections, except I can find say PDFs, Word docs, and images all in one smart folder). And it makes it easier to share stuff, although one can certainly go back to Lr and export or manually write.

    And yes, it can affect backup. If I write over and over to a file it changes, and hence TM would back that up. But sidecars are tiny. DNGs can be more of a problem, but after intial edits or adjustments they no longer change much (in my case) and given the price of storage the extra space that takes up isn't a concern for me. They are essentially like all my other changing files.

    I agree with advice to avoid the now-defunct Time Capsules. No point wasting money on something that isn't being made anymore, especially since storage needs will just grow. I like using just externally attached storage, since it's simpler, but Synology makes some good stuff if your budget is bigger.
     

Share This Page