Hamper wrote:
I've decided to split my massive 100K+ library into six smaller 20K ones and manage from there.
The limit on Project size is independent of the limit on Library size. I regularly test a Library with now 500,000+ Images (15,000+ Projects), four levels of Folders, some of the most complex Smart Albums I can make. This Library works flawlessly. Since my tests have revealed no flaws, I have no trouble recommending ignoring number of Images in your Library up to at least half a million.
I'm glad we now have an official limit on the number of Images in Projects. Those who have been following this board for a while will not be surprised: it was regularly reported that very large Projects led to performance problems.
I (all the more so) recommend sticking to "One Project = one out-in-the-world photo shoot", and that Projects be used as standard bottom-level storage containers. I strongly recommend against using (the very poorly named) Projects as _organizational_ containers, beyond the above. Import your digicam files into Projects. Organize Projects with Folders. Create Albums for finding and grouping Images for use, and organize your Albums with Folders.
I also recommend making your Library as big (as inclusive) as possible. The more Images in a Library, the more useful it is (one of the primary functions of the Library is to be an index of what it contains). The reasons for having multiple Libraries, IME, are:
- Image sequestration
- multiple photographers working independently
- collections that are not fundamentally organized by photographer.
Put another way: one Library for each photographer or photography business, separate Libraries for Images that need to be handled securely, and separate Libraries for collections that are not based on one photographer's (or photography business's) work.
Message was edited by: Kirby Krieger -- minor additions.