Skip to main content
Adobe Photoshop Family

21 Messages

 • 

918 Points

Wed, Mar 9, 2016 9:22 PM

Under consideration

78

Lightroom: Respect Hierarchical Folders of Presets

5 years ago, poster Sean Phillips first suggested this idea. Adobe has officially marked it as "implemented" - however, it is not implemented. Preset subfolders are scanned by LR, however, directory structure is not respected beyond the first level.

This makes preset management kludgy and inefficient. Please correct this by simply allowing the LR preset hierarchy to reflect the subfolder structure in the LR develop preset folder tree.

Responses

1 Message

 • 

80 Points

4 years ago

I can't believe that Adobe still hasn't done this.

21 Messages

 • 

918 Points

It is absolutely baffling.

1 Message

 • 

80 Points

4 years ago

There should be at least one level more.
Now the folder list is to long and need to much vertical scrolling.

22 Messages

 • 

486 Points

4 years ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled is it possible update lightroom to make a folder inside a folder, similar to the ....

Hi I was wondering is it possible in Lightroom to have an update so as to be able to make a folder inside a folder similar to what is already in the collections Module

22 Messages

 • 

486 Points

I now see that many other users have long been asking for this to happen, and nothing has, would it not only be just courteous of Adobe to make some sort of statement here as to why this has not happened or if there is a chance it may or may not, then at least to say so. I look forward to comment

3 Messages

 • 

182 Points

If you dig back thru the many comments on this you will find that Adobe's official response is that it is done. In fact it is not of course, what is done is the Quick Develop Presets NOT the Develop Presets. I would also ask that the implementation for the Quick Develop is not correct either, it does not follow the standard for Tree-based keyboard searches. I suspect they are writing their own code instead of using standard windows objects.

22 Messages

 • 

486 Points

4 years ago

I see now that I have asked this question just how many other Adobe customers have been asking the same thing for at least a year, if not longer, so much for listening to your customers adobe, I can take on board that some things take time, and there are many other things also needing attention, but when you have people from the Professional user to someone like me who just uses your product to help with his happy snaps, all asking for the same thing, dont you think you should get your finger out and do something to help...........rant over

1.3K Messages

 • 

22.5K Points

The thing is, Kelvin, maybe it's not that great an idea? Let's say you do have large numbers of presets in multiple level of folders, and let's say Adobe did implement the suggestion as described. So you'd still spend an age looking down one hole - sorry, subfolder - after another until you find the B&W preset you want, or that cross process one or whatever.  There are some B&W presets here, some there etc.  Respecting folder hierarchies just doesn't really gain you much of any value.

What would help is to copy the filter box at the top of Collections and the Keyword List. You could then filter the preset list by entering something like "B&W BW Mono".

12 Messages

 • 

452 Points

Hello John

I do not agree with your point of view. Those of us that uses many presets, journalizes them into logical folder structures, and therefore need to be able to subdivide these into sub-folders. I'm not looking around in one folder after another. If the option for subfolders were implemented, I can find the right preset category with a few clicks. And from here my photo workflow is easy.

In the photo club I belong to, we have several times talked about this problem that Adobe will be able to solve with very little effort, so why not fix this small technical issue?

Your suggestion to be able to filter presets are welcome, but I don't believe naming itself is the logical journalizing method. Here you ends up with a complex names syntax!

Best regards

Lars

22 Messages

 • 

486 Points

John that's why forums like this are a great thing, everybody has another idea, yours is another for the toolbox, but many people here are wanting to have a folder hierarchy for presets if the parent folder is named correctly, you would not spend so long looking as you describe I think, who knows the two ideas together could be a great combo

7 Messages

 • 

256 Points

John, even if this much requested feature was finally implemented, nobody would force you to use nested folders. You can keep your flat preset hierarchy. So this is really a complete non-issue.

I do like the idea with the filter / search box though. 

3 Messages

 • 

182 Points

WOW, I so disagree with the first part. As someone who has been involved in computers since 1959 I can tell you that the hierarchical file structure was one of the great advancements. That does not preclude a search capability, it could be done like windows and I assume Apple. Just place the cursor anywhere on the tree and start typing, do not even need a search box but I would include both. The most maddening part to me is that Adobe pundits agree with us and yet it isn't done. In addition, you can find the code to do this in almost any programming language for free on-line. I just checked and the Quick Develop Presets do honour Tree searching but only for 2 or 3 keystrokes. I suspect we will not see anything on this at least until the new Lightroom. I see signs for a major new product totally different from what we have now.

12 Messages

 • 

452 Points

4 years ago

Hello John

I do not agree with your point of view. Those of us that uses many presets, journalizes them into logical folder structures, and therefore need to be able to subdivide these into sub-folders. I'm not looking around in one folder after another. If the option for subfolders were implemented, I can find the right preset category with a few clicks. And from here my photo workflow is easy.

In the photo club I belong to, we have several times talked about this problem that Adobe will be able to solve with very little effort, so why not fix this small technical issue?

Your suggestion to be able to filter presets are welcome, but I don't believe naming itself is the logical journalizing method. Here you ends up with a complex names syntax!

Best regards

Lars

25 Messages

 • 

504 Points

4 years ago

Listen, it's a waste of time to argue about hierarchical folders versus filtering/search. If we could have both implemented, it would help all of us. But we have been posting about this request for way over a year with no response or reply from Adobe. They appear disinterested in this idea and these suggestions. Having both works for the largest number of users who are people who love Adobe, but are frustrated by the lack action from Adobe. There's more competition now and users are losing their love for Adobe. I wish they would pay attention!

164 Messages

 • 

5.2K Points

Agreed. The fact that they marked this as complete years ago when it clearly wasn't proved that they aren't interested.

Champion

 • 

219 Messages

 • 

3.9K Points

Where is it marked in this thread as Implemented???

22 Messages

 • 

486 Points

I just asked one of the mods if they can confirm this, though I have also seen it marked somewhere as Implemented, just cannot recall how to get to it again.

22 Messages

 • 

486 Points

5 years ago
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

 I Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 121
  •  
  • 44 Posts
  •  1072 Reply Likes

Official Response





Hierarchical Develop Presets was implemented in Lightroom 4: 

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

22 Messages

 • 

486 Points

The above seems to be about photoshop but is applied to this conversation, I am wondering if someone has got their knickers in a twist over this

Adobe Administrator

 • 

8.2K Messages

 • 

117.4K Points

4 years ago

Just for clarification: Preset Folder Organization touches many different areas. Preset organization needs to be consistent across the application. Places where Preset Organization is currently present:

1. Develop Module - Preset panel 
2. Library Module - Quick Develop panel
3. Auto Import>Auto Import Settings...
4. Tether Capture Tool Bar
5. Import dialog - Apply During Import panel

Work has recently been completed to make those dialogs (and the subsequent organization represented) equivalent across the application. 

For items 2-5, there is little performance cost to increased hierarchy.  For Item 1, the cost is more significant. The Develop Module's Preset panel, ties to the Navigator Panel's preview image and the increase in hierarchy will complicate generation of a preview image when mousing over the preview. 

When the 6-year old thread, originally mentioned, was posted, Lightroom 3.x had more rudimentary functionality than today. That was updated in Lightroom 4 to allow for more hierarchy.  Additional consistency work was done in the 6.x time frame. 

Threads in this forum are marked implemented when we believe them to be implemented based upon the original poster's feature request. If that is shown to be in error, we mark the status of the thread accordingly. As Victoria has already pointed out, the thread had its "Implemented" status changed after this was realized. 

So - for all of you wanting this Hierarchical Preset organization I have a few questions: 

Have you viewed all five of the places where this will impact UI and are comfortable with the impact on workflow in those areas - whether you use a particular area or not?

Specifically to all who have posted on this thread - which area (1-5) are you asking about?

How many levels of hierarchy are desired?

How many are necessary?

How many will be detrimental to the average user? 

In order for a serious feature request to succeed it has to impact positively the workflow of the Lightroom user and not introduce new workflow issues. Adobe needs to hear more from you on this issue. 
 

Adobe Photography Products

Quality Engineering - Customer Advocacy

Champion

 • 

29 Messages

 • 

1.3K Points

1 is the highest priority, followed by 2. 

At least one more level is required, though 2 might suit others. 

See above

I guess there has to be some limit. I'm happy with 2 more levels to keep mine better organised. I think beyond 5 is too many. 

The key for me is to have sets of either branded or similar presets in a secondary folder below the main parent. E.g. All my LRB presets which have their own folders could be in a parent LRB folder, that way they're neater in the panel. Same for VSCO presets in their own folder. It reduces the main list down to a more manageable set, rather than a long list of folders. 

164 Messages

 • 

5.2K Points

Yes, this nails it perfectly.

25 Messages

 • 

504 Points

Thank you Rikk Flohr for replying to this request. Your explanation is helpful in understanding the issue from your perspective. For me, the most important area is for the (1.) Develop Module. That's the end result I'd like to see accomplished. For the others (2. - 5.) that you listed, I'm very willing to take some performance hit to accomplish number 1. In fact, some of these others you list will help make the develop module preset organization easier to accomplish, especially in the (5.) import panel. I believe it will help our workflow in all 5 areas (net gain in efficiency).

How many levels of hierarchy are desired?  3

How many are necessary?  3

How many will be detrimental to the average user?  no limit, make it the user's choice

Thanks for considering this.
Marty Cohen

3 Messages

 • 

182 Points

Basically anytime the program accesses any presets folder hierarchy on disk it should present that hierarchy exactly as it is just like Finder or File Explorer . Flattening it is user unfriendly, causes a performance hit and slows workflow.
If I have to prioritise it would be #1 first, then #5 and after that, I don't care (I had to spend 10 mins finding them because I never use them). The argument that a hierarchy causes a performance hit on the Navigator makes no sense to me and I am speaking as a programmer for over 30 years. Whether you are mousing down a long flat list causing the Navigator to update or a hierarchy is the same. Perhaps you are using a hover time of 0? Simply allow a configuration setting so I can set a hover time that suits my style.

As to how many, since the end user can organise their own or acquired presets then it is up to each user to decide how deep. The program should present that structure in the UI with the same limits as the platform file managers which I believe is 256 characters for each but if not that might be a reasonable limit (256 character path  and file name)

As to the Adobe built in presets, use common sense. The existing structure needs to be at least 1 deeper so that I have Lightroom then a choice between B&W and Color then what you have now but reserve 1 deeper just in case.That would be 3 levels but allow 4 or 5 for future. If they use a standard off the shelf HD folder reader object then this is a moot point other than to specify a high limit during object creation and I would vote for 5 OR make it a Prefs setting would be even better.

None of this makes me want to leave LR and PS but the long delay in implementing a standard Windows and Apple construct as you have in the Folders section and elsewhere creates unnecessary tension between us.

Thanks for getting involved Rikk.

7 Messages

 • 

256 Points

Thank you for an official answer :)

As for your questions:

"Have you viewed all five of the places where this will impact UI and are comfortable with the impact on workflow in those areas - whether you use a particular area or not?"

Of course performance impact is never a good thing - I do believe however it is definitely well worth it if the impact is only on preset preview and application. If there is a significant delay every time when switching to the Develop module, that would be a matter for concern (but also a sign of seriously bad programming ^^).

"Specifically to all who have posted on this thread - which area (1-5) are you asking about?"

I mainly just care about the 1 - Develop module. The functionality would of course also be very nice on 2, 3 and 5, though I personally don't use these often enough to matter (and if I do, I can currently use a single folder for favorite import presets). As for 4 - ask me again when Adobe and Pentax get their act together and I can actually shoot tethered ;)

"How many levels of hierarchy are desired?"

Obviously, two at a minimum so we can have preset groups with subgroups. Three would be a lot nicer, of course, but I could live with two if that's significantly easier to implement. Four or more already seems a bit like overkill to me personally.

"How many are necessary?"

See above - even two levels would already help a lot compared to the current situation.

"How many will be detrimental to the average user?"

That's a non-issue IMHO because even if you were to offer fifty levels of hierarchy, nobody would be forced to use them. But for sanity's sake, I'd draw the limit at five.

Of course, a Filter / Search box as suggested by John would also be a very welcome addition. But if I had to choose between those two, I'd prefer a hierarchy because it's easier to browse a well organized preset library than wracking my brain for the name of a preset I forgot.

As for this:

"Preset organization needs to be consistent across the application"

Just out of curiosity let me ask why is this? Is this a necessity because all those areas using presets use the same code or is this a dictum from your UI/UX team?

164 Messages

 • 

5.2K Points

4 years ago

I basically only ever use presets in Develop,  so that's where this is most important to me. However in order to make the program consistent for users I can't imagine why you would develop this in one place and not everywhere else. To do differently (as it is now) only makes the program more confusing.

Having at least 3 but no more than 5 levels of hierarchy would be useful. Mine are organized both in folders based on the source from which they came, which often includes at least one more sub level to describe the type of preset (eg. B&W, Color, Psychadelic, etc.). I currently also have another level that I created a few years ago when older presets didn't work properly with the newest process version (or reverted the image back to the previous process version when they were applied). Although I rarely use them I still have some of those older presets and still see a need for that level of hierarchy...

As for performance cost, obviously I'm not interested in taking any hit in that regard if it's possible to avoid it. LR is already, unfortunately, a sluggish pig most of the time. However I honestly believe that is a different conversation. I truly believe that using good coding practices across the platform (which includes reusing identical code wherever possible) will help that more than hurt it. Admittedly I am not an active developer and I stand to be corrected in that regard.

But my point is still valid that Adobe need to address the performance of the program across the board. I can access my images in Photo Mechanic and ON1 Photo RAW almost instantly while when accessing the same images in LR sometimes takes as long as 10 minutes to even see anything other than a spinning beachball. Adding (or not adding) hierarchy levels to my presets folders will not change that...

22 Messages

 • 

486 Points

4 years ago

I am not a professional in any of these matters but the whole thread of this thread has been about the develope  Module  and what is best to help Professionals and other users alike when using that Module, Adobe Professionals surely have to be the final arbitrator of what is best for everyone, If you can give us what we want and still meet the needs of the general community and your own organisation then either go ahead and do it or just say it cannot be done, no matter what is said here you will in any case do what makes the best business sense.
  

2 Messages

 • 

102 Points

3 years ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Sub Folders In Presets.

I have a lot of presets and when it comes to organisation Lightroom is not my friend. Surely the organisation of presets should be a priority for the application/program. Yes folders of presets are good but when you buy collections and they are in 15/20 different types it would be nice to have your main folder (preset creator) then within that folder for example folders grunge, vintage, etc etc.

2 Messages

 • 

112 Points

I agree..... I’ve bought presets from many sellers..... sometimes 10 different packages from one seller. For example: I bought ten different preset packages from XYZ each with a different name, like wedding, baby blues, vintage, grunge, pretty purple, etc..... I’d like to make one folder that is by xyz snd the put all the sub folders under xyz. Nd close it up.... then there is abc company and the same issues.... I want one folder that says abc.... and then out all the different packaged presets (in there folders) under abc folder! I use about 5 companies I like to buy from so if I had them all closed, I’d only have 5 folders showing up...... the way it is now, I have probably 50 folders under my presets that I have to click on..... then search that folder.... for the actual one preset I want! It gets old scrolling!

1 Message

 • 

84 Points

3 years ago

So glad I have found this but really surprised there are so few votes.
Please, Adobe can something be done about making our time on your product more efficient. It would be greatly appreciated by many people.

25 Messages

 • 

504 Points

3 years ago

GREAT NEW WAY TO GIVE THIS FEEDBACK...  Adobe put up a survey asking users to tell them their top 3 issues with Lightroom performance. This is a good place to let them know about how much time we waste because Lightroom does not provide for hierarchical Develop Module Preset folders. Here's the link to the survey:  https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/LrDesktop_performance

17 Messages

 • 

292 Points

3 years ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Nested folders of presets.

I second that! Having one folder deep organization reminds me of 3" floppy disc era computing. 
It would be great for Adobe to respond more often in it's LR iterations to how experienced photographers actually use Lightroom, and how deeper UX/Intuitive design can make it even more powerful workflow software.

Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: Lightroom: Custom "Collections" of Develop Presets.

22 Messages

 • 

486 Points

3 years ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Can we please have some sort of Official Response on the Thread Lightroom: Respec....

The above thread it seems has been marked as resolved by an official comment that Hierarchical Folder presets  were implemented in Lightroom 4, even if they were, they are not currently in CC, which is why the thread is asking for them, but confusion abounds as commentators seem to think that Lightroom just do not care, is it possible to get some sort of official review/comment of this thread. ? thank you

Champion

 • 

5.1K Messages

 • 

93K Points

For reference by future readers, see the posts starting with this one from Adobe employee Rikk Flohr: https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lightroom-need-to-respect-subfolder-hierarchy...

10 Messages

 • 

296 Points

3 years ago

Another +1 for this. Just organised a heap of downloaded presets the way I wanted them, and LR crushed the structure. On top of that, it's not even showing quite a few of them. Bit annoying...