Flags are collection dependent (as opposed to rating). Rationale?

In I collection, I've flagged several pictures as "rejected" with the intention to filter them and, later on, to delete them. When I add a rejected picture to another collection, in the new collection the picture is "unflagged". It seems that the flagging status is not metadata. Thus, flagging behaves different from rating.
What's the rationale behind this?
Regards,
Harro

Harry K wrote:
In I collection, I've flagged several pictures as "rejected" with the intention to filter them and, later on, to delete them. When I add a rejected picture to another collection, in the new collection the picture is "unflagged". It seems that the flagging status is not metadata. Thus, flagging behaves different from rating.
What's the rationale behind this?
What you are seeing is by design.  The rationale is that flags are local whereas ratings and labels are global. That is to say, flags only apply within the folder or collection in which they were applied. Flags are not treated as metadata and have no meaning beyond Unflagged, Pick or Reject. Flags cannot be written to the file and are therefore visible in other applications (e.g. Bridge).

Similar Messages

  • Persistent Flags in Collections: Allow as Configuration Option?

    Great way to start the day seeing the launch of LR4 Beta!
    As I'm watching the NAPP training videos Scott Kelby makes a point under the Enhancements section re: "persistent flags" that now carry over picks into Collections.  When I first started using Lightroom (circa LR1 launch) the lack of this really frustrated me.
    Until I realized the brilliance of it.
    I will regularly make my picks/flags in the Library and then port these selects over to a Collection.  Within that Collection, however, I would review and do sub-picks again (say for a subset of images that would go onto a website, or perhaps for individual selects that would go on for further processing, or those that would be candidates for a book).  This was very convenient and I figured it was the basis of the non-persistent design.  LR4 takes this away.
    So with that in mind, while I recognize this new feature will be welcome by many I am hoping you will consider making it a configurable option under Preferences (Flag Persistence: On/Off) if it is not already there.  This way the new version will not interrupt established workflows and users can customize based on their needs.
    Thanks.

    Please realize that this is a huge deal breaker for a lot of people. Local flags are essential to the point that I would consider not adopting Lightroom 4 in a workflow because of it. I use per-collection flags a lot to make selections or sub-selections. And I'd say 80-90% of the people I have seen using Lightroom in the last few years take advantage of local flags somewhere in their workflow.
    Personally, I occasionally have collections of images selected by somebody else and I want to mark my picks from that collection, or the other way round (i.e. someone picks from my collection) and that should have nothing to do with a global pick or reject status.
    Or let's say I have a collection "Candidates for Social Media" and I want to pick the ones that actually go online. With global flags, I can't do that since it affects the status in all collections, for instance in one like "Candidates for Print Ads". Putting picks into a new collection instead of using flags has the huge disadvantage that it doesn't show the selection in context of the original set (plus the target collection keyboard shortcut is a toggle, so unless I go through images strictly in sequence, I am in danger of accidently removing something I wanted to add) and makes it hard to look at alternates, go back and change things etc. Plus it's an additional unnecessary collection that clutters the collections panel and makes it slower to find the relevant stuff. I guess I could probably make virtual copies instead of putting images directly into collections to work around the problem, but I'd end up with several (or depending on the type of images a lot of) completely unnecessary virtual copies that clog up the main catalog. Not a viable workaround.
    Anothe major issue is that in the process of upgrading catalogs from previous versions into LR4, all the work that has gone into creating local flags in the old catalog would be completely eliminated and inaccessible. That means quite a lot of work like creating lots of additional collections in the old version before the upgrade if I wanted to bring all the existing data safely into LR4.
    Proposed solution: Either support both local and global flags in parallel with different icons (which I would prefer), or make the flag behavior a per-catalog or per-collection preference. But simply changing the behavior of flags to global is just a major workflow issue. In fact, when I first encountered the new system in my LR4 test catalog, I thought I had found a major bug.

  • Flags are not definable

    Flags do not stay as selected in version 1.3. Can this be changed tomake the flags hold their chosen designation?

    Your problem is not very clear, please elaborate. How are you using the Flags and where? What do you expect to see?
    Flags are local to a Folder or Collection. Change where you are and the Flags can change. This is by design. Go back to the same Folder or Collecion and the Flags you did there will be the same.
    Don
    Don Ricklin, MacBook 2Ghz Duo 2 Core running 10.5.1 & Win XP, Pentax *ist D
    See LR Links list at my
    Blog for related sites.

  • Upgrade warning: Local flags in collections may disappear for good

    So I've upgrade (or rather copied and upgraded) my LR 3 catalog to the newly installed LR 4.
    And there seems to be no smart upgrade policy for local flags in collections. They're simply gone.
    If you want to migrate, it seems to me that you will have to find a way how to preserve those flags by fiddling with LR 3 first.
    I'll probably make two stacks in each collection: picks and the rest. Very cumbersome to manage, but probably the best alternative until Adobe decides to give us some sort of 'picking the best' locally for a collection.

    There are going to be differences of opinion whether flags should be global or local to collections. I guess it is a matter of personal work flow and preference. What seems to be lost in all of this is that flags have been local for a long time and we all have developed our use of them with that in mind. I personally group photos by subject into collections and then review them for selection. I flag the picks in the collection as I go through them and then I can pull up just the flagged photos in the collection for later use. It might be to create a CD, a slide show, or whatever. This process often involves a great deal of time comparing variations on the same picture for expressions, focus, etc. Once I make my choice I flag it. I have gone thorough that evaluation and selection process for thousands of photos. Now Adobe is changing this major item with no option to the user to keep the flags local to maintain the structure that has been created under the earlier system.
    I am certainly capable of using global flags going forward with new photos, but my concern is the inability to carry forward to LR4 the flags I have already spent hours and hours applying to the catalogs in LR3. I personally would be fine with converting my local flags to global flags, just don't simply throw them away. That is essentially what LR4 does - it thows them away. They represent a lot of time and work to pick the best photos.
    I have to beleive there are a lot of people who have used the flags in a similar manner. I do not see how Adobe can make such a significant change to this issue after years of the other structure without any method to at least convert the existing flagging information to the new system. It is precisely this kind of change that makes people reluctant to switch to things like DNG file formats.   

  • Validations(TCode GGB0)  are client dependent how to move from one client t

    Hi All,
    I have done chabges in Validation set (Requirement from FICO Functional). As Validations are client dependent. I done the changes in 200 client now Functional want me to do these in 100 client. So Will SCC1 TCode will wrok in this case ? Or there is any other method to transport from one client to other.
    Thanks..

    Dear friend .
            SCC1 works finely in this case. You have To create request and move it to development And for production transport this request..
    regards
    Ajit

  • Possible bug with Pick flag and Collections

    Odd behaviours in v3.3  (Windows) with pick flags in Collections:
    Create (or use) a Collection Set which contains a number of different collections
    Assign Pick plag to one photo in each collection
    Bug 1: Highlight Collection Set and note that none of the images shows the Pick Flag in the thumbnail view. Also Filtering this view with Pick flag fails to pick up the Flagged images
    Now return to one of the Collections within the Set and create a Virtual Copy of one of the images that has a Pick flag. (Note virtual copy does not have a flag - which seems logical). Return to Collection Set and (Bug 2) note that Pick flag has disappeared from original image and now appears on Virtual copy.
    Something wrong here somewhere I suspect.

    lightshop wrote:
    Odd behaviours in v3.3  (Windows) with pick flags in Collections:
    Create (or use) a Collection Set which contains a number of different collections
    Assign Pick plag to one photo in each collection
    Bug 1: Highlight Collection Set and note that none of the images shows the Pick Flag in the thumbnail view. Also Filtering this view with Pick flag fails to pick up the Flagged images
    Now return to one of the Collections within the Set and create a Virtual Copy of one of the images that has a Pick flag. (Note virtual copy does not have a flag - which seems logical). Return to Collection Set and (Bug 2) note that Pick flag has disappeared from original image and now appears on Virtual copy.
    Something wrong here somewhere I suspect.
    I could partially repeat bug 2.
    I have Collection Set (Test) which contain to collections: "Collection 1" and "Collection 2". Both Collections contain 4 images.
    I selected "Collection 1" and applied Pick flag to all those images. When I select Test (Collection Set) I got 8 images shown,  which none had flags. Ok, this works as expected. I selected "Collection 1" and then selected 1 image and made Virtual copy from it. Lr show me now 4 images with Flag and 1 virtual copy without. Again, works as expected. I now select Test (Collection Set) and I get 9 images (as expected), but one of them, the virtual copy, has pick flag applied. Not as expected. If I go back to "Collection 1" I get four images with Pick flags and one virtual copy without. (as expected.)

  • "Flags" are disappearing

    I've posted a CS Review to my client. When I address the comments the client makes and go to "Flag" and mark them as "Done" and "Save" then close the review, when I re-open the review my "Flags" are gone. The client comments are still there but not my response. This is how I keep track of what's been corrected and what hasn't.

    Had the issue since upgrading to 10.9.
    I am running the 10.9.1 update released today.
    POP Yahoo email.
    I also tired recreating several of the rules (after deleting the existing ones) and, still no luck.
    I fail to understand how apple can not fix this as it's been broken since the mavericks release of 10.9. Numerous people have filed bug reports, yet, still rules (a key functionality in Mail), remains broken.
    Perhaps apple might be able to fix this before 2014 :)

  • Hi gurus scripts are clint dependent & smart forms are clint indipendent

    hi gurus scripts are clint dependent & smart forms are clint indipendent what is the meaning that

    SAPscript are client dependent.
    They need to be copied from one client to another for testing. this can be done from SE71->utilities->copy from Client.
    For transferring between server as like other objects they need to be transport.
    As for smartforms they are client independent and all changes are available at the same time in all clients for execution.
    Unlike smartforms, if you want to use or modify a sapscript in a different client you need to copy it from that client or client '000'.
    This is applicable to it accessory components like graphics, texts..etc
    NOTE:
    When u execute a smartform it generates the Function Module, which allows u acces the smartform in any cleint
    Hope it will make some sense
    Reward if helpful
    Thanks
    Krushna

  • Why sapscripts are client dependent & smart forms are client independent?

    why sapscripts are client dependent & smart forms are client independent?

    You developed the script in development client , you can't find the same in testing client even though the server is same.
    Where are You developed the smartform in development client , you can find the same in testing client even though the server is same.
    Few more reasons why....? Please read below:
    SAPscript technology is based on a mainframe product from the 1980s,
    while Smart Forms have only been around since (roughly) 2001. With that sort of time gap,
    there are bound to be significant differences between the two tools. As you have noted correctly, client dependence is a fundamental one.
    Although SAPscript has had some incremental improvements over time,
    its forms have always been -- under the hood -- relatively passive objects, with minimal embedded logic.
    These forms were designed to be driven and controlled by ABAP programs,
    much in the way ABAP programs read in database tables to produce reports;
    if you ever download a SAPscript form (e.g., via utility program RSTXSCRP),
    and look at the portable text file it produces you'll see what I mean.
    Many text objects (e.g., invoice header texts) are bound directly to documents which are client-dependent, so it makes sense for these text objects to also be client-dependent. From a complexity standpoint, SAPscript forms are close enough to these text objects where I can see how it made sense at the time to make them client-dependent too.
    Conversely, a Smart Form is significantly more robust and complex. For instance, it can contain program nodes and nested tables with patterns. When a Smart Form is compiled, it generates an ABAP function module – and these are always client-independent. This is appropriate, given that this form has more in common with an ABAP program than its predecessor. For instance, when a print program calls a Smart Form, the form itself takes over to produce output, without any further direction from the print program. In fact, the join is so seamless that I often find myself using a Smart Form's Initialization section for logic to handle any data gathering not handled by the print program. I would never even think to attempt this with SAPscript.
    Several factors figured into SAP's decision to make Smart Forms client-independent, including customer feedback. There are significant advantages to client-independence. For instance, a change made in one development client happens immediately across all development clients. Among other things, this means we don't have to waste time figuring which client contains the most recent version -- they all do! In addition, transporting Smart Forms is easier, since we can safely bundle them together in the same transport as their client-independent print programs (no worry about mixing client-dependent and independent objects).
    Check the beloe links for more information
    script and smart forms
    http://www.sap-img.com/smartforms/smartform-sapscripts.htm

  • Why SAP Script are Client Dependent, Smartforms are client-independent.

    why  SAP Script are Client Dependent,Smartforms are client-independent.
    Edited by: Srinivasa Reddy Ariga on Oct 27, 2008 12:28 PM
    Edited by: Srinivasa Reddy Ariga on Oct 27, 2008 12:49 PM

    Before you do anything else, read this: Welcome and Rules of Engagement
    Google is your friend.  Try keywords smartforms client dependent   Next time - search first and ask second.
    oh, and it helps to get the correct forum...

  • Flags are local to collections?!?

    ok, i find this pretty weird: if you're browsing a collection and set a flag on a photo (pick or reject), then change to a different collection or to "All Photographs", that same photo you just flagged is flagged no longer! shouldn't flags be a global attribute of a photo, just like colors, or stars? Or is this a feature?
    This behaviour makes flags rather useless for me, since i usually organize my shots into collections before sorting through them and picking out the ones i don't need. I then browse the collection when i have time, rejecting photos that didn't turn out, but when browsing a collection, "Delete rejected photos" simply removes the photos from the collection, and there's no way to permanently delete them (remove them completely from the library and the hard drive). Anyway, i find this pretty annoying...

    You work the way you want to work, of course, but one way to deal with the issue would be use labels or some other filter ( colors) and make your selections from a filtered list before saving into a collection. It seems as though once in a collection, most selection activities are only relative to the collection, not absolute.
    The intent of the program designers was apparently to have collections be the result of filtering, not the means.
    -wick

  • Flags are "local" - why?

    As already mentioned in other articles, flags in Lr are said to be "local". Not like color labels or keywords, flags belong to "photo instances" rather than photos.
    In other words: If I flag a photo looking at it through a collection, the same photo is not flagged when navigating through folders. Why?
    I like to switch forth and back through different views of my photos (e.g. Last Import, Quick Collection) but why can't I use flags in such a workflow?

    What I tried to do was marking photos as "rejects" in order to later phisically delete them.
    I choose a subset of photos to process from my "Last Import" container and created a quick collection. I then marked some pictures as "rejects" (while in quick collection). At the very end, I tried to delete all rejected photos but - since I was looking at a quick collection - there was just a remove but no delete command available.
    So I switched back to "Last Import" view and now all my rejects were gone...

  • Removing the explicitly installed flag for all dependency packages

    From what I gather, pacman -Rs won't remove any packages marked as explicitly installed, which causes a couple of problems for me:
    Say I need to reinstall all my packages for whatever reason; they'll all be marked as explicitly installed, so from that point on I wouldn't be able to search for orphans.
    There other case I can think of would be when I reinstall a dependency of some package for whatever reason, then later delete that top package with -Rs, that would mean the dependency and anything it depends on would remain on my system even if I don't really need it.
    Does pacman support, or are there any scripts that will go through the package databse and mark all packages that are depended on by other packages as dependencies rather than explicitely installed? Basically reset the explicit flag for anything that isnt a leaf on the tree.

    Hi
    There are 2 ways in doing this, either by report filtering or by formula, i would highly suggest using a report filter, just click the funnel icon in your webi report and drag your flag object then select Not Equal to condition then select 0.
    if you want to use a formula you can type in "=[Person Object] where([flag] = "0")". NOTE: only use "" if your flag is a dimension.
    kindly tell me if I'm missing something.
    Regards,
    -John Vincent

  • I've imported several CDs that are "collections", with songs by various artists.  Only a PORTION of the song info appears in iTunes, and, when a song is "clicked-on" to play it, a message appears that the "song could not be found".  Any ideas ?

    The CDs are imported into the "iTunes Media" folder, under "Compilations".   Each CD has a folder, with the name of the CD.  However, EACH SONG in the folder is assigned a sequential number as a prefix before the song's name.  For example "2-1 Sunshine of Your Love."  This prefix, I believe, prevents the song from being imported into the iTunes library.  The song's name appears in the iTunes library (with the number prefix), BUT no other song info (artist, CD name, time, etc.) shows in the iTunes library.   I am NOT designating these CD's as "complilations", but somehow, iTunes is arbitrarily assigning them to this "Compilations" folder, and then assigning sequential numbers to each song.    I am confused.  (My only remedy is to MANUALLY remove the prefix number from each song in the CD folder, within the COMPILATIONS folder, then "re-import" it into iTunes.  Cumbersome.)    Thanks in advance for any opinion, tips or guidance.

    The numeric prefixes in filenames are probably the optional disc number, followed by the track number. iTunes will pick up the Compilation flag from the Gracenote CDDB database if you ripped the tracks with iTunes, or the flag may have been set earlier if these are existing tracks you have imported into a new library.  The iTunes naming convention is <Artist>\<Album>\[<D#>-]<T##> <Name>.<Ext> where Album Artist is used instead of Artist if not blank, and Compliations is used instead of Artist when Part of a compilation is true. Empty Artist or Album values are replaced with Unknown Artist or Unknown Album respectively. With Windows, file and folder names are limited to 40 characters. If more than one file is added with the same details subsequent tracks get suffixes to separate them.
    If iTunes can't find a file that usually means that it has been moved after it was added to the library. Select a single broken track and press CTRL+I to Get Info. Look on the summary tab at the location that iTunes expects to find the file. Where is it really? Post back both paths and I might be able to figure out what has happened, and suggest a fix.
    tt2

  • What are the dependent SCs to be added to the Track, to develop NW CE BPM

    Hello Gurus:
    We are creating a track in a NW 70 SP17 system to be used for NW CE 7.1 Ehp1 SP03 applications, like Business Process
    Management applications (Process Composer, Rules Composer). While creating the track, I chose the track template to be "Composite Application 7.1 (with Business Process Management)". And I added the following 14 dependent SCs to the development SC I added to the track.
    CAF01_0.SCA
    CAFMF01_0.SCA
    ENGFACADE01_0.SCA
    ENGINEAPI01_0.SCA
    EPBASIS01_0.SCA
    EPBASISAPI01_0.SCA
    EPBUILDT01_0.SCA
    ESF01_0.SCA
    FRAMEWORK01_0.SCA
    GPCORE01_0.SCA
    MMRSERVER01_0.SCA
    SAPBUILDT01_0.SCA
    VCFRAMEWORK01_0.SCA
    WDRUNTIME01_0.SCA
    But when as a Developer when I try to create a DC of type Process Composer, that project type is dummied or disabled ???
    Other project types like Composite Application, Web Dynpro etc are enabled and working fine.
    Question:
    Is it enough to add corresponding dependent SCs related to Business Process Management ? If so what are those SCs ?
    (ii) If I need to choose another track template like " Business Process Management Application for NetWeaver 7.1" which is also available, then how could I have DC project of type Composite Application ?
    Appreciate your help,
    Prasad Nutalapati

    Satish:
    I am talking about creating DC projects of type 'Process Composer' for NW CE BPM applications, with in a track I created using a certain template I mentioned. How would that relate to NW Dev Studio ?
    To answer your point, when I try to create a local DC project of type 'Process Composer', yes I was able to, no problem. Because the NWDS is from the same CE Server installation files (7.1 Ehp 1 SP00).
    Thanks,
    -Prasad

Maybe you are looking for