Hacker News Reader

Comment by joshmlewis | Hacker News Reader

The problem with CC is if you're storing a lot of RAW photos, you'll run out of cloud storage within a year. I started off going this route and now I feel stuck.

View on HN

So I am only using CC for sharing albums which is the sweet spot.

I just sync one album of photos I want to share to CC. LRC stores every photo I have ever took on a 10TB WD MyBook.

I'm not sure how well CC syncs changes back to LRC though which could be a problem.

Yeah. I have 100K photos which I've done some pruning of but I really don't want to lock myself into having to pay Adobe for sync space. I believe Lightroom Classic also still has some organizational features that haven't been brought forward yet. For the most part, I'm content with working on my photos on my desktop system. I don't feel a lot of need to have everything synced everywhere.

I only use CC for albums I want to share. LRC will always be my source of truth. The cool part of the workflow, is you can just tag photos you want to share in LRC, and then they sync and they're in the cloud for people to view at max resolution.

Although the gallery feature of CC is a bit buggy. A better flow might be to sync an album to Dropbox - but syncing plugins are always unreliable I find.

I use Flickr for sharing and just publish them there directly from Lightroom.

Only a year! Try a day or two. Their base subscription gives 20GiB AFAICT. Yesterday I went birding, and got 13.8GiB of RAW files, AFTER deleting out-of-focus or mis-exposed shots. I started with ~500 photos, after that pruning I've got 240. Each one is ~60MiB, since I've got a 60.2MP camera (Sony α7Riv). File size is definitely a disadvantage of such high-resolution cameras.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com