Issue exporting original & virtual copies

I am using Lightroom 3.6 and do the following:
- I selsect a photo  "test.cr2" and rate it 2 stars
- create a virtual copy of this photo and modify it (the virtual copy) and rate it 3 stars
Now I use different Export settings to export my 2 stars and 3 stars photos in jpg.
So I first select all my 3+ stars photos and export them:
- here my virtual copy gets selected and exported to my destination folder as "test.jpg"
Then I select all my pictures (1 to 5 stars) and export them  too (but with different export options such as 'post-prcessing'). And I specify that existing pictures has to be ignored in the Export options since I don't want my previous batch to be overriden. And here 2 things happen:
- the original photo is tentatively exported as "test.jpg" (same name!) --> the file already exists, so "ignored"
- the vitual copy is exported as "test-2.jpg"
Finally, I end up with 2 photos "test.jpg" and "test-2.jpg" in my destination folder but they are actually the same and both issued from the virtual copy...
There are probably easy work-arounds to this situation - like split exports 3 to 5 stars and then 1 to 2 to avoid overrides. But... is it possible to keep constency in the naming convention of the exported files?
i.e if an exported file orginates from a virtual copy, always use "xxxx-2" even if the orginal is not exported at the same time
Tks & cheers

Sounds like a bug, that Beat's work-around would probably circumvent.
The problem I have with using the copy name, is that it can't be conditioned upon whether the photo is in fact, a virtual copy, or even: if the copy-name is blank.
So if you have:
{base-name} ({copy name}).{ext}
then if the master is named MyPhoto.DNG (with no copy name), and has one virtual copy named "Copy 1", then jpeg exports will be named:
MyPhoto ().jpg
MyPhoto (Copy 1).jpg
-bleck-tooey...
I have special virtual copy name handling in all my export plugins, but I think Adobe should address this in Lightroom proper.
R

Similar Messages

  • Export Catalog - Virtual Copies

    Hi. If you export a group of photos as a Catalog, does this export all virtual copies including their own repsective xmp data? I need to send a batch of RAW files to someone but need them to be able to see all the virtual copies as well.

    Yes, export as catalog takes the respective VC's with it. Remember they exist in the catalog only.

  • 'Virtual' Copies to (optionally) start all settings from 0

    I would like to have the ability to make a 'virtual' copy that looks like the current image, except that all the sliders/settings start at 0.  This is different from making the original virtual copies and resetting the sliders/settings, which would just bring it back to the imported version.  This is like actually having a virtual copy of the current image as it is, rather than a virtual copy of the original image with the same settings applied - a subtle but very important difference.
    The reason for this is so that presents would be A LOT more useful.  Say you have a preset for B/W that'll kick up the exposure to +0.5 and the blacks to 20.  If you had to do that in the first place just so the image looks 'normal', then applying the preset may not actually do anything for you - some shots may need a +1 exposure adjustment on their own, so that in effect the preset should result in a +1.5 exposure adjustment over the original, whereas if you apply the preset to the current implementation of Virtual Copies, you end up dropping to +0.5 instead of actually going up an additional +0.5
    To get around this and to have some consistent results in my images (by using presets), my current workflow is driving me crazy.  I end up importing all my RAWs, adjusting exposure, contrast, etc., and then exporting the files to JPG.  Then I import them all, and apply my presets, but that's so tedious and I have to export twice.
    Please, please help and implement this.
    Thanks for listening.  I love the product, btw
    PS - Another way to get around this would be to allow the option for presets to be relative rather than absolute.  Ex: The B/W preset will do an actual increase of 0.5 to the exposure and an increase of 20 to the blacks.  That would be great too, and might actually be preferrable.

    This seems to be a very frequently requested feature, and fo rus it would certainly be the #1 missing functionality.
    We use Lightroom to work on large batches of event/wedding photographs, all taken in RAW format.
    1. With current 'absolute' presets, there's no telling what it will do to any given photograph: a "antique photograph" preset will do wildly different thing to a photograph under tungsten, as to a photograph under sunlight or fluorescent or flash.
    2. Similarly, our workflow is interrupted: instead of being able to colour/exposure correct all images and then apply a preset to this _fixed_, 'normalized' version, for consistency of look; we have to play with images one by one, or go to workarounds like export/import: all of which defeat the point of Lightroom as a workflow-enhancing app.

  • Virtual copies exported in Win7 appear to lose edits

    When I export virtual copies IN LR5, all seems well.  The Library Grid view shows the new copies of the original image with the various changes I have made in Develop.  This is also true for the brief folder view that LR5 pops up at the end of the export.  But, when I later view the same folder with the Win7 Computer utility, or any other editor, these files all appear the same as the original!  No changes evident.  So it appears that I have missed some step in the export process to "fix" the changes in the virtual copies to the new files?
    Kelly Cook

    I know they should be different after export.  I expected them to be different.  Could the original file type be an issue?  My original was a JPG, not RAW.  The Library mode let me create virtual copies, the same a using a RAW file.  And, Develop let me make all the usual adjustments to the virtural copies, same as if they had been RAW.  Export did not put up any warning flags either, appeared to function normally, even though I was exporting JPG virtual copy to JPG.  I did use unique filenames (appended the Copy text) for each of the exports, so there should not be any confusion there.  Is some extra step needed to export a JPG virtual copy to JPG?  Or is this an undocumented issue?

  • Create several virtual copies at once. Looking for a workflow of exporting 650 photo's in two versions

    Hello,
    i have photographed a wedding and i have 650 finished photo's. All came from a 5Dm3 of 5Dm2. All are in raw. The color versions are ready. I have created a preset to convert all 650 edited version to B/W. The key is i will not edit the curve and other light and contrast sliders because, and cropping for that sense since these are all done already. So to make it more simple, i need to silver 650 photo;s in color and B/W. The color versions are done.
    I am looking at three workflows:
    1 create virtual copies of the 650 photo's, filter them out, apply the b/w preset/ make some small tweakes and export the B/W version
    2 export the color version to a 16 bit tiff, import those and the apply the b/w preset/ make some small tweakes and export the B/W version
    3 make an extra copy of the lightroom library and then apply the b/w preset/ make some small tweakes and export the B/W version
    In option one i do not know how to create 650 virtual copies at once. It seems i can do this only one photo at a time which is to time consuming
    In option 2 this is an extra batch and consuming me much more hard disk space
    in option three this is workable but i rather stick to one library
    Any help in this?
    Thanks!!
    Ronald

    Go to the library module, grid view. Highlight all your images and create a new collection. One of the options when you create the new collection is to make new virtual copies. The collection will consist of virtual copies of all your original files. Then, just work with the collection and create your black-and-white images. The virtual copies can be exported just like the regular images. So you can export color and black-and-white versions.

  • A way to merge edits in virtual copies back the the original dng

    I have a large set of images from a recent job (all with varying edits). My client if there was a way to take the final set of images an apply a variety of different lightroom edits to compare against the original set. I made selected my full set of original dng files and created several virtual copy sets and placed them in separate collections. After making a variety of tests the customer has decided on one of the virtual copy sets. Is there a way to merge the edits in the virtual copy set back to the original dng files? Is there a way to make a virtual copy set into its own set of dng files.
    Jim

    Is there a way to make a virtual copy set into its own set of dng files.
    A very quick way is to either export originals (or as dng, which does the same thing in this case) on the virtual copy set, which will give you a folder on your harddisk with "edited" dngs (I quote this because there is no such thing as edited dngs. The RAW data is untouched, there is just a develop recipe along with a jpeg preview saved into the file). Another way is to export the collection of virtual copies to a new catalog. You can include the originals if you want, or you can simply leave them in place if you don't want to double the needed storage space. You'll get a new catalog with just the virtual copies in it, but they will be masters at that point. Then you write metadata to file from this newly exported catalog.

  • Find and export Virtual Copies: Easy to add and ( i would argue) Necessary

    I haven't found an easy way to go back and easily select all virtual copies in a library in order to export them.
    A virtual copy is easy to miss and sometimes its hard to remember where you made changes in a large collection.
    There needs to be a search option for file types in LightRoom that can find the virtual copies and allow them to be collectively exported as real copies.
    If not a search function, then please simply insert a "save all virtual copies" option in the export area. Perhaps it could have the option to export all to their respective original file's folder OR to a designated edits folder with some tag to refer to the original location.
    I would very much appreciate an official adobe contact if at all possible :-/

    You can filter out Virtual Copies using a button on the filter bar located in the bottom right corner of the Lr application window (just above the filmstrip). Click a folder (folder panel) to narrow the filter to a specific folder or subfolders or the top most folder to show all virtual copies. You'll also find the second button will show only Master photos.

  • Virtual Copies come first in exported files?

    Is there a good reason why virtual copies, which come after the original file in the Library, are named in a way that causes them to come before in the exported set of jpegs?  IE - ogfile.jpg and ogfile-2.jpg.  When sorted by filename, the virtual copy is first!  This totally counterintuitive.  The original files should get a -1 suffix or the virtual copy should be named sequentially.  Or am I missing something?

    I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this!
    I suppose I should add that I generally have a manually ordered final set of files - edited, complete with virtual copies, ordered, and, as a last step, batch renamed in the Library (Custom_Name + #Sequence), to take on the new order.  In this case, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the exported set to be identical to the Library arrangement.  After all, I do take care in putting everything in a consistent, coherent order, so my clients can make sense of their (gigantic) image sets.
    So my options to acheive this are as follows 1) add a -1 to everything (huge sets with hundreds if not 1,000+ images)  2) manually add a -1 to the original file, requiring changing (and changing back!) the custom rename settings, or renaming from Bridge and syncronizing 3) manually rearrange the exported jpegs, batch rename (again!).
    Or, alternatively, Lr could 1) rename the files in such a way during the batch rename in the Library, that will hold their order after export (ie treat the VC as a unique file, at least for renaming purposes) 2) add the -x suffixes so the files hold their order after export.
    Lr could do this intelligently, seamlessly, and without user intervention.  And it should!
    Thanks again for not ignoring me!

  • Virtual Copies search and export...

    Hi,
    The underscores I'm using in my filenames seems to be messing up the sort order. So I want to replace the underscores with dashes. LR can't do this in its rename utility, afaik. If I do this externally, then I need to re-associate the images in LR's database with the files on the disk. I have about 5000, so don't want to do this on a file-by-file basis. However, if I remove all the images from the LR database and re-import everything, I'll lose the virtual copies, won't I? (I can export the metadata and keywords to sidecar files, so won't lose them.)
    So here's my first question: Is there a way to export the data for a virtual file to an associated sidecar file that LR can later read back in? My other thought is to convert all the virtual copies to tiff files (eat a lot space that way). Either way, I need to find all my virtual copies. So my last question is: Is there a way to search for, or filter on, just virtual copies in LR?
    Thanks,
    Michael

    re virtual copies, the answer is No is 1.0 but Adobe understand the problem and I'm hopeful you'll see a method before long. For now, you have to do something immediately after VC creation - add to a collection, mark the IPTC instructions, or add an appropriate keyword.
    The sort order shouldn't be messed up by underscores. I assume they are in a consistent position in the filename - I use yymmdd_012345 quicl description.ext. Are you sure you are sorting by filename - see the toolbar (T) in Library.
    John

  • Virtual copies naming issue

    When I created a virtual copy of an image in LR3, and then I renamed the images, the virtual copies would have the new name with a hyphen.
    i.e if there were two virtual copies associate with the file, the renamed sequence would be as follows jcp0001, jcp0001-1(vc), jcp0001-2(vc), jcp0004
    This had the advantage of keeping my file numbers in sync when I uploaded them to my online lab (Pictage) and the client gave me a file name.
    In LR4 renaming sequencing doesn't take into account the virtual copies in terms of the chronological # and compensating for the vcs. So the same sequence would be jcp0001, jcp0001-copy(vc), jcp0001-copy2(vc), jcp0002
    This has the affect of misaligning my files with those of the online host. I have searched for how to adjust this, but cannot find a solution.
    Anyone know of one?
    Many thanks in advance!
    Justine

    The copy names are included in the exported filenames, but the way they are named by LR has changed from LR3 to LR4. The numbered sequence no longer "counts" the virtual copies as taking up a chronological number space. I know it's really confusing to explain!
    But think of it this way, LR now counts the first master file as 0001, and the next master file as 0002, but there are 2 virtual copies of 0001. So when I export them, master file 0002 is really the 4th file in the list, and then I have a discrepancy between my hard drive files and the ones online the client is seeing (they see it as image 0004, when it's really file 0002). Does that make the problem clearer?
    Thanks,
    Justine

  • Merging virtual copies back into original

    Hi,
    I'm using Lightroom 2 and have finally got round to creating a single master catalogue from all of my yearly ones.
    Somehow during the importing I managed to pull in a load (1400) photos without their develop settings.
    This would have been fine if I'd noticed before spending days reorganising my keywords.
    Thanks to lightroom being able to detect duplicates on import from catalogue, I've managed to re-import the "developed" versions, keeping the originals as virtual copies. This means I now have a set of 1400 original images with the correct developing changes (and no keywords) - each one has a single virtual copy with no developing but the correct keywords.
    Can anyone think of a way of copying the keywords back into the originals for all 1400 photos? I want to get rid of the virtual copies.
    Seems like there should be some way of doing this?
    Cheers in advance for any advice.
    Nick

    Hi,
    I did originally import the photos from catalogue - the problem is I got out of sync somehow (PEBKAC - I probably developed in the original catalogue and keyworded in the new master one).
    However, LR2 thankfully allowed me to reimport the settings for each photo and I used "create a virtual copy" thankfully - otherwise I'd have wiped out my tidied up keywords.
    Problem is as below...
                   develop settings     keywords
    Original       correct                  none (I intentionally deleted the crappy old ones)
    VC              wrong                   correct
    All I want to do is copy the keywords from the VC to the orig (but for 1400 photos)
    Nick

  • Virtual Copies And Collections Issue

    I created a few virtual copies for the purpose of having B&W versions of images. Then I added a new collection named B+W and added these virtual copies to the collection. The counter for the collection incremented correctly but when I selected the collection, none of the virtual copies appeared there even thought they were counted in the collection.
    Any one else experience this or can corroborate that this is a bug?
    Jim

    Similar problem, Jim. I asked about it twice in this self-inflicted thread:
    http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc36332/0
    Got no response. Which is one reason I mentioned in the "Split This Forum?" thread that I'd be grateful for a stepped-up Adobe presence in the U-to-U. Because for all their generosity of time and spirit, even the most helpful users sometimes don't know the answer, and having somebody like George or Jeff jump in a say, "It's a bug; we're working on it," would save precious time.
    Mac OS 10.4.9

  • How to export "original" w/o Lr adjustments?

    I've searched this "6 ways from Sunday" and can't find an answer. Often I will start the edit process in Lr (making various adjustments including cropping, changes in white balance, etc.) and decide for variety of reasons that I need to work on the ORIGINAL file without Lr's adjustments. The export dialog has "export to hard drive" and under file settings: Image format "Original." Despite selecting this and requesting no other changes exporting ALWAYS includes Lr edits. I've worked in preferences and in the export options and as I said done a lot of searching but can't seem to get to the original (as in unaltered) file. The only way to do this is to go to the edited file in Lr and reset or delete all adjustments, then export. Note this also happens with "Edit in Ps." Why, you ask, would one want this? Example: I have to provide a team photo to the newspaper in a specific format. I then want to use the same original photo to create a poster for possible sale. (Do you have any idea how hard it is to get 15 kids to all have their eyes open at the same time? ) Of course the cropping and treatment of a poster is significantly different than that necessary for paper submission.
    Again, I've looked and doubtlessly overlooked, but can't find an answer. Any assistance is greatly appreciated.
    Robert
    Lr 5.3, Mac OS X 10.8.5 (all current updates) Original files are .CR2 though I can't see how this would be relevant.

    Thanks for the quick responses. Suzanne, the "Create Virtual Copy" is a great idea. I actually had no clue what Adobe meant by "virtual" in this case. Seems as if it's missed named as what one is doing is marking the original in place.
    Bob your explanation that it depends on how the the viewing program interprets the metadata makes sense. I can see an argument from Adobe that obviously you'll want to use the work you've done if you export it. On the other hand nearly all of my plugins provide a choice that says something like "Open with Lightroom changes?" Would be trivial for Adobe to add this both to "Export as Original" and to "Edit in Ps." I would argue that very few people would interpret "Export as Original" to mean "Export in original format, but include all the changes you've made."
    I came to Lr from a competing program that allowed one to set whether or not they wanted virtual copies created when an adjustment was made. I always chose this approach and while one might end up with several intermediate "views" they were easy to stack and easy to delete any you didn't want to retain. I note that there is stacking in Lr but haven't figured out what it does other than to take a selection of pix and put them in a pile.
    Again, thanks. I'll experiment.
    Robert

  • Creating unique names for virtual copies

    I utilze three different sets of images for most jobs: the raws, the thumbnails I upload for client review and the jpgs I send out for prints. I like to match the filenames so there is no confusion.  Unfortunately my gallery (smugmug pro) also assigns a unique # to each upload.  When I use virtual copies to ceate alternate versions of certain images they are named copy 1 or copy 2 in LR and the preceding # is dropped from the sequence, so when I upload the thumbnails, the gallery #s no longer match the filename # below. I always instruct my clients to ordeer selections from the filename but enough of my retail clients have become confused that it is becoming irritating. So I was wondering if there is a way to overide the LR presets and assign individual names to the virtual raws and the jpgs?

    OK You are confusing the file name with the SmugMug URL. When you publish to SmugMug you are exporting a new jpeg so your virtual copy is irrelevant unless you have a method of linking it with what your client is viewing. That probably means not changing the original camera file except for the number of different edits you make; which Lightroom does automatically.
    　 

  • Inconsistent order in grid when creating Virtual Copies.

    When I create a virtual copy of a photo and look at it with the stack expanded, the order that the two pics appear in the library grid is inconsistent. Sometimes the VC is listed AFTER the original in the grid, and sometimes it's listed BEFORE the original. When it's listed before the original, I've tried changing the stack "on top" setting, but this only changes which photo appears when the stack is collapsed -- the order when expanded stays the same.
    I feel like I might be missing something here, i.e. is there some method of making a VC appear after vs before the original in the library grid? Also, is there a way to swap the order so that I can "fix" the situation? So far, the only fix I've found is to delete the VC and re-create it, at which point the order is sometimes corrected.
    Thanks for any feedback on this,
    Larry

    b_gossweiler wrote:
    it might be that you have a filter in effect on "All Photographs" that prevents the VCs from being shown
    Here's why I don't think that's my problem. I search and find an image - so yes I am using a filter - lets say I want file ABC123. Now I see that frame and I also see a Virtual Copy which I previously created. So clearly I don't have a any filter to prevent my seeing VCs. Now I select the Master and create a new Virtual Copy. The new copy does not appear but the Master reports it is now 1 of 3. So Lightroom is telling me there are three copies of this file, but only displays two, the Master and an older Virtual Copy.
    All I have to do (!) to see the new Virtual Copy is quit and relaunch. Now I see all three copies, the Master, the older and the new VIrtual Copy. Nothing changes between quit and relaunch.
    Even if "All Photographs" isn't a Smart Collection, is appears to have the same issue others have reported on creating Virtual Copies.
    DG

Maybe you are looking for