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.

Similar Messages

  • Deleting a virtual copy from a collection

    Hi!
    I just tried to implement a workflow based on collections and sometimes virtual copies instead of folders. But I ran into a problem quickly: I found no way to delete a virtual copy directly from a collection. Here is what I tried to do:
    - packing each shooting in a separate folder (like before)
    - creating a new Collection Set for this shooting and inside this one Collection "all" where I put all photos in
    - creating other Collections for the tasks that I need e.g. "print", "blog", "photobook for parents", ...
    Then my idea was to use only virtual copies in these task-Collections. Creating the copies and working with them works great, as I expected. Only one little problem came out:
    - When I look to the old folder, all virtual copies are shown there -- and counted. So the displayed number of photos is nearly useless to me. Hasn't that been different in LR1 or 2?! Is there a way to change this behaviour?
    But this is not the main problem. The main problem is:
    - When I decide not to use a photo from a task (which is removing the virtual copy from the collection), I found no way to *delete* the virtual copy. It is only *removed* from the collection. So I have lots of unused dead virtual copies in the original folder (which makes the displayed number even more useless).
    I found one complicate workaround: Not deleting the virtual copy, but marking it with "x" as "abgelehnt" (forgot the english word, sorry :-) and later deleting all marked photos.
    But even if I try hard, I will forget this sometimes.
    So is there at least a way to show all virtual copies, which are not in a collection?
    I found ways to either make a filter or a smart collection with only virtual copies. And I can right-click on each and look in the submenu "go to collection..." to see whether is is member of a collection. But I found no way to make this with a smart collection, because the option "not empty" is not available for the collection field.
    I just found the very very complicate solution:
    - go to the folder, delete the "keep" flag from all virtual copies
    - set the "keep" flag on all photos
    - go to each collection and set the "keep" flag on all copies (or photos)
    - deleting all copies without the keep flag
    This will of course also delete all virtual copies which are used in collections which I forgot to choose.
    So I would like one of two things:
    - an option "delete virtual copies if removed from a collection and not member of another collection"
    - or a filter/smart collection way of showing virtual copies which are not member of any collection
    At the moment, I think I will keep my old workflow which was to work with folders and snapshots. Which is also by no means free of drawbacks. Hmm, then again, when comparing: My old workflow has the risk of loosing work (when changing anything without having made a snapshow), but the new workflow has only the disadvantage of having garbage and of not knowing the number of real photos...  sounds better maybe ;-)
    But maybe there is a solution for my problems?!?! Help please ;-)
    Greetings, Joerg

    I found no way to delete a virtual copy directly from a collection.
    Ctrl+Alt+Chift+Delete.
    Hasn't that been different in LR1 or 2?!
    No.
    Is there a way to change this behaviour?
    No. But if you say, you have an "all" collection in your shoot set, you can see the number there. Why judge the count from the folder? You can also use the Library Filter to filter by negatives and/or virtual copies. You can use smart collections somehow, to filter out VCs.
    So is there at least a way to show all virtual copies, which are not in a collection?
    Create a smart collection with the following rules:
    Copy name contains "copy"
       and
    Collection does not contain "a e u i o"
    an option "delete virtual copies if removed from a collection and not member of another collection"
    Use the SC above, select all, and hit Ctrl+Alt+Shift+Delete.
    - or a filter/smart collection way of showing virtual copies which are not member of any collection
    Same as above.

  • 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.
     

  • 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

  • Flickr and Virtual Copy Problem..

    I have photos uploaded to flickr through lightroom but if i create a virtual copy of a used image flickr gets confused because the filename remains the same and wants to update my image with an edit i prefer to keep separate.
    Without creating a tiff or jpg of the original RAW file is there a way to avoid this?
    Would love to be able to rename virtual copies but it's not possible right?
    any solutions?
    S

    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

  • Ability to move a collection "virtual" copy from one collection to another.

    If you've got the option to create a collection upon Import there is no guarantee that all the photos in that Import should be part of the same collection. Since Lightroom's default behavior is to copy pictures when dragging between collections it would be nice to have the option to move then and not risk an inadvertent remove operation while trying to clean up duplicates. It would make for a more user friendly organization tool. Leveraging the shift key during a drag operation would seem to be the most logical to Windows® users. This is the default action (Shift-drag) to move files in Explorer.

    duplicate post
    https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/2192840?tstart=0

  • 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

  • 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 Not Added To Current Collection

    I'm looking at a standard (not smart) collection of images.  I want to create a virtual copy and have that copy automatically become a part of the collection I'm looking at.  This was the standard behavior in LR2.  Under LR3 I have to create a virtual copy, go out to "all photographs", grab the image and drop it into the collection, go back to the collection, and from that point I can continue editing.  What a round trip!  Any tips?
    Thanks!

    Thanks for all the tips.
    I think I've figured out why the behavior isn't quite what I expected.  Here's the structure of my collection:
    >Weddings {collection set}
         >My Photography  {collection set} (to separate work I do for other photogs)
              >John & Mary Wedding  {collection set}
                   >Me {collection} (to separate images shot by me at the wedding)
                   >Second {collection} (to separate images shot by my second)
    I spend most of my time sorting, rating, and editing from the "John & Mary Wedding" collection set.  This way I can see all images shot by my team in chronological order, but when I create a virtual copy from this location it only appears in "all images" and is not associated with any collection.  Th8is makes sense I suppose since images cannot be in a collection set, only a collection.
    So now that I've identified what I'm doing wrong, can anyone suggest a workaround or a better way to organize the images?  I like being able to keep individual photogs separate.  It may seem nit-picky, but I'd rather not have to jump back and forth between collections while working.  I'm dealing with too many images.
    Thanks in advance.

  • Virtual Copy & Collections

    Hello,
    i have organized my pictures in collections. When i create a virtual copy of a picture and drag it to the collection the picture-count of the collection is increased by 1 but the virtual copy wont show up in the collection.
    - Is there a way to create a virtual copy of a picture an assign it to an colletion?
    - Is there a way to filter / search for virtual copys?
    Thank you
    elessar

    You have to assign it to a collection at the time of creation while it is selected post creation (whether one or a group).
    AFAIK there is no filter for VCs at the moment. A work around would be to assign all VCs a color (assuming you won't want that color for other uses) and filter on that color.
    Don
    Don Ricklin, MacBook 1.83Ghz Duo 2 Core running 10.4.9 & Win XP, Pentax *ist D
    http://donricklin.blogspot.com/

  • Can't make virtual copy

    I am unable to create a virtual copy of photos in just one of my Collections. Try to make a virtual copy results in "no photo selected" in navigator. I switched to another Collection and had no problem. Any ideas?

    Bill, Lightroom 2.3 is so much better than Lightroom 2.0 or 1.x for the vast majority of Lightroom users that it's worth the trouble.  I don't blame you for being reluctant to go through an 18 hour download, but it's definitely the thing to try.  Do you have a friend, or workplace, with broadband access who can download it for you in a minute or two and put it on a USB key, or burn it to a CD?  As you probably know, it will install as a free upgrade and link itself automatically to your LR 2.0 key, even if it's downloaded on another PC, once it's installed to yours.
    I also see, now that the other two threads I was referring to pop on the right of this display under "More Like This".

  • Virtual Copy Trouble

    Im not sure if the problems with Virtual Copy have been reported with Win XP SP 2, but here goes.
    1. The only times where Virtual Copy works as described is when using Library>All Photographs or Folders. When restricting the view with these two options, VC works just as documented.
    2. Using Keyword Tags, either nested or not, or the Metadata Browser, only the original is shown when a visual copy is created.
    3. Except in the case of (1) above, the VC is not shown when added to to the Quick Collection.
    Since Visual Copies is such an important concept, this is a major bug. If not here, where should this situation be reported?
    Wil

    1.2. You can create a VC anywhere, but it will only stack while in the library or folders. If left unstacked you will see it any part of the Library, but not be able to stack/unstack unless you return to the Lib/folders. Stacking is not abled in any other part of the Library, although heavily requested.

  • [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

  • 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.

  • 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.

Maybe you are looking for