P: Photos are marked for republish even though there is no change.

"But please note that this problem is new for export!"

Every major release, there seems to be a new twist to the symptoms.

Sounds like you have a lot of published collections. You might check out the Publish Collections command of the Any Source plugin, which makes it much easier to find photos and collections that need republishing, mark them as up-to-date, or republish the collections in parallel to slow publish services.

Hello,

I've been using Lightroom since version 1 and have never had such a bad update as I have now to version 13. Mind you, this is very subjective, of course it depends on what you use. I use VERY much the export via publishing services. It has ALWAYS been the case that many many image files have been suddenly marked as changed over and over again, but with nothing changed about them, no metadata, no development. I'm used to that, unfortunately. I actually hope for years that this will be fixed sometime.

But now it happens that already during an export the files are immediately marked as changed again. The progress bar during the export also jumps back and forth, sometimes wildly.

Many greetings
Friedemann

Sehr geehrtes Adobe Team,

Problem: im Veröffentlichsdienst bei Lightroom Classic stehen ständig Fotos auf "Erneut zu veröffentlichende geänderte Fotos" obwohl die Bilder im Katalog nicht geändert wurden, sondern nur z.B. mit einer größeren Ansicht (Lupe) betrachtet wurden. Dies macht es unorganisiert, da man später nicht mehr unterscheiden kann ob die Bilder nun wirklich aktualisiert und entsprechend neu hochgeladen werden müssen.

Lösungsvorschlag: Es wäre gut eine Auswahl treffen zu können welche Veränderungen am Bild Einfluss auf den Veröffentlichsdienst haben

Grüße

"tell LrC to discard all existing 1:1 previews first, and THEN let it re-render them?"

I edited the steps to include that, thanks.

Hi John, I would perhaps add another step before your b) — tell LrC to discard all existing 1:1 previews first, and THEN let it re-render them? (to avoid that it will skip rendering existing current 1:1 previews, which it may or may not do, I don't know).

Thanks for your remarks that my approach is rather brutal. I've re-worded what I wrote a little bit to make it clear that this is crude and works for me (and some more explanations).

(last not least, sorry to hear that the article didn't load when using Chrome — that shouldn't happen! I had a few .htaccess rules to block very old browser versions because a lot of malicious bots use them, and I might have slightly overdone it, I guess... anyway, that's beyond the scope of this forum of course.)

"It does not seem to be necessary to delete all the previews."

His first step is to delete the preview cache: "delete Lightroom’s entire preview cache (the “<catalog name> Previews.lrdata” file or folder)". That deletes all the previews.

"It also does not seem to be necessary to build 1:1 previews which take a lot longer. "

If you have a catalog with 100,000 photos and 100 published photos, it is certainly faster to build 100 1:1 previews than 100,000 standard-sized previews.  On my 5K display, the standard-sized preview is almost as big as the 1:1 preview, so there's little difference.   As I said, which method is faster depends on many factors.

Alex suggests "render new Standard previews, at least for all photos that are in Publish Collections".  It does not seem to be necessary to delete all the previews.  It also does not seem to be necessary to build 1:1 previews which take a lot longer.  Regardless, this bug is a PITA and Adobe should correct it.

It loads in my Firefox but not Chrome (Mac).

That solution requires rebuilding the preview cache for the entire catalog, whereas my variant only renders 1:1 previews for published photos.  Which one is faster will depend on multiple factors.

I just clicked it on two different computers and it loaded without issue.

@e.j.v92227290, at the bottom of the top post you can see "BUG: Acknowledged". This indicates that Adobe has file the issue in their internal tracking system. Unfortunately, Adobe rarely says when they might fix an acknowledged issue.