Lightroom Classic 7.3.1: "Don't import suspected duplicates" not working correctly

  • 4
  • Problem
  • Updated 3 months ago
  • Not a Problem
  • (Edited)

Der all,

the above mentioned checkmark in the Import Screen has lost an important part of its functionality. Is this a bug or a design change?

Previous behaviour (very helpful):
In the not too distant past, the checkmark did prevent the import of duplicates even if images had been renamed after the first import.
This was possible because the original filename from the camera was kept as a meta data field for each image and new images filenames could be compared against the original filenames of already imported Images.

New behaviour (not helpful)
Now I found, that the checkmark works only as long as the already imported files have not been renamed.
The checkmark does not compare against original filenames of existing images any more. instead it compares only the actual filenames.

It would be very appreciated, if you could reinstall the original helpful functionality of the checkmark.

Kind regards,

Hans Kühne

Photo of Hans Kuehne

Hans Kuehne

  • 5 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
  • frustrated

Posted 3 months ago

  • 4
Photo of Just Shot Me

Just Shot Me

  • 191 Posts
  • 48 Reply Likes
this Feature/Option seems to be working just fine on my system. I made a new folder on my drive where I store my photos, Copied over several, 15-20, photos from another folder, opened LR and then clicked the import button. When the import dialog window opened I selected Add at the top then point it to the new folder I had created. With that option/Feature checked the photos are all grayed out, meaning they are already in the catalog.


With it un-checked they are ready to be imported.



What you are seeing can be caused by renaming the original photos when you imported them and now LR is seeing the same images as new because they still have the original name. 
Photo of Johan Elzenga

Johan Elzenga, Champion

  • 1212 Posts
  • 488 Reply Likes
I believe that is exactly what the OP says, but that should be considered as a bug. Lightroom stores the original name of the images in its catalog, just for this purpose: to recognize duplicates, even when they are renamed. It can use things like creation date and time for that. And AFAIK, that is what Lightroom always did correctly.
Photo of Robert Somrak

Robert Somrak, Champion

  • 104 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
When you rename a file DURING import the "original filename" in Lightroom becomes the renamed file, not the camera created name.

When you rename a file AFTER import the "original filename" in Lightroom is the camera created name.

This can be easily demonstrated by importing 2 files, one by renaming during import and one by renaming after import.   
Then select both renames files and use the rename template as follows to rename them again.


The one name during import will not have the camera created filename.

This behavior has been in Lightroom for a LONG time and because of it I quit renaming files on IMPORT a long time ago to preserve the original filename. 
(Edited)
Photo of Johan Elzenga

Johan Elzenga, Champion

  • 1212 Posts
  • 488 Reply Likes
Correct, but it should not stop Lightroom from identifying duplicates, even when they were renamed on import. Lightroom has a lot more info it can use, such as the creation date and time, the exact file size, the camera make, model and number, etc. That should be enough to identify an image as 'suspected duplicate'. The file name is the least useful one, as many different cameras use the same 'IMG_1234' format.
(Edited)
Photo of Robert Somrak

Robert Somrak, Champion

  • 104 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
Johan
I agree that the OP's issue shouldn't happen even with the "Rename on Import" issue.  The exif display  in Library shows the original date/time of the file although Lightroom has a LOT of issues with the date/time exif data.  

As a side note, I think Lightroom should preserve the CAMERA original filename, even with a "Rename on import".  It may or may not be a bug but I consider it at least a poor design
(Edited)
Photo of Hans Kuehne

Hans Kuehne

  • 5 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Dear all,

thank you all for your helpful comments.

Today I retested the issue and and it seems, that my testing procedure yesterday was not correct.
Todays retest went ok, and I could not reproduce the error situation. 
The named checkmark is effective also after the original files have been renamed.

Insofar this issue can be considered closed.

I do not know, what exactly went wrong yesterday, but I apologize for stirring you up with a wrong error report.

Have a nice Weekend,

Hans


 

Photo of Sunil Bhaskaran

Sunil Bhaskaran, Official Rep

  • 311 Posts
  • 110 Reply Likes
Thanks for letting us know.
We are happy that it's working for you.

Thanks,
Sunil