For purposes of Portfolio, even if new changes ARE syncing to cloud from Lighroom Classic - and your web galleries are constantly updating themselves on the fly - photos inside your Portfolio site will still not dynamically update themselves.   That only happens on demand:: when you edit the Portfolio site, and actively tell it to refresh its photo content to match the current state of your collection in the cloud. ... View more

So currently (if I understand right) you are deciding which ones to export, doing so, and then wishing to find a retrospective way to filter down to see which ones have been exported how.    Maybe you could consider this the other way around: beginning by awarding images suitable collection membership, a certain 'workflow' keyword or whatever as part of finding, reviewing, selecting them ready to be exported that certain way. So with those metadata attributes in place, later viewing what's been exported in a particular way is straightforward - alternatively, for a given photo, later viewing the different ways this has been exported (what Collections does it belong to / what keywords does it have).   Depending on the export target, a system of Publish collections (membership assigned directly) or Publish smart collections (referring to per-image metadata) may help smooth the workflow here. ... View more

Which module (Library or Develop) - and if in Library, are you showing Grid or Loupe view? Even when selecting your images in the Filmstrip at the bottom of screen (which is constant), the current interface shown in main window makes a difference on whether all the currently highlighted images will receive a Paste, or only the active image.   So far as Copy / Paste, have you put a checkmark against the particular kinds of processing that you want to copy from one image, and paste onto other images?   Last, incidentally, are you aware of the AutoSync setting?  ... View more

if you go to delete the master version of a photo that also has got one or more virtual copies, there is a warning to that effect.    If it is a particular virtual copy that you want to keep, and not the master version, you can first highlight that virtual copy and (in Library) use Photos menu / "Set Copy as Original".    This turns what was the master version before, into a virtual copy - and vice versa: IOW it is the unwanted one that shows the folded corner now, and so that can be selectively removed. Another reason for having the preferred version as the master, is so it can participate if necessary in writing / reading external XMP metadata. ... View more

one possible tactic: rather than initiating the PS edit of Raw normally (passing through ACR silently, image created in memory only at first), to use an external editing preset to initiate this. There then follows a different interaction between PS and LrC.   In the standard workflow, PS gets an unsaved image and the subsequent Save needs to do several things at the same time: to create the file on disk but also to communicate to the Catalog that something new needs to be imported. It seems this latter part is what is failing to happen when save is invoked by a batch Action.   In the workflow that an external preset produces (and the same will happen when a non-Adobe editor is  used, or if  LrC and PS are not version-compatible) the creation of the file on disk AND its import into the Catalog have already happened before PS sees anything. In this case if is LrC itself that has rendered the Raw conversion into pixels, not ACR, and therefore what is opened in PS is an already existing file. Therefore all that needs to happen when the image is subsequently saved by PS, is the update of a file on disk. LrC has that file already imported regardless of PS saving or not; it is "looking out for" any later re-saves in any case: however that re-save is being invoked at the PS end, should make zero difference to LrC AFAICT.   The main difficulty of this method IMO, is training oneself to not use Ctrl+E shortcut - and remembering to choose Edit In... / [name of preset] instead! ... View more

You have "clipping warnings" turned on - Develop has these, Library does not. The blue markings identify areas of the photos that are naturally, or are adjusted to be, so dark as to portray little or no detail - and the red markings tell you the same for very light areas.    Press J key to toggle these indications ON / OFF. They are just informational - won't appear in prints or exports.   Warnings are sometimes a call to action, and other times can be safely disregarded. And only you can judge that: the warnings are there to help you, you are not there to keep the warnings happy.   Sometimes we will be fine about a few very bright lit areas showing featureless white. Sometimes lightening a dark background enough to "make the warnings go away" might turn out worse, not better, pictorially. Myself: I seldom refer to these warnings and even then, only as a momentary check. They can also be selectively turned on and off using the little triangles top left and top right of the histogram panel in Develop. ... View more

glad you got it working! ... View more

Your current catalog is not going to be changed, by exporting FROM it. The images that are going to be included in the new catalog will all refer to the same storage locations.   Imagine you wrote out a list of some people's names and addresses, and then you photocopied that sheet of paper. This duplication process has not changed the original piece of paper; the same actual people still exist in the world unaffected; they are the same people being referred to on one list, as on the other; and their addresses are all still just as correct whichever list you look at. ... View more

this screenshot is from Windows, 13.2 release  ... View more

When you Export as Catalog you have two choices for the checkbox "Export negative files".   If checked, LrC creates new copies of all relevant image files alongside the newly created catalog, in a new arrangement of local subfolders which mimics the relative folder organisation seen in the starting catalog. Then these (parallel) copies in their new folders, are the ones referenced by the new catalog. So both setups are now fully independent of each other, going forward.   If unchecked, which would be my recommendation, the newly created catalog references the exact same images in all the same current locations (and this can include multiple drive volumes) as the starting catalog does. So those files and folders are now held in common by both catalogs. Thus if you were to rename or move or delete or write metadata out to one or another image file from within one catalog, that action will have an impact for the other catalog which is referencing this same image file. ... View more

Yes it is just building a new Catalog that has got the same sorts of information inside.   To export all images, go to "All Photographs" collection and make sure the Library filter is set to None. That defines an overall set of images that will be included. Then in Export as Catalog, un-check "selected images only" to get this entire set (without needing to expand stacks, and highlight all of its individual members). ... View more

That is very strange. I assume you have confirmed zero photos are in fact present.    Perhaps your current catalog is so malformed that it is not importable from? or... something else is not right.   A fallback tactic that occurs to me - short of writing out metadata and reimporting photos fresh, which would be a very distant last-resort - is to try "pushing out" an intermediate catalog using Export as Catalog. Then see if that operates OK. If not fully, but it does show your edited images, maybe this intermediate may be bringable (Import from Catalog) into a new, freshly made catalog. Aim being: a known-good database structure which contains only known-valid image entries properly indexed. Hope being: that anything found non-valid should have been excluded along the way. ... View more

so - you do see a dialog similar to the one below, and chose the same option?   ... View more

It's perfectly safe to try: the only data you are modifying is the Catalog that you are importing into. Your prior Catalog (that you are importing from) is not altered at all. If you were not happy with the outcome, you could simply erase the new Catalog and make a fresh empty one.     Prompts that can arise with 'Import from Another Catalog' have to do with how you would want any conflicts / comparisons as may arise between image versions that are already there, and incoming image versions for the same photos, to be resolved. Since an empty catalog starts with NO photos whatever, such questions will not even get asked.  ... View more

In the new empty catalog - you do know NOT to use "import photos and videos", right?   Rather, you want "import from another catalog" - the screenshot is from Windows but I am sure MacOS will have a similar menu.     The outcome is that the existing catalog's information about: what images are imported from what folders, how those are organised virtually (Collections, keywords etc), how edited and with what History - all gets merged in wholesale.    ... View more

I should have also mentioned, there is a Reset button that can be clicked to re-initialise all adjustments for a given mask. ... View more

Are you syncing an Upright mode from one image to the other, or just specific Upright results along with Transform "adjustments"? Syncing an Upright mode can be expected to re-analyse this other photo from scratch, and when it does so, may identify different edges and thus give different results - even if the framing was otherwise the same. Then Transform controls 'by the numbers' (such as Scale, Horizontal or Vertical perspective) imposed on top of that auto Upright starting point - would be modifying from a different starting point. Also, depending on what has happened with Constrain Crop. ... View more

The Raw data needs to be converted into a viewable image, and every aspect of that conversion requires one or another value to be set. Setting a value to 0 instead of default 5 (say) is just as much an active decision as setting it to 10 instead of 5 would be - or, deciding to leave it on 5.    The default processing for a camera JPG does show all sliders zeroed, which makes sense for an already processed image. But all zeroes for Raw conversion would be unlikely to be optimal, nor even conducive to visually judging the image's potential and processing needs.    This difference is most obvious to see with the Color Temp white-balance slider. With a Raw, the Temp slider sets the absolute Kelvin-value you want the image to employ, starting from scratch. With a JPG this same Temp slider does not show Kelvin numbers - but instead, a warmer/cooler scale that further adjusts the image relative to whatever it is already processed to look like, or else simply leaves that appearance alone.   A Raw has no such prior appearance that could be left alone. ... View more

If this had been Library, that might have been just a matter of deleting the previews and forcing their re-generation but happening in Develop is more critical IMO. If this is a Catalog specific issue, and integrity check has not worked, and the image files themselves are OK (you can check those by making a new temporary Catalog and test-importing some there) - then I see two possible next steps:   Start going back through this catalog's backups until you get to a properly working version;   make a new empty 'known good' Catalog, then use Import from Another Catalog to merge in copies of contents of this 'bad' Catalog - all its imported images with edits and history, collections, metadata etc - into that. ... View more

One quick thing you might try, to see if it sorts out the Catalog's entry for this particular image:   Make a Virtual Copy - (FYI: this new copy will get a duplicate copy of all your latest editing, but will lack History of the prior steps carried out to achieve that; also lacking some Collection memberships, Print or Book Collection membership etc that the starting image may have) -  and see if that previews correctly in Develop.   Assuming it does, you can switch that Virtual Copy in, as the new Master version against this imported file - the previous Master automatically becomes a Virtual Copy so nothing is actually deleted from the Catalog by trying this.   I would recommend, if not already doing so, ensuring an integrity check of your Catalog is going to happen at next opportunity as part of Catalog backup. Below settings are my own; I have LrC prompt for backup every time I close the application forcing me to opt-out (as I judge required) rather than having to remember to opt-in. Assuming you are making some periodic Catalog backups, that may let you recover in case there is some sort of wider Catalog corruption.     In my experience a regular optimise and integrity check will normally maintain its good health, though.  ... View more

The file system can not know what's imported to a Catalog or not. The Catalog can not know about image files that are not imported. But you can use the Catalog to selectively do something, to just those image files that are imported.   For example: inside the Catalog's Folders panel, rename the folder from "[Name]" to "[Name]-spares". Then in the same panel, Add New Folder alongside, calling that "[Name]". Now drag all the image thumbnails that the Catalog presents, from "[Name]-spares" into "[Name]". Outcome: your imported image files are in a folder called the same as before, non-imported image files are separated out.    Yes, laborious. Personally I would regard this as needless micromanagement anyway. LrC is already doing its job of distinguishing what's Cataloged from what is not. The file system does not need to separately do that too.   If (for example, to close off a previous year) you did want to regain disk space by thinning out the files, to only those that are imported - across many folders within that year - this is possible to do as a bulk operation, with an Export as Catalog / Import from Catalog sequence.   But for a single folder at a time, likely not worth the trouble. Depend on the proportion of keepers to incidentals, I suppose. I like to cull obvious duds at the import-from-camera-card so those won't even have made it into the computer. Just trying to design-out any future operations that can be avoided. ... View more

Yes click into "All Photographs" to indicate you want to include all photos. There is no need to select them though, so stacking does not need to be expanded. Just make sure "Export selected photos only" is left un-checked.     If you are happy with maintaining the current file locations for all your imported images, then also un-check "Export negative files". This (IMO oddly named) option will otherwise duplicate and then reference copies of all the included source files, into a duplicated folder arrangement alongside the exported Catalog. ... View more

The external metadata approach mentioned would only have been a fallback if a suitable plugin had not been available; also sometimes plugins are not granted the ability to update particular types of information from within the Catalog, so an external approach has to be the workaround.   But Keywords and Ratings should AFAIK be fine: the recommended plugin is the best option to try IMO. ... View more

I don't have a recommendation for a LrC plugin, but another approach to investigate may be external utilities which can update XMP metadata. So a sidecar XMP file in the case of proprietary camera Raw, otherwise embedded metadata in e.g. a camera JPG or a DNG.   The sequence would in that case be: ensure up-to-date XMP metadata is written out to file system for the images concerned; externally amend that to impose these keywords and star ratings; read XMP metadata back into the Catalog for the images concerned. Reading and writing XMP is standard Catalog behaviour and needs no plugin, albeit if there is such a plugin it should streamline the overall process. Exception: virtual copies cannot write out, nor read in, external metadata. ... View more

another possibility: you may have checked the option "Store Presets with Catalog" in the Catalog Settings. That option looks for some dedicated presets alongside the Catalog. Turning this option off will show you the centrally stored presets again - built-in ones, and any user presets that you had previously saved centrally.  ... View more

I don't think you can delete these. They may be un-checked from appearing:       ... View more