Using Keywords to Kick the Bucket System of Organization
When dealing with digital photos, it extremely important to develop an organizational system that’s intuitive and easy to use. This is not only due to the high number number of images today’s photographers are shooting, but also because of the digital nature of all of the images. This type of organization is referred to as “Digital Asset Management” (DAM).

Do I really want to put Ruby into a bucket?
In earlier days of digital photography, the primary approach to DAM was to organize files into specific folders based on image content. For example, Every time I take some photos of my dog, Ruby, I place them into a folder named “Ruby”. If I shoot some photos of our other dogs, Hazel and Sam, then I place them into folders with their names. No matter when the photo was shot, it gets placed into a folder based on the image content.
I call this the Bucket System. It’s like sorting photos from a shoot into specific buckets that contain other photos of the subject(s). Though the Bucket System represents an outdated way of doing things, I still meet photographers who are using it. In some cases I’ve seen it lead to an unmanageable mess.
The Bucket System seems intuitive at first. That’s because I can see all photos of Ruby whenever I want to without needing to remember details about where they are stored. However, I have two main problems with it. First off, it removes files from the original context of when they were captured. If I shoot photos of Ruby on a hiking trip, those photos are removed from that trip folder and placed into the Ruby folder. I could make a copy for the Ruby folder instead of moving the original, but that uses more storage space. It also makes it difficult to remember which file is the main one I’ve edited.
My second issue is that it causes problems when there are multiple subjects in the photo. If I shoot a photo of all three dogs (like the one on the below) which folder do I place them into? Ruby, Sam, or Hazel”? If I use all three folders, I have the same problem of creating and managing additional copies of the same image. Yes, I could put them all into a folder named “Dogs”, but I know lots of dogs. That folder wouldn’t really help me to stay organized.

This image of the couch potatoes gets keyworded for Sam, Hazel, and Ruby.
The real key to an efficient DAM is Keywords, (or Keyword Tags). Using keywords allows you to label photos with image content while leaving them in their original context. With keywords, if I have a photo of these couch potatoes, I label it with Sam, Hazel, and Ruby keywords. Then when I’m looking for photos of the dogs, this one will pop-up in the search returns when I search for any of those keywords.
If you’re using Photoshop/Bridge, Lightroom, Elements, or Aperture, there are easy ways to add and filter for keywords. No matter which one of these programs you use for your DAM system, make sure that you’re using keywords to kick the Bucket System and build an efficient organizational system.

The commonly accepted ‘bucket system’ is to import images to size based folders and referencing them from there. Number folders for example 0001 onwards. Once you fill up 0001 with 4gig worth (or there abouts) of images then start 0002. This means one can backup folders (buckets) once filled and know that nothing else will be added in to spoil the backup. I used to use 4 gig folders to allow me to backup to dvd to but now I use 8 gig folders and backup to other drives. Its clean, efficient and scalable. The system you talk about sounds like what I call ‘windows default’. Kick the default and build on the buckets.
Hi, i think that i saw you visited my website thus i came to “return the favor”.I am attempting to find things to enhance my site!I suppose its ok to use some of your ideas!!