Flickr Camera Roll

In article , android wrote:

Sandman:
And it sucks big time, which is a pity. But this is a
limit in Lightroom's plugin handling rather than in Flickr.

I liked how Aperture handeled this much better. I got a
"Flick" 'folder' in the sidebar, which had sub-folders which
were all my flickr "sets" (now "albums") and I could drag
any photo to any set at any time.

android:
You're a dev. This is what is called business opportunity!

Sandman:
Nope, since I'm not the developer of Lightroom.

The outside of the box thingy ain't you is it???

"outside the box" won't help Lightroom, unfortunately.

--
Sandman

In article ,
Sandman wrote:

In article , android wrote:

Sandman:
And it sucks big time, which is a pity. But this is a
limit in Lightroom's plugin handling rather than in Flickr.

I liked how Aperture handeled this much better. I got a
"Flick" 'folder' in the sidebar, which had sub-folders which
were all my flickr "sets" (now "albums") and I could drag
any photo to any set at any time.

android:
You're a dev. This is what is called business opportunity!

Sandman:
Nope, since I'm not the developer of Lightroom.

The outside of the box thingy ain't you is it???

"outside the box" won't help Lightroom, unfortunately.

You could make a droplet for the dock or something, you lazy bum! ;-p
--
teleportation kills

In article , android wrote:

In article
,

Sandman:
And it sucks big time, which is a pity. But this
is a limit in Lightroom's plugin handling rather than in
Flickr.

I liked how Aperture handeled this much better. I got a
"Flick" 'folder' in the sidebar, which had sub-folders
which were all my flickr "sets" (now "albums") and I
could drag any photo to any set at any time.

android:
You're a dev. This is what is called business
opportunity!

Sandman:
Nope, since I'm not the developer of Lightroom.

android:
The outside of the box thingy ain't you is it???

Sandman:
"outside the box" won't help Lightroom, unfortunately.

You could make a droplet for the dock or something, you lazy bum!
;-p

That wouldn't help, since Lightroom's drag'n'drop functionality is broken.

Also, it wouldn't solve the aforementioned problem either.

--
Sandman

In article ,
Sandman wrote:

In article , android wrote:

In article
,

Sandman:
And it sucks big time, which is a pity. But this
is a limit in Lightroom's plugin handling rather than in
Flickr.

I liked how Aperture handeled this much better. I got a
"Flick" 'folder' in the sidebar, which had sub-folders
which were all my flickr "sets" (now "albums") and I
could drag any photo to any set at any time.

android:
You're a dev. This is what is called business
opportunity!

Sandman:
Nope, since I'm not the developer of Lightroom.

android:
The outside of the box thingy ain't you is it???

Sandman:
"outside the box" won't help Lightroom, unfortunately.

You could make a droplet for the dock or something, you lazy bum!
;-p

That wouldn't help, since Lightroom's drag'n'drop functionality is broken.

Humpf!

Also, it wouldn't solve the aforementioned problem either.

Humpf!
--
teleportation kills

In article , Andreas Skitsnack wrote:

Sandman:
That wouldn't help, since Lightroom's drag'n'drop functionality is
broken.

That which was never present can hardly be said to be broken.

Huh? Lightroom's drag'n'drop functionality does exist, it just that it drags the
wrong file and shows feedback to the user with makes the operation unintuitive

I consider the inability to drag and drop in LR to be a disadvantage
in using LR. For example, I sometimes want to re-naming a series of
photographs so they will fall in a particular order in some other
app. In FastStone (a free photo viewer), I can do this by dragging
and dropping the images to the order I want and then re-naming in
sequence.

Ah, that's not generally called "drag'n'drop", at least not in this sense, even
though you are both dragging and dropping. I am in reference to the OS sense of
drag'n'drop where you drag and drop file (aliases), which is also what Android
was in reference to (drag to the dock).

I can work around the disadvantage by deleting the LR images,
re-naming outside of LR and then re-importing the revised structure,
but that's extra work.

Yeah, LR doesn't have manual sorting. Not sure if that's ever been a problem for
me though. But there is an easier solution for your problem - set LR to sort by
filename (which I'm assuming you already have), and then in the metadata panel,
change the filename of the file. No need to rename outside of LR and re-import.


--
Sandman

In article , android wrote:

Sandman:
And it sucks big time, which is a pity. But
this is a limit in Lightroom's plugin handling
rather than in Flickr.

I liked how Aperture handeled this much better. I got
a "Flick" 'folder' in the sidebar, which had
sub-folders which were all my flickr "sets" (now
"albums") and I could drag any photo to any set at
any time.

android:
You're a dev. This is what is called business
opportunity!

Sandman:
Nope, since I'm not the developer of Lightroom.

android:
The outside of the box thingy ain't you is it???

Sandman:
"outside the box" won't help Lightroom,
unfortunately.

android:
You could make a droplet for the dock or something, you lazy
bum! ;-p

Sandman:
That wouldn't help, since Lightroom's drag'n'drop functionality is
broken.

Humpf!

Sandman:
Also, it wouldn't solve the aforementioned problem either.

Humpf!

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up. It's a nuisance.

--
Sandman

On 2015-05-06 02:22:27 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On 5 May 2015 05:37:45 GMT, Sandman wrote:

In article , Andreas
Skitsnack wrote:

Sandman:
That wouldn't help, since Lightroom's drag'n'drop functionality is
broken.

That which was never present can hardly be said to be broken.

Huh? Lightroom's drag'n'drop functionality does exist, it just that it
drags the
wrong file and shows feedback to the user with makes the operation unintuitive

I consider the inability to drag and drop in LR to be a disadvantage
in using LR. For example, I sometimes want to re-naming a series of
photographs so they will fall in a particular order in some other
app. In FastStone (a free photo viewer), I can do this by dragging
and dropping the images to the order I want and then re-naming in
sequence.

Ah, that's not generally called "drag'n'drop",

I don't know what else you'd call it. What else could it be called? A
file is dragged to a new location and then dropped.

at least not in this sense, even
though you are both dragging and dropping. I am in reference to the OS sense of
drag'n'drop where you drag and drop file (aliases), which is also what Android
was in reference to (drag to the dock).

I can work around the disadvantage by deleting the LR images,
re-naming outside of LR and then re-importing the revised structure,
but that's extra work.

Yeah, LR doesn't have manual sorting. Not sure if that's ever been a
problem for
me though. But there is an easier solution for your problem - set LR to sort by
filename (which I'm assuming you already have), and then in the metadata panel,
change the filename of the file. No need to rename outside of LR and re-import.

That is not a simpler method when, say, a series of 50 images is
rearranged. I already have LR set to sort by file name and I use
numerical files names (2015-05-05-01) Manually renaming each of those
files not only takes quite a bit of time, but you have to go about it
without duplicating numbers.

So, if 2015-05-05-01 should be 2015-05-05-06 in the new sequence, you
have to change the present 2015-05-05-06 or the new 2015-05-05-06 will
be 2015-05-05-01-1. All the -1's would need to be renamed again.

Doing it outside of LR and re-importing is much faster and less
complicated if there's a large number of files to rearrange. Outside
of LR, I can drag and drop to the new sequence and then rename the
entire group at once.


Whatever, though, it's my problem and I deal with it.

I don't see why you guys are complicating things.

In LR Library Module select a folder or collection. Let's say "Little
League 5-2-2015".
Select all (command + A). From the Menu go to Library- "Rename File"
Now you will be able to name the first file (& Start number) let's say
"game-0001.dng" in the sequence and all those selected files will be
named and numbered in sequence.

So now if you want to move files around to rearrange the sequence, a
little thought has to come into play.

Consider game-0001.dng: "game-0002.dng"; "game-0003.dng"; et seq, to
"game-0045.dng" and you want "game-0027.dng" in position #3. Just
rename "game-0027.dng" to "game-0002A.dng". If you now want
"game-0031.dng" in position #4, rename it "game-0002B.dng", and so on.

I am not saying that it is the perfect, or favored solution, I am sure
that somebody else will come up with something better, it is just a
solution using the tools in LR.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article ,
Tony Cooper wrote:

Turns out, though, that the job isn't over. Both grandsons were named
to the league's All Star team (the only two from their team) so I'll
have another series of games to photograph.

Ain't life a bitch!
--
teleportation kills

On Wed, 06 May 2015 00:31:28 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

On Tue, 5 May 2015 19:52:01 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

Yeah, LR doesn't have manual sorting. Not sure if that's ever been a
problem for
me though. But there is an easier solution for your problem - set LR to sort by
filename (which I'm assuming you already have), and then in the metadata panel,
change the filename of the file. No need to rename outside of LR and re-import.

That is not a simpler method when, say, a series of 50 images is
rearranged. I already have LR set to sort by file name and I use
numerical files names (2015-05-05-01) Manually renaming each of those
files not only takes quite a bit of time, but you have to go about it
without duplicating numbers.

So, if 2015-05-05-01 should be 2015-05-05-06 in the new sequence, you
have to change the present 2015-05-05-06 or the new 2015-05-05-06 will
be 2015-05-05-01-1. All the -1's would need to be renamed again.

Doing it outside of LR and re-importing is much faster and less
complicated if there's a large number of files to rearrange. Outside
of LR, I can drag and drop to the new sequence and then rename the
entire group at once.


Whatever, though, it's my problem and I deal with it.

I don't see why you guys are complicating things.

In LR Library Module select a folder or collection. Let's say "Little
League 5-2-2015".
Select all (command + A). From the Menu go to Library- "Rename File"
Now you will be able to name the first file (& Start number) let's say
"game-0001.dng" in the sequence and all those selected files will be
named and numbered in sequence.

So now if you want to move files around to rearrange the sequence, a
little thought has to come into play.

Consider game-0001.dng: "game-0002.dng"; "game-0003.dng"; et seq, to
"game-0045.dng" and you want "game-0027.dng" in position #3. Just
rename "game-0027.dng" to "game-0002A.dng". If you now want
"game-0031.dng" in position #4, rename it "game-0002B.dng", and so on.

I am not saying that it is the perfect, or favored solution, I am sure
that somebody else will come up with something better,

Sure, that works for four examples or any relatively limited number
But, what I'm talking about is rearranging 100, or sometimes over
150, shots. I download all to LR because I use a preset I developed
that may not be the final edit, but brings me close.

With a large quantity like this, I can delete them from LR, rearrange
them in the original file to which I downloaded them using FastStone
or Bridge by dragging and dropping or gathering like shots using
stars, rename them in the sequence I want, and then re-import them
into LR. Nothing is lost in the process, and a great deal of time is
saved.

Your system involves renaming each individual file after determining
where it should fall in sequence.

The reason I've had to work out the most efficient system is that in
the last two months I've shot 16 baseball games in which my two
grandsons were players. I've averaged over 150 shots per game.

I put up a gallery for each game of about 30 shots per gallery on the
league's website, and make an effort to include each of the 13 team
members in two shots. To pick the two I want of each player, I sort
each player's photographs so they run in sequence, and then pick the
two or more best ones of each player. This is easiest when each
player's shots are in a sequence.

After arriving at my 30 or so best shots, I then rearrange them again
so they in a pleasing format so each boy's photographs are spread out.
Then, I rename so the sequence appears this way in the gallery which
is set to show files in number sequence.

Tonight's game was supposed to be last game because it's the end of
the regular season. When tonight's are done, all the photos will be
burned to DVDs and each boy on the team will be given a disk.

Turns out, though, that the job isn't over. Both grandsons were named
to the league's All Star team (the only two from their team) so I'll
have another series of games to photograph. The All Star team will
compete in a interleague series against other Babe Ruth league All
Stars from other cities.

During the season I tried several ways to cull the photos down to the
30 I want. I tried using the rating stars and other ways. The system
I described above works the best for me.

I should mention that during the first run-through I permanently
delete the obvious misses. The 30 or so images in the final set are
renumbered (date)-01 to (date)-30 (or whatever the ending number is)
and the rest are numbered (date)-101 and up. They're kept, but not
used for the gallery. Sometimes the 101 and up images are good
images, but more than I need for the gallery. Some of the parents
want extra images of their son and I email them these, and some of the
extras are of my own grandsons.

it is just a solution using the tools in LR.

There's no reason to use just LR if using a combination of LR and
something else works better.

If you select a photo in LR, and then press F2, a rename dialogue
opens. Just stick a '1', or "A1", or anything unique in front of the
existing file name, something that you are certain LR will sort on
first, and in the order you desire. After they are sorted in the
preview pane, you can easily select them all, and do whatever you want
with them, including copying them to a new collection. I suppose it
might be even easier in the grid view. That rename dialogue also has a
renaming options dropdown list that you might find useful.

On Wed, 06 May 2015 01:58:51 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

If you read what I wrote, renaming up to 150 photos one at a time is
what I'm avoiding.

What I read is that you are using only about 30 of the photos. That's
all you need to rename.