Lightroom: Metadata collisions between catalogue and files

20 Votes
LEGEND ,
Apr 08, 2011 Apr 08, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Lightroom will report on metadata collisions on a case by case basis. However, it does not provide for a way to search for files that metadata discrepancies vis a vis the catalogue.

Can this feature be easily added?
Idea Released

Views

44

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
44 Comments
LEGEND ,
Apr 08, 2011 Apr 08, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I think the FR is a good idea, and I think it would be easy to do - although I dont have metadata issues much any more...

In the mean time, some people are using a script that extracts the info from the database, and starts up Lightroom, then use LR-somethin-or-other plugin to make a collection of all photos with metadata issues. Detailed info is available on the other forum, however its search is broken.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 08, 2011 Apr 08, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'd like to see the ability to filter on all three states of metadata mismatch:

- "Up arrow",
- "Down arrow", and
- "Exclamation flag".

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Adobe Community Professional ,
Apr 11, 2011 Apr 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The original feature request has been around for a long as Lightroom itself.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 11, 2011 Apr 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

This strikes me as one of those things that should just be done already - assuming it wouldn't take much time...

In the mean time, many have solved this problem by a workaround (issue SQL query to round up the files, then make a collection of said files using plugin). I solved this problem for myself another way, but it would be a nice gift to the community if someone having solved this problem via the SQL query / collection method could post a turn-key start-up script + instructions for others to use... - I'm trying to concentrate on other things m'self...

PS - The above-mentioned solution was posted on the "other" forum, if you could find it...

For example, one could write a python script with guts like:

catalogPath = # get from command line args or config file or something.
lrCatCon = sqlite3.connect( catalogPath )
cur = lrCatCon.execute( sql to round up the files with metadata issues )
# create file with list of those files.

# startup Lightroom
if os.name == 'nt': # windows
os.startfile(catalogPath)
else: # Mac
subprocess.call(['open', catalogPath]) # mac/nix.

Lr/transporter (was it?) or custom plugin takes it from here in Lightroom - makes collection.

Then use this script to start Lightroom and you'd have a collection ready...

FWIW,
R

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 11, 2011 Apr 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thanks Rob. Ian, any clue as to why Adobe hasn't responded to requests to make this happen? It seems like it would be a very simple addition to the filter bar. In the meantime, we all have to learn SQL 🙂

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 11, 2011 Apr 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

My theory: I think the Lightroom team members are very disciplined individuals. If it ain't top priority, it don't make the cut, no matter what it is or how long it would take to do it, or how long its been an issue. - Just a theory. What other earthly reason could there possibly be? - It couldn't possibly take much time to fix, and they couldn't possibly not know about it... Maybe in their own photography hobbies they never have the issue... - 'tiz a puzzlement...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 11, 2011 Apr 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

My theory: I think the Lightroom team members are very disciplined individuals. If it ain't top priority, it don't make the cut, no matter what it is or how long it would take to do it, or how long its been an issue. - Just a theory. What other earthly reason could there possibly be? - It couldn't possibly take much time to fix, and they couldn't possibly not know about it... Maybe in their own photography hobbies they never have the issue... - 'tiz a puzzlement...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Engaged ,
May 19, 2011 May 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

VERY needed feature.
I all the time have this issue especially beacause:
-I cannot geotag within LR
-Not all metadata can be edited in lightroom
-Many problems with lightroom handling of time metadata -> which I set outside of lightroom

I suppose the problem is
- it takes time to scan all the photos to check if they are synchrone.

And then what we need is not just 2 arrows (or well only as a short cut)
what we need is to be able for each photos to display a table of the metadata values in the catalog and in the file so that we can compare both metadata state and decide which way we want to synchronise - and even best : decide for each piece of metadata of each photo the way we want to synchronise them )
So there would be 3 level
-decide for a selection of photo the way to synchronise metadata
-decide for a given photo the way to synchronise metadata while directly comparing these metadata
-decide for a given metadata of a given photo the way to synchronise it.

Regards
Eric

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
May 19, 2011 May 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Eric - I agree with your comments, but just so you know:

There *is* a way, *now*, to display and/or log a detailed list of differences between metadata on disk and metadata in catalog, via ChangeManager.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
May 19, 2011 May 19, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Eric - I agree with your comments, but just so you know:

There *is* a way, *now*, to display and/or log a detailed list of differences between metadata on disk and metadata in catalog, via ChangeManager.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Engaged ,
May 22, 2011 May 22, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi,
great I will have a look

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Engaged ,
May 22, 2011 May 22, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi,
great I will have a look

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
May 22, 2011 May 22, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi Eric,

Its not as straight forward as you'd probably like, but I do it "all" the time. Contact me using the old forum's PM or my website if problems or questions.

Hints:
-------
- You have to read metadata from disk, then invoke "Select To Compare".
- Then select the previous state (from edit history) and invoke the "Compare To" function.

(There is no facility for item-by-item merging of differences, but the differences are also logged so you can merge manually if necessary)

If you prefer the state as read from disk, just select it in the edit history. If you prefer the catalog state and there's a conflict to resolve, just re-save xmp (or re-lock photo if you are using that feature of ChangeManager).

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
May 22, 2011 May 22, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi Eric,

Its not as straight forward as you'd probably like, but I do it "all" the time. Contact me using the old forum's PM or my website if problems or questions.

Hints:
-------
- You have to read metadata from disk, then invoke "Select To Compare".
- Then select the previous state (from edit history) and invoke the "Compare To" function.

(There is no facility for item-by-item merging of differences, but the differences are also logged so you can merge manually if necessary)

If you prefer the state as read from disk, just select it in the edit history. If you prefer the catalog state and there's a conflict to resolve, just re-save xmp (or re-lock photo if you are using that feature of ChangeManager).

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Aug 04, 2011 Aug 04, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I would really like to see a Unsaved Metadata Smart Collection item.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Enthusiast ,
Aug 24, 2011 Aug 24, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Absent any official (or unofficial) response from Adobe, I have assumed that the reason this feature has not been implemented is because it is in general a very expensive feature to implement (in terms of disk access). In order to know the metadata status of a catalog, you need to know the modification time of all files in the catalog, which can only be done one-by-one. I think that mac file systems allow you to easily find changed files, but I don't know about Windows, so relying on that would make for a confusing interface.

However, after a folder is synchronized, the metadata status of all the files is known (or is known to the time of the synchronization). I wonder if Adobe could somehow lever off the synchronization process to create temporary found sets with various metadata states, but only allow access to them immediately after synchronization (when they are likely, but not assured, to be correct)?

I think we all feel the need for this, that any even halfway usable solution would be a great boon.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Aug 24, 2011 Aug 24, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Alan wrote, "Absent any official (or unofficial) response from Adobe, I have assumed that the reason this feature has not been implemented is because it is in general a very expensive feature to implement (in terms of disk access)."

LR already implements automatic background checking for metadata conflicts and displays the conflicts with an icon on the Library thumbnails, and it records the conflicts in its catalog.

What people are asking for here is pretty simple: a way to filter just those images that LR has already identified and recorded in its catalog as having conflicts.

In another thread, some people would also like to have a mechanism to see the fields that are in conflict and be able to choose on a field-by-field basis how to resolve the conflict.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Aug 24, 2011 Aug 24, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I think Lightroom's background checking is on-demand, sorta like preview generation... - It doesn't necessarily know about metadata conflicts catalog-wide (although it could...).

See related idea to detect and identify metadata conflicts, catalog-wide along with other potential issues: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Aug 24, 2011 Aug 24, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I think Lightroom's background checking is on-demand, sorta like preview generation... - It doesn't necessarily know about metadata conflicts catalog-wide (although it could...).

See related idea to detect and identify metadata conflicts, catalog-wide along with other potential issues: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Enthusiast ,
Aug 24, 2011 Aug 24, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Exactly. LR can't know everything about every file, so Adobe has decided that it would only confuse the user to pretend that it knows everything. However, when LR knows that there is a conflict (it has consulted the file's modification date, and found a conflict), it puts up an icon for that file. I am suggesting that immediately after a synchronization operation, it does know everything for that folder, and can act differently.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Enthusiast ,
Aug 24, 2011 Aug 24, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Exactly. LR can't know everything about every file, so Adobe has decided that it would only confuse the user to pretend that it knows everything. However, when LR knows that there is a conflict (it has consulted the file's modification date, and found a conflict), it puts up an icon for that file. I am suggesting that immediately after a synchronization operation, it does know everything for that folder, and can act differently.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Enthusiast ,
Aug 24, 2011 Aug 24, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

And to comment on an earlier post in this thread, yes, afaict, Lightroom could easily have a smart folder criterion for "unsaved metadata" and it would be very helpful to have such a folder for those who do not "automatically save metadata". I can see no reason why Adobe couldn't implement this immediately.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Enthusiast ,
Aug 24, 2011 Aug 24, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

And to comment on an earlier post in this thread, yes, afaict, Lightroom could easily have a smart folder criterion for "unsaved metadata" and it would be very helpful to have such a folder for those who do not "automatically save metadata". I can see no reason why Adobe couldn't implement this immediately.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Aug 24, 2011 Aug 24, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I dont know why Adobe is dragging their feet on this one. Yes, there are some technical issues around when the info is getting updated, and yes, all are easily solvable, or so it seems to me too, so no - I dont have a clue why Lr3 hasn't got this remedied - maybe Lr4 (or Lr3.5, ha-ha).

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Aug 24, 2011 Aug 24, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I dont know why Adobe is dragging their feet on this one. Yes, there are some technical issues around when the info is getting updated, and yes, all are easily solvable, or so it seems to me too, so no - I dont have a clue why Lr3 hasn't got this remedied - maybe Lr4 (or Lr3.5, ha-ha).

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report