Jpg Master and Raw Buddy on Separate Drives

[WebEngel]

Hi Imatch experts,

So far, I had my Jpg and Raw files in the same directory.  Jpg is Master, Raw is buddy. Imatch is set to write XMP files for the master Jpgs.  Lightroom picks these up and uses the metadata.  Lightroom then writes the new Jpgs to the same folder, thereby replacing the Jpg.  For average pictures that are well exposed and whitebalanced, I delete the Raw file and just keep the Jpgs as I will never process the Raw file.  For all average pictures, I delete the Raw after the processing.  For good pictures, I keep the Raw forever.  Some pics don't have Raw files, for example the mobile phone ones or the multi-exposure pics.  This entire workflow works nicely.

I am now considering using a larger SSD and having the Jpgs there and the Raw files (as well as the movies) on a magnetic disc.

Does anybody have an easy setup that works?

I mean I can imagine Imatch keep track of buddies wherever they are.  I trust it, have never tried.  I assume, Imatch can also put them in different folders upon command, no worry either.  I have browsed the forum and saw some people do it this way.

But a couple of things sound more difficult:

• Create and maintain directory structure (D:\Jpgs\2019\01 and F:\Raw\2019\01)
• Make Imatch write the XMP file (again Master is Jpg) to where the Raw is
• Tell Lightroom to write into the Jpg folder (and not into just one folder or the Raw folder)
• Delete Raw files from Imatch.
• Use GeoSetter (which will probably write the XMP where the Jpg is)

Any ideas?

Is it worth the effort at all?  I mean there is probably some work to do, and all I save is the speed from viewing Jpgs from a SSD rather than from a magnetic disc.

Martin

[Jingo]

Hi Martin - although SSD's are much faster than magnetic disks... I find loading JPG's to be very fast already even on 7200 rpm platters.  My entire IMatch database is just JPG's because once I process a RAW file, I hardly ever go back to the RAW images and do it again.  So, I don't add the RAW files to the database but do keep them on a separate drive.

Mario can best tell you if it is worth the effort.... for me, I find the program speedy enough using normal hard disks for the images and SSD for all cache, program data and executables.

Good luck!

[Mario]

Please don't ask questions in a board that is intended to give tips and info about workflows to other users.
Please read the board description before you post. If in doubt, post in "General Discussion".

I will move your post to the appropriate board this time.

[Mario]

In general: Don't make your life so hard.
If you already have to ask that many questions and you work with multiple applications on your files (Lr, GeoSetter, IMatch, ...) you should keep your file system structure as simple as possible.
IMatch can deal with all kinds of weird configurations, including buddy files on other disk. But (most/all) other applications cannot.

SSD don't improve speed of loading image files considerably. An SSD for the database is great.
For images, you probably won't notice any difference. Maybe when writing back metadata to many files you may notice a small speed increase.

IMatch loads a typical JPEG in 0.2 to 0.4 seconds. From a spinning disk or a normal hard disk.
And IMatch loads files for the Viewer etc. always in advance and in the background so the disk speed is irrelevant.
I often work with 80 MP JPEG cache files created from digital back RAWs and they are loaded in ~ 1 second from a spinning disk. And also in ~ 1 second from a SSD.

[WebEngel]

Thanks for the response and sorry for the wrong forum

[Mario]

Thanks for the response and sorry for the wrong forum

You're welcome. No problem. Just trying to keep this community tidy and organized.