Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Stacking Photos in LR Library  (Read 3936 times)

Potus5

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
    • http://
Stacking Photos in LR Library
« on: April 15, 2008, 03:48:04 pm »

when I select photos to be stacked, and then ctrl-G the selected set of photos, and then click the 's' key, my photos only momentarily stack and then almost immediately go back to their original layout. If I select the photos and then go to  the menu, click on 'Photo' and then scroll down to 'Stacking' and attempt to access the 'Group into Stack' sub-menu command I find all the commands under the 'Stacking' sub-menu are greyed-out.

I'm using LR 1.4, on a PC system, with 2 Quad Core Intels, 2.4 GHz, VISTA, and 4 G of RAM.

It would seem that I've set something up, perhaps in my Preferences set up, which is not allowing me to stack pictures, however I can't find where to reset things so that I can stacj photos. Any advice?
Logged

JDClements

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
    • http://www.jdanielclements.com
Stacking Photos in LR Library
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2008, 08:19:56 pm »

Are you trying to stack photos in a "collection"?
Logged

Potus5

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
    • http://
Stacking Photos in LR Library
« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2008, 10:02:29 pm »

Quote
Are you trying to stack photos in a "collection"?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189818\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Yes, these photos are arecoded to and sitting in a single collection.

Glenn
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Stacking Photos in LR Library
« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2008, 10:39:15 pm »

Quote
Yes, these photos are arecoded to and sitting in a single collection.

Stacking don't work within collections, that's the problem. Do it from the folder.

The reason is, collections can contain images from different folder locations, so it would be problematic to say the least to allow this in a collection.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4755
    • My photography site
Stacking Photos in LR Library
« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2008, 06:06:04 am »

Quote
Stacking don't work within collections, that's the problem. Do it from the folder.

The reason is, collections can contain images from different folder locations, so it would be problematic to say the least to allow this in a collection.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189851\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
But do put in a feature request or add your voice to an existing one. Stacking really need not be limited to folders.

John
Logged

Potus5

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
    • http://
Stacking Photos in LR Library
« Reply #5 on: April 18, 2008, 09:44:41 am »

Digitaldog and John

thanks for the information - now that you remind me a recall reading that stacking could not be done from within a collection but in my day to day workflow focus in processing the photos I had fogotten that I was actually working from within a collection rather than in a single parent folder.
Logged

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4755
    • My photography site
Stacking Photos in LR Library
« Reply #6 on: April 18, 2008, 11:24:49 am »

It's a limitation that has always irritated me and prevented me making much use of stacking.

John
Logged

dreed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1715
Stacking Photos in LR Library
« Reply #7 on: August 10, 2009, 01:13:07 pm »

As a feature request, I'd like LR to have an option to automatically stack DNG files on top of raw files in the same way that it (and various other programs) automatically stack raw files on top of JPEGs.

Why do I prefer this method vs embedding the raw into the DNG?

File size.

If my raw file is size X then the DNG file is going to be roughly 2X if I embed. That means it takes twice as long to write to disk, twice as long to read from disk and longer for whatever application to process. I'm not worried about the disk space (or else I'd have it delete the raw files.)
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up