Image management involves two issues: how images are stored and how to locate a particular image when I want it. While I have an organization system in place for my slides, I recently found myself struggling to manage the digital files on my hard drive. One of my biggest problems with digital is that the number of digital images increases at an alarming rate. The more I shoot, the bigger the problem becomes. After much frustration and stalling, I established a file management system that has done wonders for my frame of mind.

The first image management decision involves how to store digital images. CDs are a cheap and universally accepted way of storing information. For many photographers, the use of CDs is their first choice for image storage. Unfortunately, CD storage is not ideal for the serious digital photographer. With approximately 650 MB of storage space, a CD can only hold about 60 images from my Canon 1Ds (not including the huge TIFF files Photoshop can produce). This last year, I added over 6,000 images to my files, enough to fill 100 CDs. How many CDs it will take to hold 30 year's worth of images? I better start talking to my wife about expanding my office!

One solution to CD's limited storage capacity is to use DVD storage media. Unlike CDs, each DVD holds 4.2 gigabytes of data, just under 400 1Ds images per DVD. That is a lot of images. Unfortunately, the DVD file format is still in a state of transition with no industry standard. In the future the medium will become standardized and DVDs will enter the picture as a major storage medium. Another problem of both CD and DVD storage is locating an image once it is off the hard drive. This isn't a problem when an image library consists of 10 DVDs, but what about 100 or even 1,000? Without a good filing system it is easy to know that an image exists, just not where it is. Once the image is located, I would need to retrieve the disk to access the image. Again, this is no big deal if I only need a few images, but what if I want to make a submission of 200 images, each on a separate disk? CDs and DVDs are a viable storage option for photographers shooting for a particular client (i.e. portrait and commercial photographers). Following a photo shoot, images will only be accessed if that client wants to make a purchase. After all, it is very unlikely that I will purchase a portrait photograph of someone I don't know. Stock photography is different. As a wildlife stock photographer, I need access to my entire image library to fill the diverse and unpredictable requests of my clients.

My solution to image storage is external hard drives. All my digital images are stored on a Western Digital 200 GB external hard drive. This 6 x 9 inch box provides me with the equivalent of 308 CDs or 48 DVDs. It also provides immediate access to every image in my collection. What if the hard drive fails? How do I ensure my entire collection isn't lost? The secret to using external hard drives for storage is to never use just one. Anyone who has used computers for long knows that hard drives sometimes fail, usually at the worst moment. One of the commandments of digital file management is to always have a backup. When I originally purchased my hard drive, I bought two. The primary drive is always hooked up to my computer to provide easy access to the image files. The second drive sits on my desk, but it not attached to either the computer or the power supply, otherwise a power surge could wipe out both drives. Periodically (once every few weeks or after a major photo shoot) I connect the backup drive and reformat it. The entire content of the primary drive is than copied over to the backup drive. Once the backup drive is updated, I disconnect it from the computer and the power supply. Of course, fire or theft could destroy both drives and leave me without a single image to my name. For the ultimate in security, I take this a step further. By adding a third drive to the system, I can create a second backup drive and store it at a different location (each image is now on three separate drives). Just remember to update this drive periodically.

Once the method of storage is decided upon, the next issue is organizing the image files. As a wildlife photographer, I organize my slides by species since this is the main category image buyers request. Now that I work with both slides and digital files, it is to my advantage to keep the two systems as similar as possible. Some photographers catalog wildlife images by scientific name. While I have a background in biology, trying to remember the scientific name of ever species in my image collection seems too much like work. I want to keep things as simple as possible. With that in mind, I created a file structure on my hard drive that groups the images by the species' common name. In the first level, I have folders for "Animals", "Plants", "Scenics", and "Other." Moving into the "Animals" folder will bring up folders for "Birds", "Mammals", "Insects", "Reptiles" etc. In the "Bird" folder are "Anhinga", "Avocet, American", and "Killdeer" just to name a few. Before being placed in a folder, images are renamed using the species name and a sequential number. For example, my Killdeer images are named "Killdeer_00001..."Killdeer_00002"...and so on. Renaming digital files in this manner is easy with the batch rename function found in most RAW converter programs. Using the species name and a number as the foundation of my naming system offers a number of advantages. Every digital file in my collection has a unique name, new images can be added easily, the file name indicates of what the subject is, and I can tell how many images I have of a particular species. Landscape images are cataloged using a similar system, using location as the main category instead of species.

For most photographers, cataloging images by subject is as far as image management needs to go. Images can be found simply by go to the appropriate folder and use an image browser to locate the file. As images collections get larger and image searches become more complex (i.e. "Do you have any images of three animals with two mountain peaks in the background?") tracking images becomes more of a challenge. This is where a database is beneficial.

What should a nature photographer look for in a database program? There are three requirements I have for any image database. First, since I am working with digital images, the program has to automatically generate thumbnail images. This lets me use the database much like a light table, a format I am accustomed to from my years of working with slides. Second, the program must be able to show a catalog of images on CDs and DVDs without having to access the disk. Although I currently store my images on external hard drives, in the future I might want to transfer images onto DVDs. If I do this, I want to be able to examine and search disks with a minimum of hassle. Third, the database must be able to perform searches of the IPTC data from each image. IPTC data is a data field into which information can be added to. With slides, caption information was placed directly on the slide mount. With digital, caption information is added as IPTC data along with copyright information. While many database programs provide for the addition of keywords, I want to keep my work to a minimum. I already add IPTC caption information to every image, so why not use a program with the capability to search through that information?

Based on the criteria above there are several programs available. Of these, the IMatch database program (www.photools.com; available for Windows only) is one of the most flexible and affordable programs on the market. IMatch is designed to manage large image collects (well over 100,000 images) and works well with the species file structure I use. Once images are imported into the database, the program acts as an image browser to review images in a collection. While the program will support a wide variety of file formats (including most RAW files), I only import jpg images. As I indicated previously, I shoot RAW files with an accompanying jpg. Jpg images are small and work significantly faster in IMatch. Since I always keep my RAW and jpg files together and use IMatch for searching and locating images, only including jpg files works well.

The true power of IMatch comes from the database search functions. Once images are part of the database, searches can be performed using a variety of criteria, including file name, text (this included IPTC data), format, date, and even file size. If this isn't enough, I can perform searches for images with similar colors or create a sketch and have the program perform a search based on that.

Databases take a lot of time and energy to create and keep updated. Before devoting that time, it is important to decide if a database is really necessary. In my experience, most photographers have a good knowledge of the images present in their files. If someone asks if I have an image of a skunk, I don't have to open up my database to find out. A database comes in handy when I am looking for concepts rather then particular subjects. If someone asks me to show them my "moody, evening shots," the database might pull up images that didn't come to mind (assuming my caption information is sufficiently detailed). Databases are also helpful if someone else is trying to locate images. While I might know every image in my collection, my wife doesn't. Having a database expands her ability to locate images and the efficiency with which I can run my office.

In the last three articles, I have explained the workflow I use to manage my digital images. I find that my enjoyment of digital photography is directly linked to the efficiency of my workflow. Remember, digital workflow is a highly personal aspect of the photographic process and what works for one person might not be right for someone else. Talk to a variety of people and fine tune your own methods. The key is to remember that the purpose of a digital workflow is to reduce the time you spend in front of the computer. Digital photography is about photography, so grab your camera and go out and photograph.

Editor's Comment: Let us know what you think! Please email the Editor to let us know your thoughts.