P: Respect Hierarchical Folders of Presets

As for not being forced to use a feature, so what. It's still development time used and not available for features one does value.

Riiight. Debate settled, folks. If John doesn't want a feature, Adobe shouldn't waste any time implementing it (no matter how many other users might want it) because all their resources need to be focused on the ones he values.

Glad we cleared that up.

I am not a professional in any of these matters but the whole thread of this thread has been about the develope  Module  and what is best to help Professionals and other users alike when using that Module, Adobe Professionals surely have to be the final arbitrator of what is best for everyone, If you can give us what we want and still meet the needs of the general community and your own organisation then either go ahead and do it or just say it cannot be done, no matter what is said here you will in any case do what makes the best business sense.
  

Basically anytime the program accesses any presets folder hierarchy on disk it should present that hierarchy exactly as it is just like Finder or File Explorer . Flattening it is user unfriendly, causes a performance hit and slows workflow.
If I have to prioritise it would be #1 first, then #5 and after that, I don't care (I had to spend 10 mins finding them because I never use them). The argument that a hierarchy causes a performance hit on the Navigator makes no sense to me and I am speaking as a programmer for over 30 years. Whether you are mousing down a long flat list causing the Navigator to update or a hierarchy is the same. Perhaps you are using a hover time of 0? Simply allow a configuration setting so I can set a hover time that suits my style.

As to how many, since the end user can organise their own or acquired presets then it is up to each user to decide how deep. The program should present that structure in the UI with the same limits as the platform file managers which I believe is 256 characters for each but if not that might be a reasonable limit (256 character path  and file name)

As to the Adobe built in presets, use common sense. The existing structure needs to be at least 1 deeper so that I have Lightroom then a choice between B&W and Color then what you have now but reserve 1 deeper just in case.That would be 3 levels but allow 4 or 5 for future. If they use a standard off the shelf HD folder reader object then this is a moot point other than to specify a high limit during object creation and I would vote for 5 OR make it a Prefs setting would be even better.

None of this makes me want to leave LR and PS but the long delay in implementing a standard Windows and Apple construct as you have in the Folders section and elsewhere creates unnecessary tension between us.

Thanks for getting involved Rikk.

Thank you Rikk Flohr for replying to this request. Your explanation is helpful in understanding the issue from your perspective. For me, the most important area is for the (1.) Develop Module. That's the end result I'd like to see accomplished. For the others (2. - 5.) that you listed, I'm very willing to take some performance hit to accomplish number 1. In fact, some of these others you list will help make the develop module preset organization easier to accomplish, especially in the (5.) import panel. I believe it will help our workflow in all 5 areas (net gain in efficiency).

How many levels of hierarchy are desired?  3

How many are necessary?  3

How many will be detrimental to the average user?  no limit, make it the user's choice

Thanks for considering this.
Marty Cohen

I basically only ever use presets in Develop,  so that's where this is most important to me. However in order to make the program consistent for users I can't imagine why you would develop this in one place and not everywhere else. To do differently (as it is now) only makes the program more confusing.

Having at least 3 but no more than 5 levels of hierarchy would be useful. Mine are organized both in folders based on the source from which they came, which often includes at least one more sub level to describe the type of preset (eg. B&W, Color, Psychadelic, etc.). I currently also have another level that I created a few years ago when older presets didn't work properly with the newest process version (or reverted the image back to the previous process version when they were applied). Although I rarely use them I still have some of those older presets and still see a need for that level of hierarchy...

As for performance cost, obviously I'm not interested in taking any hit in that regard if it's possible to avoid it. LR is already, unfortunately, a sluggish pig most of the time. However I honestly believe that is a different conversation. I truly believe that using good coding practices across the platform (which includes reusing identical code wherever possible) will help that more than hurt it. Admittedly I am not an active developer and I stand to be corrected in that regard.

But my point is still valid that Adobe need to address the performance of the program across the board. I can access my images in Photo Mechanic and ON1 Photo RAW almost instantly while when accessing the same images in LR sometimes takes as long as 10 minutes to even see anything other than a spinning beachball. Adding (or not adding) hierarchy levels to my presets folders will not change that...

Yes, this nails it perfectly.

1 is the highest priority, followed by 2. 

At least one more level is required, though 2 might suit others. 

See above

I guess there has to be some limit. I'm happy with 2 more levels to keep mine better organised. I think beyond 5 is too many. 

The key for me is to have sets of either branded or similar presets in a secondary folder below the main parent. E.g. All my LRB presets which have their own folders could be in a parent LRB folder, that way they're neater in the panel. Same for VSCO presets in their own folder. It reduces the main list down to a more manageable set, rather than a long list of folders. 

Just for clarification: Preset Folder Organization touches many different areas. Preset organization needs to be consistent across the application. Places where Preset Organization is currently present:

1. Develop Module - Preset panel 
2. Library Module - Quick Develop panel
3. Auto Import>Auto Import Settings...
4. Tether Capture Tool Bar
5. Import dialog - Apply During Import panel

Work has recently been completed to make those dialogs (and the subsequent organization represented) equivalent across the application. 

For items 2-5, there is little performance cost to increased hierarchy.  For Item 1, the cost is more significant. The Develop Module's Preset panel, ties to the Navigator Panel's preview image and the increase in hierarchy will complicate generation of a preview image when mousing over the preview. 

When the 6-year old thread, originally mentioned, was posted, Lightroom 3.x had more rudimentary functionality than today. That was updated in Lightroom 4 to allow for more hierarchy.  Additional consistency work was done in the 6.x time frame. 

Threads in this forum are marked implemented when we believe them to be implemented based upon the original poster's feature request. If that is shown to be in error, we mark the status of the thread accordingly. As Victoria has already pointed out, the thread had its "Implemented" status changed after this was realized. 

So - for all of you wanting this Hierarchical Preset organization I have a few questions: 

Have you viewed all five of the places where this will impact UI and are comfortable with the impact on workflow in those areas - whether you use a particular area or not?

Specifically to all who have posted on this thread - which area (1-5) are you asking about?

How many levels of hierarchy are desired?

How many are necessary?

How many will be detrimental to the average user? 

In order for a serious feature request to succeed it has to impact positively the workflow of the Lightroom user and not introduce new workflow issues. Adobe needs to hear more from you on this issue. 

Please share this with all the photographers you know who use Lightroom. Adobe is more likely to listen and act if large numbers of users join this effort and make their request known. It would be especially helpful if some of the prominent photographers with large internet followings would join and become part of this effort.

Thanks Victoria, some light at last.