P: New Way to Handle Related Groups of Photos

What do you want as title? I can update it for you.

The more I think about this, the better it sounds. If group handling were refined I might just get a new drive and use it to store "related" files. I mean, for me, there are two impediments to shooting bursts, hdrs, panos, externally editing, focus stacking, virtual copies, etc...:

1. Related file management.
2. Storage.
3. (In case of external edits, add: loss of edit contiguity with source, a.k.a. the "forking disjointedness", and its cousin "the big tif").

This FR/Idea would solve #1, a couple big drives mostly solves #2, and #3 would remain to be solved - but that's another FR/Idea.

PS - I *think* you can't change titles once somebody has replied - maybe the forum "administrator" could do it. - One of us could make new FR/Idea with revised title and manually move relevant contents over if need be - standing by...

Thinking it through, the original FR does fit pretty well with the "Group" idea. It somewhat detailed out the single-file 'atomic' kind of grouping you'd mentioned elsewhere. To support this in the broader grouping strategy, perhaps a few additional specs:

• 
  
• Some sort of built-in or default Master/Copies group
• 
  
• Any new Virtual Copy gets added to this group if it exists, otherwise the group is created with the original image as the Master
• 
  
• Any derivative file created through 'Edit In' gets added to this group if it exists, otherwise the group is created.
• 
  
• The 'Edit In' dialogue adds a checkbox for "Make Edited File the Master" (useful when building a PSD from a RAW file, for example).
• 
  
• Exporting gives the option to add the Export to this group
• 
  

I think that, or anything close, would do it.

I would much prefer something like the broader 'Group' strategy, and would only think of my original FR as a fall-back if the broader strategy isn't going to fly.

So, up to you if you want to post separately - it might give the subject better visibility. If not, wonder if I can change the title of this FR?

Paul Wasserman

Paul - I was thinking the original FR/Idea would also fit into the "Group" idea, but if you'd prefer to keep them independent, I'll start a new thread for the "Group" idea. In any case, I'm onboard for keeping track of how photos relate to each other, whether a group relationship or master/slave...

?
R

While I still would like to see the specific Master/Derivative features I requested in the original FR, I really like the 'relationship' concept as a replacement for stacks. To make this work I think the UI really needs to be intuitive. If we call the related images 'Groups' for now, here are some suggestions for starters:

To add to or create a Group:

• 
  
• A Group is created like a stack is now, via right-click
• 
  
• To add to an existing Group, the name is selected from a list
• 
  
• The list of existing Group names are those the image that was right-clicked belong to
• 
  
• A new Group can be created by entering a new name. The image that was right-clicked becomes the Master image for the new group
• 
  

Working with Groups:

• 
  
• Any image that is part of a group will have a little icon (like the existing 'Collections' Icon
• 
  
• Any image that is the Master Image of a group will be identified.
• 
  
• Clicking the 'Groups' Icon on an image will bring up a list of Groups the Image belongs to
• 
  
• Selecting a group will bring up a grid with all members of the group displayed. It'd be nice if this was a pop-up window, but that might not be practical.
• 
  
• A Command button on the screen will appear saying 'Return to .... wherever you were before working with the group. Also doable via hotkey.
• 
  
• The Master image for the Group will be identified in some way, and can be changed to another image via right-click or button
• 
  
• Images can be removed from the Group or deleted here
• 
  
• If this Group was launched from a Collection, a little button will appear on each image. The button can be pressed to add or remove the image from the Collection
• 
  
• Right-Click options would include "Move to same folder as Master", "Move to selected folder" (with a folder dialogue), etc.
• 
  
• Possibly, the last Group worked with would remain persistant, like the Quick Collection. This would allow navigating to other folders or collections and dragging images to the Group, etc.
• 
  

Additional thoughts welcome.

Paul Wasserman

Another good idea as part of the new Lr relationship handling (stack replacement) features.

To review: Presently, one photo can be related to another photo in Lightroom via:

1. Shared stack (which suffers desparately from lack of collection support).
2. Virtual copy (deleting master silently takes all virtual copies with it).
3. Being in the same folder or collection...

Yet, in real life photos can be related in more ways, for example:

- Its an intermediate version of or component to the same exact photo (e.g. internallly edited raw and externally edited tif, or hdr/pano components).
- Its a final version of the same exact photo (e.g. virtual copy).
- Its a similar photo (e.g. part of a burst).

Personally, I think the database handling should be slightly, subtly changed, such that all photos are handled as virtual copies, meaning:

- A photo copy is defined by a set of adjustments, and the base photo to which they should be applied.
Thus, there is no longer a distinction between virtual copy and real copy.

And, then if the software/user can define relationships, for example:

- Intermediate(component)/Final
- Similar

Notes:
------
- the virtual/real relationship no longer exists (or perhaps I should say *always* exists).
- stacks don't define relationships per se, but you may have a context menu item to stack things based on relationships. (actually, stacks would no longer be necessary,
since this whole FR would really be a more sophisticated way of handling relationships than just "stackage")
- intermediate(components)/final: intermediates are hidden in default viewing mode, since they are not the final photo, but components or stepping stones to the final photo.

Summary:
--------
Relationship handling in Lightroom would be a welcome improvement, namely:

- Simplify by removing the distinction between real & virtual.
- Add the ability to define "user relationships", maybe with a default "starter" set, for example:
- hdr
- pano
- derivative
- duplicate
- burst
- same object (or person)
- same scene (or group of people)
- Note: for each of these relationships, one photo will be considered the "master", or "representative" - the signficance of which may depend on the kind of relationship.

Change the UI to automatically indicate related photos somehow, and ability to hide/show or expand/contract related photos, or edit related photos as quick collection...

Example use cases:

- One selects a bunch of photos and creates an HDR, then defines the HDR output as "representative" and the whole set as members of the "hdr" relationship.
By default, the components are hidden from view. Context menu includes things like "view only related photos" (e.g. put in quick collection for editing), and "view to include related photos" (expand internal "stack" for viewing within present folder or collection).

- One selects a bunch of photos and assigns a "burst" relationship to them. Any photo can be considered "representative" of the burst for the purpose of viewing in default mode.
Similar items exist on context menu for editing/viewing just the burst, or viewing all related burst photos.

- One could select a bunch of photos of the same object, and create a new relationship called "same object"...
- One could select a bunch of photos of the same scene, and assign it an already existing relationship called "same scene"...
- One could select a bunch of photos to be part of a collage or photobook, and assign it a new relationship called "project code-name see-saw"...

More notes:
- Photos can be members of more than one relationship.
- This could replace stacks altogether.

PS - One could accomplish most of this now, sortof, with a disciplined regimen of keywords and collections, or custom metadata and a plugin..., but I think native support would make it more straight forward to use.

Conclusion: All of this is a way of saying, "yes" to the original FR/Idea, with the additional ideas:

- to make it more general via user-creatable "relationships".
- have it replace stacks.
- promote virtual copies to "first-class-citizens" (and retire the distinction between real & virtual).

Final Thoughts:
--------------------
All of this could be made backward compatible:
- Assign stacked photos to the "legacy stack" relationship shipped with Lr4.
- Optional: assign existing real/virtual copies to a "legacy virtual" relationship.