Odd "Moving File" problem

[RHarmon]

I've been a LR user for a long time, but now have a problem I can't seem to solve or understand.  I have quite a few files that I've sent to Photoshop for some additional work, then returned to LR for cataloging and storage.  At the moment, my original RAW files and the .tifs that I made in PS are stored in the same folders, and all are catalogued in LR.

When I try to move ONLY the .tif file to another folder -- moving the files from within LR, of course! - the ORIGINAL RAW files seem to go with them.  In other words, I want to move ONLY the .tif files, but can't seem to do it.  In every case, by highlighting the .tif and dragging it to the desired folder (in the Left Library Panel), I get two files together -- the .tif and the original RAW.

Anyone know what's going on here?  I've been VERY careful to select (highlight) ONLY the .tif... but the RAW seems to follow.

Help!

And thanks...

Robert

[RHarmon]

I've been a LR user for a long time, but now have a problem I can't seem to solve or understand.  I have quite a few files that I've sent to Photoshop for some additional work, then returned to LR for cataloging and storage.  At the moment, my original RAW files and the .tifs that I made in PS are stored in the same folders, and all are catalogued in LR.

When I try to move ONLY the .tif file to another folder -- moving the files from within LR, of course! - the ORIGINAL RAW files seem to go with them.  In other words, I want to move ONLY the .tif files, but can't seem to do it.  In every case, by highlighting the .tif and dragging it to the desired folder (in the Left Library Panel), I get two files together -- the .tif and the original RAW.

Anyone know what's going on here?  I've been VERY careful to select (highlight) ONLY the .tif... but the RAW seems to follow.

Help!

And thanks...

Robert

I think I just solved my own problem.  Will double-check this theory, but it just occurred to me that my 'derivative' images (the .tifs I make in PS and return to LR for cataloging) are probably 'stacked' with the original RAWs.  That's probably why they 'move' together when I try to put the .tifs in a different folder...  Just checked it... and all is well now.  Sorry for the silly question, but maybe this post will help someone else someday!

R

[PeterAit]

I think I just solved my own problem.  Will double-check this theory, but it just occurred to me that my 'derivative' images (the .tifs I make in PS and return to LR for cataloging) are probably 'stacked' with the original RAWs.  That's probably why they 'move' together when I try to put the .tifs in a different folder...  Just checked it... and all is well now.  Sorry for the silly question, but maybe this post will help someone else someday!

R

It occurs to me that having the RAW in one folder and the TIFF in another would defeat the cataloging aspect of LR. Couldn't you do what you want either with a collection or with an export?

[RHarmon]

It occurs to me that having the RAW in one folder and the TIFF in another would defeat the cataloging aspect of LR. Couldn't you do what you want either with a collection or with an export?

Hi, Peter...

LR can handle the cataloging fine with RAW files in one folder and their 'derivatives' in another.  In fact, as I understand it, that's what Peter Krogh ("The DAM Book" author) suggests.  It's about keeping track of what's backed up.  If you keep the derivative files in the same folder as the original RAWS, then your backups of the folder that contain both these files becomes immediate out-of-date the moment you make a new 'derivative' file.  So, the plan (again, as I understand it so far...) is to keep the original RAW files in their folder -- and ONLY the RAW originals.  So, when those folders are backed up, they are backed up FOR GOOD, and nothing new is ever added to those folders.  The derivative files are then put somewhere else (again, LR has no  problem keeping track of this, if all movement of files is done from within LR)...

Hope this makes sense to you.

R

[PeterAit]

Hi, Peter...

LR can handle the cataloging fine with RAW files in one folder and their 'derivatives' in another.  In fact, as I understand it, that's what Peter Krogh ("The DAM Book" author) suggests.  It's about keeping track of what's backed up.  If you keep the derivative files in the same folder as the original RAWS, then your backups of the folder that contain both these files becomes immediate out-of-date the moment you make a new 'derivative' file.  So, the plan (again, as I understand it so far...) is to keep the original RAW files in their folder -- and ONLY the RAW originals.  So, when those folders are backed up, they are backed up FOR GOOD, and nothing new is ever added to those folders.  The derivative files are then put somewhere else (again, LR has no  problem keeping track of this, if all movement of files is done from within LR)...

Hope this makes sense to you.

R

Yes, it makes sense to me although it would not suit the way I do things.