Lightroom Classic: Limit of 52 reorderings in custom-ordered collections and folders

  • 13
  • Problem
  • Updated 1 month ago
  • In Progress
  • (Edited)
[I've verified this bug still exists in LR 8.3, both for collections and folders. -- John Ellis] 

After a while of custom sorting the order of photos and stacks within a collection (using Grid View), Lightroom starts to unpredictably refuse to sort photos. Some will get positioned where I drop them, others won't move at all and yet others will get positioned somewhere close by (eg. 4 or 5 photos before or after).

After digging into the catalog file I've come across what I think is the problem, but don't know how to fix it. In the attached file you'll see a screenshot of the database table for the collection, you'll see I've hilited the images that are part of the same collection, but their positionId is identical (which should never happen I'm assuming), probably due to the field size reaching it's maximum length. This is what I believe is causing the problem. Tested this on both Lightroom 5.7 and CC 2015.8.

This is a major bug and effectively stops user sorting from being functional, as well as now having potentially lost weeks of work. Any suggestions?



Thanks,

Adrian
Photo of Adrian Cleave

Adrian Cleave

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Posted 3 years ago

  • 13
Photo of Eric Webb

Eric Webb

  • 12 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
In response to an e-mail just circulated by Rikk Flohr - who appears neither to have read nor understood the accumulated e-correspondence - I further confirm that from my standpoint this bug is definitely still active in a fully updated Win 10 installation.

Photo of Sunil Bhaskaran

Sunil Bhaskaran, Official Rep

  • 447 Posts
  • 156 Reply Likes
Eric,
I am sending you an e-mail off-list to get some more details.

Thanks,
Sunil
Photo of Ryan Caliendo

Ryan Caliendo

  • 3 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Sunil the images are rearranging themselves! I’ll be done with arranging an entire batch of photos on the timeline and if I make one false move with a virtual copy, most images get scrambled.
Photo of jbedford

jbedford

  • 154 Posts
  • 39 Reply Likes
What's going on with this bug?? It still persists over THREE years after being first brought to the attention of this forum. Honestly, do you guys have no clue how to fix this? It's really annoying that it appears to be a back-burner issue when your users are demanding it to be resolved. Please update us as to what is being done to resolve this major bug.

As to what Ryan (above) mentioned, the virtual copies getting scrambled, this has to be the most frustrating part of this experience. Even after exiting LR, reopening, and going back to my collection, I still can't move around the pictures that are now out of order. Thanks a lot.
(Edited)
Photo of Mary Ella Jourdak

Mary Ella Jourdak

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
Just chiming in that I'm fully updated and having this bullshit problem. This is SO frustrating. It's getting easier and easier to consider leaving behind the Adobe programs...
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Official Rep

  • 6179 Posts
  • 1367 Reply Likes
Greetings all,

The Lightroom Classic team marked this issue as fixed in 8.3 based upon the confirmation of the original reporter of the issue. It appears now that the issue was fixed with regard to the 52 image threshold but is still encountered at higher numbers of images. 

I've reopened the bug and am looking for more information regarding how many images it takes to break the reordering. Can you provide me with solid numbers of how many images it takes to break?
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4700 Posts
  • 1274 Reply Likes
I retested the recipe I tested in LR 8.3 with 1025 photos:
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lightroom-major-bug-with-custom-sort-order?to...

and it still fails the same way. I tried with significantly fewer photos and couldn't observe any problems. But this test surely points at some problems with the current renumbering algorithm.
Photo of Brendan Bullock

Brendan Bullock

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Chiming in to say that a 3 year old bug of this magnitude needs to be addressed.  As a professional wedding photographer, my final collections for every project are near 1,000 images - I can't begin to tell you the frustration when I reach the end of a project, go to export, and find that LR has moved files around within the custom sort here and there.  It can take hours to go through, find them all, and rectify the problem.  Basically once a week I am dealing with this problem on a grand scale - which adds up to many lost hours per month.  C'mon Adobe - lets have a fix already!

PS - I have noticed that this random re-sorting primarily targets images I have color labeled Red - but not ALL images labeled Red, just some of them.  Occasionally a non-color labeled image will move but I would say that 95% of the time its a Red that's moved.  This seems somehow baked into the algorithm.  I generally don't use other color labels, so I can't confirm or deny that it affects Reds as opposed to certain other colors.
Photo of StormyTheCat

StormyTheCat

  • 33 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
And now Adobe has removed the ability to load any of the older releases where ordering was not broken!
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4700 Posts
  • 1274 Reply Likes
"...any of the older releases where ordering was not broken!"

Unfortunately, the collection ordering has been broken at least back to LR 5.7.
Photo of StormyTheCat

StormyTheCat

  • 33 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
I'm not even talking about ordering collections.  I could order my regular photo sets in 8.0 but not 8.3.  I've reproduced the ordering problem on every release since.  I don't suppose there is a way to revert a catalog back to LR 6......
(Edited)
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4700 Posts
  • 1274 Reply Likes
The same ordering algorithm is used for both folders and collections, in LR 8.4 and in all previous versions.  So reverting back to LR 6 won't in general avoid the bug.  If anything, the version of the algorithm in LR 6 may trigger the bug with fewer custom reorderings than in LR 8.4.

LR 8.3 changed the ordering algorithm in an attempt to fix the bug, changing the observed behavior, but it's still buggy for both collections and folders.  That you observed the bug in 8.3 but not in 8.0 is unsurprising -- the bug's behavior isn't completely understood (it's a bug after all).  

If you have a precise step-by-step recipe for reproducing the bug that's substantially different than this one:
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lightroom-major-bug-with-custom-sort-order?to...

then please post it here. The posted recipe requires moving large blocks of photos within a collection or folder, repeatedly, which doesn't represent typical user behavior and thus might be prone to de-prioritization by Adobe product managers when deciding on which bugs to fix.
Photo of StormyTheCat

StormyTheCat

  • 33 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes

I previously posted this in another Adobe forum and received no official response.

Win10 Laptop

All actions are performed on a brand new catalog with 100 images (0.jpg-99.jpg) copied from the same original image.

(same creation date)

I selected all images except the first 2. (So 2-99) I then dragged them to be between 0 and 1.

Next deselected only the first of my selected images (2) and dragged the rest between the first 2 images.
I repeated this until all images were moved. (0, 100, 99, 98, .....)

Next I repeated the above, selected all images but the first 2 and moved them between the first 2, deselected 1 image from my group each time.

Eventually I got to a gallery view of 0, 73, 72, 71, 70, ....... 1 74, 75, ..... 100 which 72->1 selected.
When I moved the group of 72->1 between 0 and 73 the ordered was invalid.

I ended up with 0, 1, 10, 11, 12, 13, ...... not what I expected (0, 72, ......)


Photo of Sunil Bhaskaran

Sunil Bhaskaran, Official Rep

  • 447 Posts
  • 156 Reply Likes
@StormyTheCat,
Thanks for the reproducible steps. (The issue is reproducible.)
We are currently investigating.

Thanks,
Sunil