> Nothing? To this day, I don't understand the concept of "library management" and Lightroom as a tool. Might be simply because I'm neither a photographer nor a

> Nothing? To this day, I don't understand the concept of "library management" and Lightroom as a tool. Might be simply because I'm neither a photographer nor a digital artist. Photos don't have a natural band/album/song taxonomy like music, or author/series (maybe)/book like books. Cameras just give you a date/sequence number structure, which is great for the purpose of incremental backups (just add folders for the last calendar day to the backup). That's almost completely useless for browsing photos, though. When you have several hundred gigs of photos, you need something better. In lightroom I have photos catalogued by location, by event, and by subject, and a few ad hoc collections. E.g. I really like nature photography, so "by subject" means I have them grouped up by species, and "by location" also covers parks, zoos, etc. The reject/star rating workflow makes it easy to get rid of out of focus/blurry/otherwise inadequate photos and flag keepers for developing. I don't bother going for a fine-grained rating, but five-stars means photos I'm developing right away, four-stars are photos that are good but not amazing. I often end up revisiting these and finding something that makes me change my mind once I put in the work to develop them. You just have to actually feel the pain of not having a tool like that, and then buy into the workflow, I guess.