P: Make stacks Really Useful

Stacks in collections have all the same uses as stacks in folders, and more. I generally group all of the images from a particular category into collections and work on them from there, never going back to the folder. The fact that stacks don't work there, and even more so that stacks don't work from images across different folders (especially subfolders) drives me crazy.

Stacks in collections have all the same uses as stacks in folders, and more. I generally group all of the images from a particular category into collections and work on them from there, never going back to the folder. The fact that stacks don't work there, and even more so that stacks don't work from images across different folders (especially subfolders) drives me crazy.

In addition to John's use, I often revist the same subject on different shoots (hence they the photos would be in different folders) and would find it useful to stack them together.

Julie, think about derivatives stored separately from originals (eg what Peter Krogh calls the bucket system). This would benefit greatly from stacking based on the image's database ID, and not on the limited folder + filename key as used now.

Thinking purely of stacking within collections, one could imagine showing the same set of images to two different clients or for two different projects and using stacking to hide the less-wanted images. Or again, a mixed collection of derivatives and originals.

John

A separate but tangential idea would be the ability to right click an image and be offered to find the parent image, derivatives, images that share this image (such as focus stacks, HDR, panos, etc), or all of the above. And possibly turn those findings into a stack or collection.

Julie,
Stacks not working in Collections is one of the major disadvantages in LR IMHO. I wouldn't go as far a Photographe to say that stacks in stacks should be possible, but stacks working within the same collections sure would be a step forward.

Example:
I often work out of a collection doing develop work, and sometimes go into external edit to do so. In this case, I'm not able to stack the original with the externally edited copy, which I would like to be able to do. Also, stacks spanning folders would be nice to have too, i.e. in the case you have a JPG and a Raw folder with related images.

Beat

Julie,
Stacks not working in Collections is one of the major disadvantages in LR IMHO. I wouldn't go as far a Photographe to say that stacks in stacks should be possible, but stacks working within the same collections sure would be a step forward.

Example:
I often work out of a collection doing develop work, and sometimes go into external edit to do so. In this case, I'm not able to stack the original with the externally edited copy, which I would like to be able to do. Also, stacks spanning folders would be nice to have too, i.e. in the case you have a JPG and a Raw folder with related images.

Beat

Photographe, can you give us some ideas of how you would expect to use stacks if they were allowed in collections? What types of photos would you group together?

I'm not sure what it means to put a collection within a stack, or a stack that searches. Would you mind elaborating?

I am definitely for nested stacks though... My original vision was just for two types of stacks: those that represent a single photo (what I call an atomic stack, e.g. to bind the tif that comes from an external edit to its original, or the components of an hdr or panorama...), and those that represent multiple photos. But, I like the way you think!...

I think you have the seeds of a good idea, but some clarification would be helpful...