Using Time Machine to back up Lightroom and image files with Synology RT2600ac a

[Jeffrey Saldinger]

My actual question is in the last paragraph. The other paragraphs set what I hope will be useful context.

The disk in our Time Capsule has died. I’m using it as only a router for now (ethernet connection to Verizon Fios), and have ordered a Synology RT2600ac router because it can 1) serve as a new router (the Time Machine is about 12 years old) and 2) it can accept an external hard drive that can be used for wireless Time Machine backups from our two MacBooks and one iMac. Therefore, the Synology+external drive should serve as a Time Capsule replacement. (We also use Carbon Copy Cloner each day, so we’re nicely redundant at home.)

I have read that while the Lightroom catalog is in use, it protects itself from being corrupted during a Time Machine backup by somehow preventing Time Machine from backing it up; the backing up happens when Time Machine next runs and Lightroom is closed.

In the early days of setting up the Time Capsule, I excluded altogether my Lightroom catalog and image files from being backed up by Time Machine (I used Carbon Copy Clone instead), but now, as an extra degree of redundancy, I’d like to set up the Synology+external drive to back up everything (I’ll be using a new 2TB SSD) with Time Machine.

Assuming that what I read about Lightroom protecting itself during Time Machine backups is correct, are my image files also safe from corruption (during a Time Machine backup) while I’m working on them? (The files in question are on the MacBooks and iMac; I’m not asking about images files that exist only on external drives, for which I use Carbon Copy Cloner).

[digitaldog]

I have a dedicated drive for all LR-related files and photos and do not target it for TM due to how it backs up iterations of all changes through out the day. I back that up daily using Chronosync and Backblaze instead. No idea if there is an issue or not, I just don't want all those changes being backed up through out the day; that will fill the TM drive a lot faster.

[Jeffrey Saldinger]

Thank you, Andrew.

[BobShaw]

I use Time Machine to back up everything and just leave it set to back up every hour. That has saved me a few times as you just drag the old one back from the file structure.
Time Machine runs at system level so I doubt any programme could interfere with it or be interfered.
Hourly backups don't take up any more space as they are only kept for a day and then one becomes the daily backup.

[Joe Towner]

My actual question is in the last paragraph. The other paragraphs set what I hope will be useful context.

...

Assuming that what I read about Lightroom protecting itself during Time Machine backups is correct, are my image files also safe from corruption (during a Time Machine backup) while I’m working on them? (The files in question are on the MacBooks and iMac; I’m not asking about images files that exist only on external drives, for which I use Carbon Copy Cloner).

The image files are referenced, correct? It's outside of Lightroom, and FWIW LR is just reading the RAW file, applying it's adjustments and displaying the result to you.  As nothing is being written to the RAW image file, it's not changed, and it could care less if TimeMachine is running or not.

I do not recommend using the external drive ports on routers normally, but I would think Synology does a little bit better than the others.

[digitaldog]

The image files are referenced, correct? It's outside of Lightroom, and FWIW LR is just reading the RAW file, applying it's adjustments and displaying the result to you.  As nothing is being written to the RAW image file, it's not changed, and it could care less if TimeMachine is running or not.

Proprietary raws are read only.
DNGs, TIFFs etc may have XMP saved in the container (which I recommend), and of course the catalog changes, previews, etc.

[Joe Towner]

If a DNG or TIFF had a corrupted XMP file in the container, would it break the base image?  LR would freak out saying it can't read the XMP info, and if LR had  written the XMP info it would just offer to overwrite it, correct?

[digitaldog]

If a DNG or TIFF had a corrupted XMP file in the container, would it break the base image?  LR would freak out saying it can't read the XMP info, and if LR had  written the XMP info it would just offer to overwrite it, correct?

I can't accurately answer that because AFAIK, not all corruption is created equally. The XMP should also be in the catalog for LR and also saving in the TIFF or DNG (or PSD) container is just another backup. If your catalog gets corrupted, and that happens, there is a lot more to worry about than a few images.
ACR would also suffer some issues if the XMP it also writes to TIFF, DNG etc got wonky.
I'm again not certain, but if the XMP embedded got hosed, I would hope the image would be OK but that's a guess, which I hate doing. You'd lose the edits which isn't the worst thing in the world.
Again, going full circle, backup regularly and to differing media/locations. 

[Jeffrey Saldinger]

The replies so far have been helpful, and have pointed me to other considerations related to my situation. Thanks.

My deliberations about what I want to do continue. As of this writing, I’m leaning toward using time machine with only my MacBook, with an attached SSD; continuing to rely on our good Carbon Copy Cloner habits of daily backups (each of us backs up daily to two external drives); and starting to use Backblaze for our two MacBooks (in regular use) and one iMac (which we don’t use very much at all and is now around twelve years old).

I’m also leaning towards buying the current-model router from our internet service provider instead of 1) using the Synology or 2) continuing to use our Time Capsule as a router only (my OP describes how its disk has died). Relatively speaking, our router needs are simple and I’m now inclined to think that using the Synology for Time Machine (i.e., with a USB drive attached) may not be an optimum solution for us.

If, for convenience, I don’t want to keep my Time Machine drive attached all day and prefer instead to do one TM backup once a day, (e.g., when I’m done using my MacBook), then I know I will lose the hourly backups that TM offers. But are there any other considerations I might want to take into account before deciding to go that route?  I am aware of the fundamental difference between what CCC does and what TM does, so if I do CCC daily as I have been, would once-a-day TM backups be unnecessarily redundant (as opposed to desirably redundant)?

[BobShaw]

If, for convenience, I don’t want to keep my Time Machine drive attached all day and prefer instead to do one TM backup once a day, (e.g., when I’m done using my MacBook), then I know I will lose the hourly backups that TM offers. But are there any other considerations I might want to take into account before deciding to go that route?  I am aware of the fundamental difference between what CCC does and what TM does, so if I do CCC daily as I have been, would once-a-day TM backups be unnecessarily redundant (as opposed to desirably redundant)?

The advantage of doing a time machine backup every hour is apparent if you make a mistake in the last hour requiring the previous version. Otherwise the only disadvantages of doing once a day are that that you probably have to think to do it and it will take longer. There are utilities that allow you to vary the backup frequency.

The big advantage of time Machine is that if your computer dies then you can buy a new and different machine today and have it working as you were from a Time Machine backup in 4 hours. I don't know if you can do that from a non Apple backup as the machine hardware will be different.

(Modified to make sense)

[Jeffrey Saldinger]

Thank you, Bob.

My understanding of Carbon Copy Cloner is that if (when?!) my MacBook dies, then when I come home with a new one, I can just attach any CCC drive and work from it, or clone everything (or whatever I might wish) back onto the new MacBook. From what I have read, and for the time being, there would be no backwards-compatible problems between a new MacBook Pro (Thunderbolt 4 ports) and my oldest CCC drives.

[digitaldog]

My understanding of Carbon Copy Cloner is that if (when?!) my MacBook dies, then when I come home with a new one, I can just attach any CCC drive and work from it, or clone everything (or whatever I might wish) back onto the new MacBook. From what I have read, and for the time being, there would be no backwards-compatible problems between a new MacBook Pro (Thunderbolt 4 ports) and my oldest CCC drives.

Correct (more or less with caveats). You can use the Migration Assistant with that, or TM, but how this all works could depend on the older OS and what the newer machine may have as well. What you may want is a clone (backup) that is bootable!

[Joe Towner]

You can do a TimeMachine restore from any storage medium - like a Synology NAS, external USB drive, folder share on another Mac.  CCC will be a 'Migration Wizard' type of restore so still platform agnostic.

CCC is a faster way to restore a drive on an identical Mac, like before & after you send it in for service.  I like using a NAS as it's just a folder that gets mounted when needed - I tend to do an external USB3 drive as the TimeMachine share.  Can be wired for big jobs, or wireless when working from the couch.

[Jeffrey Saldinger]

Thank you, Andrew and Joe.

For Andrew, by way of follow-up to your “What you may want is a clone (backup) that is bootable!”:

If I’m assuming, as I think through all this, that my current MacBook dies and I then get a new one, then it will come with the then-current OS installed. Doesn’t this mean I don’t need a bootable backup (just the backed up files)? As I understand it, I’d need the bootable backup only if my current MacBook didn’t “die” (by which I mean altogether ruined or unusable) but needed only to have its now-current OS reinstalled. Perhaps this is a counterproductive oversimplification, but isn’t this the basic idea?

And then further on this matter of bootable vs. non-bootable backups, how would the choice of one or the other relate (if at all) to recapturing for a new MacBook all the customizations I’ve done, especially relating to Lightroom and Photoshop (actions, preferences, workspaces, etc.).

Here is something I just came across on the future of bootability. I found it interesting but at this point in my learning curve I’m not qualified to comment on its accuracy. https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/05/24/apples-moves-point-to-a-future-with-no-bootable-backups-says-developer.

Thanks again.

[digitaldog]

For Andrew, by way of follow-up to your “What you may want is a clone (backup) that is bootable!”:

Ideally you want a clone that is one you can boot from for a number of reasons and cases. Not just when moving to a newer Mac. You want an exact clone for at least one backup and one that you could if necessary, boot from instead of the original.