Lightroom Classic: Enable the user to exclude star ratings and color labels from exported files

  • 1
  • Idea
  • Updated 1 year ago
  • (Edited)

Lightroom Classic: Enable the user to exclude star ratings
and color labels (maybe flags also, not my case) from exported files so that no
duplications arise within a fileset once the fileset based on stars and labels exported and the new files added back to the catalog. This will allow to continue batch processing and effective future searches of selection based on stars and labels with no distraction from the exported "duplicates".
Photo of Vlad Mazai

Vlad Mazai

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
  • annoyed with duplicates in filesets upon exports

Posted 1 year ago

  • 1
Photo of Tom Mickow

Tom Mickow

  • 514 Posts
  • 210 Reply Likes
Not sure I understand your process/use case, but you might want to take a look at Jeffrey Friedl's Metadata Wrangler plug in to get more granular control over what metadata is and isn't included during the export process.

http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/metadata-wrangler
Photo of Vlad Mazai

Vlad Mazai

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thank you very much Tom, at a first glance it looks like it may provide a solution, I'll evaluate it.
Photo of Vlad Mazai

Vlad Mazai

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Yes, it does what needed, besides the export window now rendered with someadditional delay. Need more to make sure those delays do not impact the process negtively. Again, thank you very much.
Photo of Vlad Mazai

Vlad Mazai

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
After some more evaluation I can confirm, the plugin allows me to avoid unvonted fields. But it severely impacts rendering of the export window. Looks like each time it renders slowly than the previous time. Anyway it still may prove itself usable...
Photo of Roelof Moorlag

Roelof Moorlag

  • 263 Posts
  • 79 Reply Likes
Why bring back exported images into the catalog? I just create them again when needed. After use i delete them.
Photo of Tom Mickow

Tom Mickow

  • 514 Posts
  • 210 Reply Likes
As I mentioned before, I'm not sure I understand your process or use-case for this whole thing and I think Roelof is going in that same direction.

There are a few pieces of data/functionality that are Lr specific and only stored in the catalog - virtual copies, stacks, etc. - but most metadata can be written back out to the files themselves or xmp sidecars that other software can use.

Everybody's workflow and needs are a little different, but exporting & maintaining copies of everything to "avoid dependency" sounds like a lot of unnecessary busy work to me.
Photo of Vlad Mazai

Vlad Mazai

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Allright gentlemen, I'm not here about defending my way to do things, I'm just seeking for the software's functionality I need :) You're absolutely right for your process. For me, noting a point in time when I definitely do not need generated files any more, navigating to them and deleting them is a bit more unnecessary work.
Photo of richardplondon

richardplondon

  • 25 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Vlad: you describe a single tree storage strategy, and a wish to be able to view or use your edited images by other means than Lightroom.

Both of these things can be achieved by Exporting (or Publishing) a JPG copy showing LR edits - LR can be set to always do this into a suitably named subfolder, of whatever folder contains the source file (e.g. Raw).

But in doing so, the "Import to this Catalog" checkbox in the Export settings, can be left empty.

Your intention is to be able to view exported photo versions using other software, and not with LR. Therefore LR does not need to show these edited exports: LR is showing you the working image versions on which those exports are based, and later updated.

And then there is no confusion between these two classes of image version.

(Personally I prefer to keep two independent folder trees: one for originals (new folders created at Import) and one for edited copies (new folders created at Export). No accident is then even possible. I never go into the originals folder other than via the LR Catalog, which is in sole charge of managing all that.)
Photo of Vlad Mazai

Vlad Mazai

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks Richard. No, generated files not going to be accessed in any way other than transferring/uploading. "Not with LR" means I have everything (a few instances for each processed file) generated/exported for the time if and when I quit using CC - .
As for trees, I dropped using different trees as an inconvinient way for me, also my process includes future syncs for some dates, so I'll get the subfolders with generated files in anyway.

Everything what is not great for me now - the stars and labels. I'd continue removing them manually rather than change my process which is perfectly ok for what I need.

The plugin Tom mentioned performes what I need, but slows rendering of the export window a bit. Looks little trouble since no need open it every time to complete export.

Photo of richardplondon

richardplondon

  • 25 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
So if generated files are only going to be transferred / uploaded, this supports that they would not need to be also re-imported to LR? 

For the output, perhaps you could include a call to "exiftool", in the postprocessing stage of your Export setup - configured with some command-line options, to clear particular metadata from the exported file? This option executes rapidly in my experience - though not having tried the LR plugin method myself, I haven't got any basis for comparison.
Photo of David Converse

David Converse

  • 941 Posts
  • 275 Reply Likes
About the only software dependency is ACR adjustments to RAW files. And if you had to, you could always export anything with an adjustment.