P: Keyword options no longer available in LR4

[Califdan]

When one has a keyword hierarchy:

In LR3, one could skip a level in selecting which keywords are exported. For example in the hierarchy A, B, C (where A is top parent) one could set A=Include on export, B=Do not include on Export + Export Containing, and C=Include on Export + Export Containing. In this way, on a photo with only keyword "C", on export we'd have A and C but not B.

In LR4 all my LR3 keywords that had this pattern were changed during catalog conversion and I can no longer set this pattern. Turning off "Include on Export" now turns off "Export Containing" and "Export Synonyms" rather than leaving them alone as in LR3.

This is a HUGE problem for me as I have my entire keyword hierarchy (over 3,000 KW's) designed to allow skipping levels. In addition, I have cases where the actual Keyword is for my workflow and convience but but the synonym is what I want exported (not the actual KW) which I can also no longer seem to do.

See screen shots below

[Califdan]

I agree, let's see if Adobe agree's 😉

[AlunFoto]

Thanks John and Dan for keeping this thread alive. Fingers crossed Adobe still reads it too... 🙂

[Lee_Jay]

It's "not a problem" by-definition since it was reported as a bug (red exclamation point) when in reality it was done on purpose.

My suggestion is to let this thread die and instead start a feature-request thread ("idea" - yellow light bulb) asking for a version of one of the solutions offered above to be implemented, and reference this thread from that one.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

For those of you that think we should do as Lee Jay suggested above, I started and idea thread two days ago here :

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

*someone replied and referenced this thread actually

[Lee_Jay]

Oops...sorry John, I hadn't noticed!

[Califdan]

Probably a good idea to keep both alive. There's a lot to be said about the "squeeky" wheel syndrome.

[Califdan]

Hi all, I looked at the "idea request" posted by John and found that it only addresses the "Synonym" portion of this problem. So I added another "idea Request" to address the "skip level" problem (which for me is more significant, although the synonym issue is also problematic)

The URL for my post is http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

Thaks -- Dan

[jepo13]

This feature change is a fundamental problem for me. I want my keywords to export exactly as they did. I spent quite a bit of time making my keyword hierarchy produce what I needed, exactly what I needed.

Could we please have a general option "Legacy keyword hierarchy functionalities" ?

Adobe, you cannot simply leave this as it is.

[GaryRowe-gcvt07]

WTF!!! Just came across this unwanted behaviour in LR4 - when were we going to be told? And, I think the 'reason' given by Adobe is rubbish. They have *broken* the keywording by removing functionality, dumbing it down ... by all means try to help people, but DON'T BREAK THINGS to do it!

We had the power to request what we wanted, and now Adobe has reduced the functionality in the program, and then tells us that it's 'not a problem' ...

CORRECTION. IT IS A PROBLEM

As so often before, I find Adobe's arrogance breathtaking.

Please please please - rethink your behaviour and let the program work again the way it used to, that gave us more flexibility.

And, in the future, please do not again alter our keyword metadata (or any other data we have put into the system) without telling us.

[johnrellis]

Dear moderator(s): Please change the status of this thread from “Not a problem” to “Under consideration” or “Not planned”. Leaving it marked “not a problem” is needlessly antagonizing customers. Jeffrey Tranberry (Adobe Customer Advocate) said it was under consideration as of two months ago.

This thread was marked “not a problem” because of ambiguity over the meaning of “problem” in this feedback forum. To users, “problem” clearly means any aspect of the application that is causing them frustration, inability to complete some task, inefficiencies, lost work, etc. When users submit feedback here, they typically use that meaning when marking their posts “problems”.

But at least one moderator here appears to think “problem” should be defined more narrowly, from a software developer’s perspective – the application isn’t working the way the product team intended it. Developers typically call this a “bug”. The moderator marked this thread “not a problem” using this developers’ definition.

Since this is a forum for users to communicate with Adobe, it would seem more practical to use the definition of “problem” as it's commonly understood by users and, indeed, how it is typically used in the hundreds of posts here marked “problem”. The moderators could insist on using the narrower definition, but that is likely just to lead to the bad feelings evidenced in this thread.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Hi Gerald

I agree 100%. This is a PROBLEM for many photographers. I "downgraded" back to LR 3.6 for some weeks when I found this keyword structure changes, but since I need to develop raw-files from D4 and D800 I have to use the LR 4.1. I really don't like it, but I have to or move to Aperture...

ADOBE : please give us the same keyword functionality as in LR 3.6 in the LR 4.2 version!

[Benjamin Warde]

"Dear moderator(s): Please change the status of this thread from “Not a problem” to “Under consideration” or “Not planned”. Leaving it marked “not a problem” is needlessly antagonizing customers."

Agreed.

-Ben

[jepo13]

Well. well, well ... are we going to recover our most useful keyword functionality or are we to drop Lr and go Aperture ?

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Jean-Pol - Very good question!
I'm also moving to Aperture soon if the keyword functionality in LR4 is not getting better again (or as it was in LR3.6)....

[john beardsworth]

So does Aperture have this "useful keyword functionality"? I'd love to know where. And when you apply a bottom level keyword, does Aperture infer that its top level "grandparent" keyword should also be applied? If so, I can't figure it out. Or do Aperture keywords have synonyms? Maybe I've missed something there too, but be careful what you wish for.....

[jepo13]

I wish Lr 4.x to reinstate the keyword functionality of Lr 3.6 !

Haven't bought Lr 4 yet, so I'll put my money where my mouth is, but I sure hope Adobe will listen !

[gasienica]

I have the exact same use case as Jason which worked in Lightroom 3. I use full names for keywords and list first names and nick names as synonyms and then only export the synonyms. Please restore this behavior from Lightroom 3.

Proposal: Don’t make ‘Include on Export’ and ‘Export Synonyms’ mutually exclusive.

[gasienica]

+1

[Camera69]

Well.... I just came across this topic by chance -- and I think, Adobe is damned right as it is now in LR4:

Forget about the privacy concerns as explained by Ben for the moment.

The real issue is data integrity:

Imagine, you have the following keywords and photos assigned to them:

people|[family]|George : photo_1
people|[idiots]|George : photo_2

Now, you don't want to let the world know that the first George is a member of your family nor that you don't like the second one.

You export both photos as photo_1_edit and photo_2_edit, do some edits in a third party program, and then re-import them to LR. Now your catalog will look like this:

people|[family]|George : photo_1
people|[idiots]|George : photo_2
people|George : photo_1_edit photo_2_edit

Do this with a few thousend photos in a deep hierarchy, and you know what you have done, and what you have to do. And you will be convinced that you don't know what you do.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

I 100% agree with you Jean-Pol

[Califdan]

Randolf,

If I understand the scenario In your example you have a parent KW of “People” and within that you have subordinate KW’s of “family” and “Idiots”. Then you export both photos. Evidently on KW’s “Family” and “Idiots” you have “export this KW turned off which in LR3 keeps the "export containing" turned on and in LR4 turns "export containing" off. So in in LR3 when you export Photo_1 and Photo_2 you get keywords “George” and “People” but in LR4 you just get "George". Then it seems you re-import the renamed edited photos.

In LR3 each one will have keywords “People” and “George” – of course losing the fact that one of the George’s was a family member and one was an idiot as you chose not to include that knowledge when you exported. In addition, since the same KW “George” is used to identify two different people (one a family member and one an idiot) when you re-import LR has no way of knowing that these are two different things so puts them both in a single "George". This seems to work in a common sense and logical manner.

However, in LR4 everything you said also happens but you also lose the fact that George is a is a member of the “People” set.

So far I don’t see your point as to why the LR4 version is preferable as it seems to loose information (i.e. "People") that I assume you wanted to keep where as LR3 kept it?

When you re-import your edited images, what is your desired result? If you want the re-imported images to have the exact same KW’s as the originals, then neither LR3 nor LR4 will do that unless you allow them to export “Idiot” and “Family” which then exposes you to revealing that information if you happen to export those photos for external use.

Dan

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

I've just installed the new Adobe LR 4.2 release candidate and it finally seems to fix our problem! Under "Bugs Corrected in the Lightroon 4.2 Release Candidate" one of the bugs (yes they call it a "bug") are: "Parents and synonyms of “do not export” keywords also do not export." With my tests so far it seems to WORK!! Have anyone els tested 4.2 RC ??

I need to test it more to be convinced it is fixed, but it looks promising. Thanks to Adobe for taking this problem serious!

[notnow117]

Where can I find 4.2 RC? I'm assuming I have to re-convert my LR3 library to get the per keyword options to carry over? When I initially converted with 4.0, it looked like they all got forced to "valid" options.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

LR 4.2 RC http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/li...
I don't know how your LR 3 Library will work with an Release Candidate (RC)

[notnow117]

Sweet! I didn't have to reconvert the library. All the keyword settings were intact, minus the one or two I messed around with to try and work around the issue initially. Thanks Adobe!