Keyword Hierachies

[becksnyc]

Lightroom Version Number

LrC 9.3

Operating System

1. Windows 10

I'm doing a moth survey this summer. I've started to nestle my existing keywords for insect taxonomy into keyword hierachies. I tested to see if photos with said keyword structure export with the entire string written to the metadata. They do.
However, when I tag a moth with the species name which has already been put in a hierarchy, the hierarchy is not offered nor does it show in the "Keyword Tags" box. Shouldn't I see the whole hierarchy ie: "Norape ovina<Troslinae<Megalopygidae<and so on up to<Animalia when the lowest in the series is entered?
Using keyword lists by filtering is fine, if I've already copy/pasted in the latin names.
And when I create a structure, do I have to use the keyword list and check off each of the keywords in the entire hierarchy? Can't they be entered automatically, somehow?
Thanks!

 

[clee01l]

I'm doing a moth survey this summer. I've started to nestle my existing keywords for insect taxonomy into keyword hierachies. I tested to see if photos with said keyword structure export with the entire string written to the metadata. They do.
However, when I tag a moth with the species name which has already been put in a hierarchy, the hierarchy is not offered nor does it show in the "Keyword Tags" box. Shouldn't I see the whole hierarchy ie: "Norape ovinaUsing keyword lists by filtering is fine, if I've already copy/pasted in the latin names.
And when I create a structure, do I have to use the keyword list and check off each of the keywords in the entire hierarchy? Can't they be entered automatically, somehow?
Thanks!

You will only see this heirarchy if “Norape ovina”. Is present in more than one hierarchy for disambiguation.

If the hierarchy parents are set to export, then they will be present on export.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[becksnyc]

Thank you, Mr. Lee. So the only way I can see the heirarchy is by filtering or scrolling through the keywordlist? Any suggestions for easily determining which insects aren't assigned to a keyword heirachy?

 

[clee01l]

Thank you, Mr. Lee. So the only way I can see the heirarchy is by filtering or scrolling through the keywordlist? Any suggestions for easily determining which insects aren't assigned to a keyword heirachy?

If a keyword has no parents (i.e. it is at the top most level) then it is not a Child of another hierarchy. So, if "“Norape ovina” is a top level keyword, it has no parents and should be assigned to a hierarchal taxonomy.
You can see this be collapsing all of the parent keywords in the Keyword List panel, You can also set up a column for hierarchial keywords in the metadata filter bar.

 

[becksnyc]

Unfortunately, I came late to the party and have thousands of keywords without parents. Enough to start an orphanage.

 

[clee01l]

Unfortunately, I came late to the party and have thousands of keywords without parents. Enough to start an orphanage.

It looks like you have your work cut out for you. There is one very technical geeky way that I can think of to ID keywords without parents. The Lightroom Catalog is a database and in the database file is a table that lists the keywords. Each keyword has a column that points to its parent (if there is one) A person with a knowledge of SQL (Structured Query Language) could use a data base manager app to examine that table and produce a list of keywords with no parents. With such a list, you could go back to your catalog and remediate ant parentless species keywords.

John Beardsworth also has some plugin apps that work with Lightroom. I do not know if any of his plugins will help here.

 

[johnbeardy]

While I wouldn't recommend going down the SQL route, there isn't really a plugin that helps in this area. I think part of the reason is that keyword reorganisation tasks aren't as generic as other tasks, and also LR doesn't make it easy to detect which keywords the user wants to change - so you have to build a UI to do so, and for a task that varies between users. So I do have scripts that loop through all keywords doing specific things like making them exportable, but not a general tool.

I'm not a big fan of hierarchical keywords, partly because I feel people (me included) end up spending time organising neat keyword families that can't be devoted to applying many more. But they do work when there is an accepted taxonomy such as species. So what I would suggest is living with a flat list, adding hierarchy when it makes sense, and then sorting out a part of the keywording when you have photos that need it. It's only when you have new pictures of Sea Eagles should you add the keyword from the hierarchy and get rid of the old flat keyword.

 

[clee01l]

John has some good points. Most notably being that Lightroom (cloudy) does not support a hierarchical keyword structure. And if you export an image and add that image file to your current catalog, the keywords get exported back as a flat list.

I had a taxonomical keyword hierarchy in my complete keyword list and over the years, it is a mess due to the two reasons I just listed.

What I have been doing lately, is adding a common name keyword and adding a binomial name as a synonym.

What might be a better solution is the use of Collection Sets. Troslinae, Megalopygidae etc. up to Animalia would all become Collection set or subset.
“Norape ovina” would be a collection of images for that species.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[becksnyc]

While I wouldn't recommend going down the SQL route, there isn't really a plugin that helps in this area. I think part of the reason is that keyword reorganisation tasks aren't as generic as other tasks, and also LR doesn't make it easy to detect which keywords the user wants to change - so you have to build a UI to do so, and for a task that varies between users. So I do have scripts that loop through all keywords doing specific things like making them exportable, but not a general tool.

I'm not a big fan of hierarchical keywords, partly because I feel people (me included) end up spending time organising neat keyword families that can't be devoted to applying many more. But they do work when there is an accepted taxonomy such as species. So what I would suggest is living with a flat list, adding hierarchy when it makes sense, and then sorting out a part of the keywording when you have photos that need it. It's only when you have new pictures of Sea Eagles should you add the keyword from the hierarchy and get rid of the old flat keyword.

I attempted keyword organization in the past, but was frustrated because I had to use "filter keywords" to even see the keywords (due to the limitation on how many can show---I think Windows OS limits it to 999???). It's hard to organize what you cannot see. I subdivided the keywords by nestling them under _A_, _B_, _C_, etc. That helped, but it's just ridiculous that simple organizational tasks aren't easier. I will likely put my taxonomy project into _000_ to keep it at the top of the list, then use the check marks to add the drop-down hierarchies I've created for the insects. SQL is beyond my geekiness.
BTW, I had asked if you had to manually add a check mark to each work in a hierarchy for all words to show, I don't think that was answered?
Thanks so much.

 

[becksnyc]

John has some good points. Most notably being that Lightroom (cloudy) does not support a hierarchical keyword structure. And if you export an image and add that image file to your current catalog, the keywords get exported back as a flat list.

I had a taxonomical keyword hierarchy in my complete keyword list and over the years, it is a mess due to the two reasons I just listed.

What I have been doing lately, is adding a common name keyword and adding a binomial name as a synonym.

What might be a better solution is the use of Collection Sets. Troslinae, Megalopygidae etc. up to Animalia would all become Collection set or subset.
“Norape ovina” would be a collection of images for that species.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Can you please give an example, so I know what you mean by "common name keyword" and "binomial name as a synonym?" Thanks
I am trying to imagine your collection set scenario. With the limitations to two levels per collection, how would you employ that suggestion? You are saying collection, "Family" with subset "species"? Smart collections that auto-create when a certain tag is added? I'm rusty on collections, as I mentioned.
I found a taxonomy chart for Lepidoptera, so I can ditch the folders now that I have a better visual for the organization available on paper.

 

[clee01l]

Can you please give an example, so I know what you mean by "common name keyword" and "binomial name as a synonym?" Thanks
I am trying to imagine your collection set scenario. With the limitations to two levels per collection, how would you employ that suggestion? You are saying collection, "Family" with subset "species"? Smart collections that auto-create when a certain tag is added? I'm rusty on collections, as I mentioned.
I found a taxonomy chart for Lepidoptera, so I can ditch the folders now that I have a better visual for the organization available on paper.

. My Keyword Tag for the Gulf Fritillary (Butterfly). You could reverse that and use binomial name for the Keyword and have (multiple) common names as synonyms.

Here is how I would envision the Collection sets that would have the Gulf Fritillary as a member as a species collection "vanillae". You could break the Phyla down into sub-phyla and the Orders into sub orders and create superfamilies subfamilies and tribes of families depending upon how granular you want your collections/collection sets to be

 

[PhilBurton]

While I wouldn't recommend going down the SQL route, there isn't really a plugin that helps in this area. I think part of the reason is that keyword reorganisation tasks aren't as generic as other tasks, and also LR doesn't make it easy to detect which keywords the user wants to change - so you have to build a UI to do so, and for a task that varies between users. So I do have scripts that loop through all keywords doing specific things like making them exportable, but not a general tool.

I'm not a big fan of hierarchical keywords, partly because I feel people (me included) end up spending time organising neat keyword families that can't be devoted to applying many more. But they do work when there is an accepted taxonomy such as species. So what I would suggest is living with a flat list, adding hierarchy when it makes sense, and then sorting out a part of the keywording when you have photos that need it. It's only when you have new pictures of Sea Eagles should you add the keyword from the hierarchy and get rid of the old flat keyword.

May I offer some perspective to what John just wrote. For some keywords, such as Location, it seems to make sense to have a hierarchy. For example, the USA has 50 states. If I add in all 50 (plus synonyms at the get-go, then I have to scroll through a long list of flat keywords to find a state such as Oklahoma. However, if I have country keyword USA, and then states as keywords, it's easier to find Oklahoma or Washington State. Even better, I don't have to add state level keywords until I actually need them. Same for any other keyword parent which can have a large number of child keywords, most of which I will never need.
In my case, as a railroad hobbyist, I could have literally hundreds of names of US railroads alone, most of which no longer exist as separate companies, but for some small fraction, I do have photographs of these systems when these corporations still exist, or old equipment preserved in a museum or railway preservation society. There were four main railroads in the UK prior to the 1948 nationalization, and some similar number in France. For my purposes, it's easier to create a hierarchy of "parent keywords," to which I will add child keywords as needed.

If there is a better way to address my concern here with flat keywords, I would love to hear about it. This forum has many people who are more experienced with Lightroom than I am.

Phil Burton

 

[becksnyc]

. My Keyword Tag for the Gulf Fritillary (Butterfly). You could reverse that and use binomial name for the Keyword and have (multiple) common names as synonyms.

View attachment 15086

Here is how I would envision the Collection sets that would have the Gulf Fritillary as a member as a species collection "vanillae". You could break the Phyla down into sub-phyla and the Orders into sub orders and create superfamilies subfamilies and tribes of families depending upon how granular you want your collections/collection sets to be
View attachment 15088

Thank you, it's obvious I was mistaken about created nested Collection Sets. I appreciate the help.

 

[becksnyc]

May I offer some perspective to what John just wrote. For some keywords, such as Location, it seems to make sense to have a hierarchy. For example, the USA has 50 states. If I add in all 50 (plus synonyms at the get-go, then I have to scroll through a long list of flat keywords to find a state such as Oklahoma. However, if I have country keyword USA, and then states as keywords, it's easier to find Oklahoma or Washington State. Even better, I don't have to add state level keywords until I actually need them. Same for any other keyword parent which can have a large number of child keywords, most of which I will never need.
In my case, as a railroad hobbyist, I could have literally hundreds of names of US railroads alone, most of which no longer exist as separate companies, but for some small fraction, I do have photographs of these systems when these corporations still exist, or old equipment preserved in a museum or railway preservation society. There were four main railroads in the UK prior to the 1948 nationalization, and some similar number in France. For my purposes, it's easier to create a hierarchy of "parent keywords," to which I will add child keywords as needed.

If there is a better way to address my concern here with flat keywords, I would love to hear about it. This forum has many people who are more experienced with Lightroom than I am.

Phil Burton

Thanks for your input. My main reason for creating a hierarchy for this project was to make the insect classification readily visible (to learn as I go).
However, my previous attempts at creating hierarchical keywords was simply to be able to SEE my keywords. Due to Windows limitations, at a certain number, I can no longer scroll down through the list.
I also, stupidly, applied more general keywords like "moth, insect" and now am trying to use Anyfilter plugin to figure out how to find photos with those keywords but without species keywords. Learning curve.