Sync issue when renaming folder in LR Classic

[OleAa]

How can I avoid that LR Classic resyncs images from Creative Cloud once I rename the dated image folders on my Mac? 

Some facts:

- Images was originally imported to an iPad or a computer running Lightroom Mobile.

- Images was then synced to my Mac via Lightroom Classic. 

So far everything is as I want it to work. But I also like to rename the image folders to something descriptive without resyncing the entire folder. Then I got two copies of all the pictures.

[Ian Lyons]

Every time you rename the folder the cloud servers loose track of the originals and will resync. It might be dumb, irritating but it's the way sync works. Therefore, if don't want the photos to resync you should not rename the folders. 

[OleAa]

That’s a silly limitation, but I understand and need to rework my workflow. 🙂 

I think that changes made within LR Classic should have been possible without breaking the connection. 

I guess I will have the same problem if moving the dated folder to an external hdd. Right? 

Anyway, thank you for your help!

[richardplondon]

Renaming image folders can only ever be productive for you, within that local context. And as discovered, that may have physical consequences - not only for syncing but also for Catalog referencing, file backup etc,

When each photo is assigned descriptive metadata (chiefly, keywords) though, that descriptive info can sync with that individual photo. That descriptive effort carries through to other contexts where your physical folders simply do not apply; such as, into an online gallery or if you simply email an isolated photo to someone.

Plus, adding descriptive info to the photos themselves is inclusive not exclusive: a photo file must live EITHER in a physical folder called one thing, OR in a different physical folder called another thing; and when those folders both sit under a further parent folder then all of the contained photos have no choice but to inherit that assocation-by-location. That makes perfect sense with such matters as capture date, whereby a "day" naturally belongs inside a given "month" and where each photo has got no fewer than, and no more than, precisely ONE date of capture... a permanent fact about that photo, which is unlikely to ever get reconsidered. And, which remains equally true for all future versions that may be produced, of that same photo.

But to have a photo derive its organisational info from ONE scheme of descriptive folder naming, at a time, is highly limiting. You would have to choose whether you are going to store it, perhaps name your folder, according to a particular event; AND/OR on a preconceived and rigid subject basis; AND/OR on some other basis... and then accept that all the contained photos must participate, together, in all of that categorisation.

Such restrictions do not apply for metadata methods: each separate photo can freely have / not have each one of many keywords, independently and regardless of folder location. Also it can freely have / not have membership in each one of many Collections, all of this running in parallel. And these attributes can be changed at will without any 'physical' consequence; and can differ between different virtual versions deriving from the same physical file.

[OleAa]

Of course you are right. It’s an old habit to keep the date and add some info to the folder name. Easy to see in Finder, and a method that don’t rely on specific software to read basic info. I tend to forget that extra step of writing metadata to file from Lightroom. But I need to rethink my workflow, as I find Creative Cloud a practical way to store images that are in active use. Then, each year, old pictures are moved to external HD’s for archiving. Thank you for your help!