Version Automatically on Top of Stack?

Question

I may be dreaming, but I seem to recall in the early days of Aperture 3 (obviously not long ago), that whenever I created a version, by cropping, adjusting, etc, that new version was automatically placed on top of the stack.
That was very useful since when I edit a photo, I consider the edited version as my new number 1.
Now, however, the new versions seem to be placed at the end of the stack, requiring me to move them to the top.
Anyone have any comments on whether or how new versions can be set to automatically be placed on the top of a stack?
Thanks.

Answer 1

Gary wrote:
Gary -- Thanks for the numbers. Numbers are good to have.
PS I've also been using Stacks for grouping bracketed (and panoramic) sets. But I've also been using them for grouping adjusted versions. It doesn't seem to be quite working out - for me - so I might have to revise that.
My experience (limited, but aware) has been that, for each of the many grouping or binning functionalities in Aperture, I am always best served by choosing one and only one purpose. Your use of Stacks illustrates the problem: are Stacks for
. making picks among burst or bracketed shots?
. grouping panoramas and HDR singles (etc.)?
. grouping development versions of an image?
Stacks provide a sophisticated binning functionality (group, rank, collapse/expand) that is applicable to several tasks. Unfortunately, there is one and only one type of Stack, and no (easy) way to distinguish them. (One can easily imagine three kinds of Stacks, one each for the grouping needs listed above.) Am I right in assuming that this is the problem you imply with "+It doesn't seem to be quite working out+"?
For me, helping to winnow my photographs is the most important function I can assign to Stacks. I stack very similar shots, select the best of the Stack and promote it to the "Pick", and then go through the Project (I use one Project for each shoot) with Stacks collapsed and select the best among the Picks and the non-stacked shots.
(My "flower bed" is, from subsoil to bloom:
. Rejects
. All non-rejects
. Stack Picks and non-rejects
. Best of Project ("Selects", which are Project-specific)
. Selected for printing, export, publication, sale, etc. (Selected Selects -- which I move to Albums)
That leaves several things to address: how to handle bracketed shots, panorama shots, HDR shots, focus stacking shots, and, not least, Versions.
Shots bracketed in order to increase the odds of a proper exposure are easy: they get treated just like other Stacks. Stack 'em, pick the best, move on.
The other groupings I deal with in an "extra-computational" way: I remember that this stack is for a panorama (for instance). Then when I create the panorama I import it and put it in the Stack with the shots which comprise it, and make it the Pick. The "extra-computational" part is, clearly, a kludge, but a livable-with one.
Version-stacking muddies this tremendously (especially when the version is already in what I might call a "Picking Stack"). *I actually think that Aperture should add a specific and visually identified method of Version-stacking separate from the existing Stacks.* Every image whether inside or outside a user-defined Stack should have it's own Version stack. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but all Version of an image must be in the same Project, no?)
If I care to Pick two Versions in a Stack (either a Picking Stack or a Versions Stack), I split the Stack.
What is your Stacks workflow, and how might you revise it?
I'm also very curious about other's use of color labels. I find them queer, due to the fact that any image can have +one and only one+ color label. There is no set of useful identifiers I can think of which has 8 non-overlapping bins (I assume I am missing something terribly obvious). I tried using colors for different sets of identifiers, but failed at each because there were always images to which I wanted to assign two colored labels. I've ended up using the colors to assign steps along the progression of image development (Develop!, Developing (some adjustments applied but not done), Problem, Developed, Redevelop!, Redeveloped, Abandon, Not yet flagged).
This works well for me, because I am able to maintain separate identifier sets for development progression and image rating (I use the built-in stars). I can have good images not yet developed, developed images down-rated, images waiting to be rated or developed, and so on. What do you do?
Need I apologize for the ramble? I really want to set up a workable system that I then won't have to worry about for a couple of years and tens of thousand of images. Thanks for reading and any replies you might make.