LR 3.3: Virtual copy hassle

Hi,
for some time now I use virtual copies pretty often. I like the concept and the ability to stack different developments of the same master image, which makes it pretty easy to keep the overview over many different versions of the same image. But, there is something I also dislike. It happens, and it does fairly often, that the image sequence in such a stack changes and (that's the worst thing) that the master images is no longer the first image of such a selection, it happens to be somewhere in the selection. Often my first attempt to reorganize the stack - as I want it to be - fails, because "LR does something on its own"!
My question: Did I miss something when using virtual copies to always have the master image as the first of a stack, and that this never changes?
Or is this somehting not (yet) implemented?
Any tips are very welcome.
Thomas
P.S: Windows Ultimate 64bit system, LR 3.3 64bit
http://hintze-photo.com

In the Library Module go to >Photos > Stacking.
You have to select at least one image and its virtual copy or else the stacking menu will be greyed out.
Then choose from the options in the menu.
WW

Similar Messages

[Help] Export or copy a virtual copy from one library to a different library?

Hi all,
I need to be able to extract or export a virtual copy (VC) from one library to an other library. The same image that the VC depend on is represented in both libraries but since a friend will be editing some images on his computer and therefor his library I need to be able to import the different VC he makes to my library later on or perhaps merge since he needs the VC I make.
So please, can someone tell me how to do this. If we only make some editing of a RAW we just save the metadata and we are done, but with VC it is different.
Thanks in advance!

Use File > Export as Catalog in the current catalogue, and use File > Import from Catalog
Ask yourself if it's really a smart idea to (a) work with multiple catalogues, and (b) catalogue the same picture in more than one catalogue. As you've found, working with multiple catalogues introduces inefficiencies like trying to copy VCs around, while cataloguing the same image in more than one catalogue is a recipe for confusion.Maybe you should be asking how to resolve the underlying workflow problem?
John

Bug or User Error - Virtual Copy

All,
I'm still on 1.3.1 (still too much dust flying on 1.4.1), Mac OS X 10.4. The situation is as follows: Took a standard RAW image file from Canon 40D.
1. Made a virtual copy of the original, crop aspect set to 8x10, made adjustments, etc. including some spot removal, etc.
2. Made a virtual copy of the virtual copy, converted to Grayscale, "assumed" the crop value and spot removals came with it. Instead, the second virtual copy is showing up with a crop value of 4x5 and the spots removed in the first virtual copy, return.
It is very repeatable, and not associated with a specific image file. I haven't tried it on Windows XP yet.
Jay S.

Hal,
I've been doing a little more with this. In Develop module, if I make a Virtual Copy of an image where I've used a Metadata preset to add some data to the image, that metadata preset is refected in the virtual copy as well, if I do the same exact thing with the same exact image in Library mode, the metadata is set to None, as opposed to the Preset I used with the original.
I know this is different from what I originally stated but seems odd. Also I'm not sure why you don't consider it a bug, small as it may be. I set the original to 8x10, if I wanted the lower ratio of 4x5, I would have set it to that. If 8x10 didn't matter to Adobe then why have it as an option. In my mind the Virtual Copy should reflect the same choice made on the original.
Jay S.

How can you create a virtual copy in a Lightroom plugin?

I looked over the Lightroom SDK and did not see any documentation on creating a virtual copy. Is there an undocumented API for this?
If not, is there a plan to add this into the SDK?

Hi Matt,
Yeah, I have some good news and some bad news:
- Good news: Keyboard stuffing (as implemented in the elare framework) works equally well on both platforms, provided the appropriate keystroke exists on both platforms.
(Mac version uses applescript, Windows uses autohotkey - both assure Lightroom is the target) - Note: @2011-07-30, I haven't actually tested this particular function on Mac - but I've tested other similar functions on both platforms.
- Bad news: It doesn't always work on either platform, since keystrokes may be usurped by open dialog boxes and open text fields in Lightroom...
- Good news: failure is 100% detectable.
Bottom line:
If the kludgy nature of this solution would be more bad than good for you and/or your users, then this is not a viable solution.
If your users would prefer the caveats in order to be able to get the job, then this solution will work well enough for now.
PS - I'm presently using it in ChangeManager and its a godsend for me. Since I understand the limitations, my failure rate is appx. 0%.
~R

Is it possible to save the adjusted virtual copy image and discard the original?

I have made a virtual copy of an image which I then adjusted in LR to the way I want to keep it. Now I am wondering either if there is a way to apply those adjustments easily to the original so I can then discard the virtual copy, or should I save the virtual copy and delete the original? I just don't need two images, one which is not a keeper. I also don't want to delete the original if the virtual copy depends upon its existence.
I want to keep images down to the one's I want and am working to delete those images which I will never use. Whichever is the best way to handle the above situation will enable me to do some much needed housekeeping to my catalog.
TIA,
Ken

You guys are pretty slick, no two ways about it. I think I'm learning Lightroom, but I'm just happy with it helping in my own situation. Some of you have far-reaching understanding of this wonderful program. Lightroom is a 'must' as I see it.
Ian, I've tried your method, as it seems easiest and most direct, I selected the VC and chose the menu item 'make copy original' and it did a 'conversion' or so it looked like, but the images still say 1 of 2 for the original with no modifications and 2 of 2 for the cropped and adjusted version. I am skeerd to delete the '1 of 2' version which I believe 'was' the original version before I chose the menu item. Now I'm not sure what I have.
Hal P Anderson, I tried your method and it did transfer the settings but not the crop, which I can understand why. I re-cropped the 1 of 2 to match the 2 of 2 version which is the virtual copy, and then selected the virtual copy and hit delete - the dialog box confirmed I was deleting the VC by asking if I wanted to delete this virtual copy. I felt more comfortable with that arrangement and now I'm sans VC with the original possessing the new settings.
Thanks to you both,
Ken

Changing Virtual Copy Names in Web Gallery

I have been creating web galleries in LR for clients for purposes of online editing. This hasn't been a problem until today when I was creating multiple copies of images using Virtual Copy. I realized when I create a web gallery the images with multiple versions all have the same name in the gallery. So there might be 3 versions of one image (a color, a BW, a sepia tone for example) with the same name.
I.e., if I have an image called "001.cr2" that is full frame and then I create a virtual copy that is cropped, in the web gallery they are both called "001.CR2" instead of "001_01.CR2", or some such thing.
I need some way for my client to differentiate btwn the two files during their online editing. Is there a way to do this without exporting the files and then re-importing to create the gallery?
Thanks in advance.
Ryan Donnell

When you create the virtual copies specify unique copy names for them in the metadata, e.g., "bw", "sepia", etc.
Then in the Web module in the Image Info panel, edit the title and/or caption fields to include the copy name as part of the filename or caption. Each image in the web gallery will then have a unique name tag to reference. If you don't want to use copy names (why not, they sure are useful for other things as well), Image # would also work.

What's the point of a virtual copy if it can't be in a different folder from the master?

When I spotted "Make virtual copy" on the context menu, I thought "Great - I can organize my photos in different ways without wasting disk space by using aliases!"
But when I tried to move the virtual copy to another folder, LR said Nope!
So I moved the master - and the copy moved with it.
What am I missing? I've seen the reference to Smart Collections, but they seem to be based on ratings or flags, not arbitrary subject-matter groupings.
So I created a "dumb collection" (my term, in distinction from the automatic groupings), made virtual copy and copied the virtual copy to the collection.
Then I then went back to the original folder and deleted the virtual copy from the original folder.
It vanished from the collection as well.
Is a virtual copy merely a way to make and save an alternative edit of a photo - but only in the same folder as the original?

A virtual copy is virtual. It is a record of the processing settings you made held in the database. LR never makes changes to the original files and does not create copies of original files (except on import if you so choose). A new file is created on export with the processing settings recorded in the database. The folder structure is irrelevant to LR other than LR needs to know where the file is on your computer.A virtual copy does not make an actual copy anywhere on your hard drive. It takes up no space as it is just a few lines of metadata recorded in the catalog. Hence virtual copy.
The point is that you may require several different versions of the same image file, different crops, different processing settings etc. These can all be recorded in the catalog and when you require the particular version you export it. On export it can be sent anywhere you like.
I would suggest you have a look at the LR manual through the help system (press F1 when LR is open) and have a look at some of the video tutorials in order to understand the basics of LR

Is it possible to create a "virtual" copy of an object in illustrator?

In other words, lets say that I've got an object (that might be a simple object like a square, or a complicated group, or anything).
I can select the object, copy it and then paste it at some other location, but now it is a separate object.
What I'd like to do is make a "virtual" copy of the object, so that if any modifications are done to one of the copies, they are also done to the other copy. I.e., if I change the color of one sub-object in one of the virtual copies, the color also changes in the corresponding sub-object of the other virtual copy.
Note that this is similar to lightrooms virtual copy feature of images, but in that case, the modifications are separate even though the underlying image stayes the same. What I'm asking about here is for the ability to "link" objects together.
BTW, the basic reason I want this is for the following reason: I want to have an object occur in more than one artboard, but if I modify the object in one artboard, I'd like it to also be modified in the second artboard. It is not feasible to have the artboards overlap over *just* the object that I need (as that would in some sense solve the problem, and in fact does solve the problem in some limited circumstances, but not all of them, namely those where the two arboards need to have other also objects along with the common object that do not overlap).
thanks!

Just an addition, jb (unless this has changed in the latest version(s)):
If you want the option to position/align them by anything but the centre of the appearance (including effetcs), you may add a nostroke/nofill rectange/circle centred over the centre of the artwork and extending past its appearance in all directions.

Virtual copy in a smart collection does not show up in that collection

LR5; When I make a virtual copy in a smart collection it does not show up in that collection but in the original folder...
All of the metadata and custom fields are identical....

The screenshot was very helpful. The problem is with the Custom 05 custom metadata field. Which plugin defined that?
It appears that smart collections don't properly search the custom metadata fields of virtual copies. I filed a bug report in the official Adobe feedback forum: Lightroom: Smart collections don't correctly search custom metadata fields.
You could work around this by using a filter preset in the Library Filter bar. Perhaps not as convenient, but it would get the job done.

Virtual Copy problem in Collections

Sometimes, but not always, when I create a Virtual Copy in a Collection, the Virtual Copy will not appear in the Collection, but it will appear next to the file in its folder.

I have not seen that. When I create a virtual copy including a soft proof copy in a collection, so far they have all appeared. Of course, if I make a virtual copy in a folder, it will not show up in a collection unless I put it there. iMac, OS 10.6.8.

"Flattening" changes to a Virtual copy.

Basically, I'd like to be able to make a virtual copy where all the changes that I made to the original becomes the baseline of the virtual copy; ie. the state that Reset reverts the image to.
For example if a need to split the image into two halves. Currently if the original was cropped, I would have to create a new crop that's half as wide and hopefully the same height. If the cropped original is the baseline of the virtual copy, I can just crop the copy in half.

I could not solve the problem of the changes sticking, or not carrying over to the sibling VCs. I found a less optimal option by using snapshots and naming them. But my changes can only be made linearly. I can't start with a base image and create 4 different developments.
I can make changes, save a snapshot then build upon that, save and name a new snapshot.
I just can't believe I can't easily change the name on a VC.
I believe what you say that you can make these metadata changes independently. But that isn't my experience.
At first I did not have Auto save XMP on, then read why I should have it on so it is ticked on now. But the way things are working is the same.
Thanks

Is there a simple way to drag new virtual copy to a collection?

I've searched multiple times for a hint on how to do this, but always come up empty, perhaps I'm not searching correctly; apologies if this is obvious, well known or asked all the time:
In Windows Lightroom (3.5 at the moment), if I select one or more images and then, on the left, right click and create a new collection, I'm given the option of creating new virtual copies of the selected images for inclusion in the new collection. I use this all the time.
However, once the collection is created, I've not found a simple, one-step method to add virtual copies of additional images to that collection. Best I've come up with is the three step process: create a virtual copy, drag the virtual copy to the collection, and then remove the virtual copy from the folder/collection where I created it. It would be far cooler if there was, say, a keyboard shortcut, e.g. alt-click-drag or something, that would do this all in one step. Is there such a method?
Thanks.

You can right click on the collection and make it a target collection. Then each time you create a virtual copy simply hit the B key to add it. No need to drag.
Remember to switch your target when finished by right-clicking Quick Collection.

Create virtual copy doesn't work

Am I doing something wrong?
I right click on a thumbnail, click create virtual copy. THe thumbnail pane flickers, but I see no evidence of stacking going on: there is no page turn icon in the bottom left or a number in the top left displaying.
I have tired this in the filmstrip in develop and in the library view.
Getho

Maybe check your sort - I had some odd sorting and it put my copy down the bottom out of site.

Editing Film Photos and Virtual Copy Problem

I just scanned some film in and then imported it to lightroom. I am now running into a problem when I go to retouch/edit the film in photoshop. When I scan the film in it scans in as a .tiff file. I first tried to edit just the original to see if it would save back into lightroom as .psd but it didnt it saved the original tiff. I want to have two copies, the original and the edited file. So second I tried to make a virtual copy and edit that one and save it but again it saved both the virtual copy and the original file with the edits that I made. I finally tried right clicking the original file and editing with edit a copy. This finally worked I was able to have a copy and the original file unedited.
My question is if I edit this way and have a bunch of edit with copies is my picture sizes going to double? (having two copies of each photo, one edited and one original)
Or is there a way to edit a .tiff as a virtual copy and not have it save the changes to both files.
hope this wasn't super confusing

Thanks Sean..
Actually it did work but on the flickr side, i didn't notice until i logged on.. The Flickr side added a '2' to the virtual copy although Lightroom uses the original name/copy. So i guess it works, just a little confusing. I have not tweaked the virtual copy yet to see if it updates the '2' copy on Flickr or throws a wobbly instead
I used Jeffrey's plugin for sometime but eventually I decided to delete all my photos from flickr (new account anyway) and decided to go fresh with LR 3. It works really well and any tweak i make get's republished without deleting any previous comments or data. Jeffrey's just doesn't have that same visual impact and integration. The LR version has a few quirks but seems stable enough for solid use... Just need to be smart with it because pilot error can make problems.
S

Couldn't delete Local Adjustments (Dodge, Burn) from Virtual Copy/Photoshop Edit

Setup: Lightroom 2.3 on Mac with latest OSX
1. I applied some settings to an image in LR, along with some local adjustments using the LR Adjustment tools.
2. I made a virtual copy of that image to apply some further adjustments, and I wanted to remove the local adjustments from this copy, so I deleted the adjustment points from this virtual copy. I also clicked "reset" on the Local Adjustments panel.
3. I do a Command+E to open up the virtual copy image in Photoshop for further edits. Problem: in photoshop the effects of the local adjustment tool are still displaying. There are dodge and burn marks in the image per the local adjustments I made in the master image, but removed from the virtual copy.
4. I rechecked the virtual copy and could see no sign of the local adjustments still in the file.
To resolve this, I had to return to the master copy, delete the local adjustments in the master copy, and create a new virtual copy.
Is this normal... I should be able to remove a local adjustment in my virtual copy and let the master copy keep its adjustments, no?

No. You cannot be taken seriously.
1. Photoshop is not Illustrator / Fireworks / Premiere / After effects / Dreamweaver / InDesign. Thank god Adobe. It is already bloated enough.
2. Much worse: your improvement list is sometimes faulty.
These are randomly selected examples:
Anri Orlow schrieb:
When you are duplicating and coping layers the layer panel becomes a horrible mess with dozens on layers with names like "Layer 123 copy 14" and it's very hard to sort it all out. Maybe it's better to copy layer with the same name as it's original?
Rename your layer. See screenshot.
Anri Orlow schrieb:
When you try to drag n' drop a layer holding down Alt to copy it, and it's already placed on top of the layer stack you have no ability to copy it on top of original one. I think it must be fixed
False. Press first Alt and move the layer a little bit upwards until you see the light line.
Anri Orlow schrieb:
Custom shapes. I understand why they are separated buy setst, but why does dialog this stupid annoying "do you really want to replace this set with another" appears every time you change the set??? And why can't we review all the sets in the same time?
What - in your opinion - means the upmost entry in the list?
Anri Orlow schrieb:
Why we can add as many raster masks to the layer but can't do the same with vector masks? Why?
Only 1 layermask + 1 vectormask maximum per layer. Try it.
3. Some of your wishes are ok, but have in mind: different people have different wishes.
miss marple

LR 3.3: Virtual copy hassle

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for