Small bug in LR ?

[Bernard]

Lightroom Version Number

8.3.1

Operating System

1. Windows 10

I think I found a small bug in LR, and I would like someone to confirm please.
. create a virtual copy #1
. create a virtual copy #2
. delete VC #1
. create a VC : it will be named VC #2 , so you have now two VC with the same name.
. but if you create a VC now, it will be #3 !! Strange ...

LR classic 8.3.1 , Windows 10

Bernard

 

[ColMac9090]

Seems to happen this way on my version

 

[clee01l]

I don't think this is a bug but an example of how LR names multiples. If you let LR Create the Virtual Copy name, it will default to adding the count to the number of virtual copies present. Your Second Copy was named "Copy 2". When you deleted "Copy 1", you did not change the name of Copy 2. In the Catalog, LR maintains a distinction of the Virtual Copies that does not depend on the Copy Name Field. The value in the Copy Name field is simple a string of characters with no intelligence built in. Lightroom simply add +1 to the current number of Virtual Copies in the array and appends that number to the character string "Copy". FWIW, the Master Copy is no different from the Virtual Copy other than the copy name has a NULL value and (I think) it is designated instance (0) since the instance counter in the programing language starts at "0". You can also promote a Virtual Copy to become the Master copy. Doing this does not alter the value of the Copy Name Field. So, unless you change the Copy Name field the promoted Master copy will retain the Copy Name originally assigned and this CAN be confusing.
This may be useful:
https://lightroomkillertips.com/making-use-copy-name-field-virtual-copies/

 

[Bernard]

Thanks clee01 for the explanation, which makes sense.
However, that there is an explanation does not mean, IMHO, that it's not a bug, or at least let's say an annoyance, because the result is that two photos have the same name, a situation that one tries to avoid.

 

[clee01l]

because the result is that two photos have the same name, a situation that one tries to avoid.

That should not be a problem. First, you might want to avoid files with the same name. The filesystem won't let you put two files with the same name in the same folder. Files with the same name is never a problem with LR. I have lots of files where the numbering suffix is repeated. And many duplicates of the same file name. I never rename my original files because I want to be able to recover that original copy that came off the camera card and stored in the "Make a Second Copy..." folder.
Second, the underlying file for all Master and virtual copies has the same unique file name and the Copy name is irrelevant. Unless you Give the Copy Name something meaningful, every Virtual Copy is assigned the default " "Copy n". Suggestions for Copy Name are meaning full terms like "Color", "B&W" or "Cropped". Once Changed from "Copy n" to something meaningful, then It does not matter when you set the copy to be the Master

 

[Johan Elzenga]

I never rename my original files because I want to be able to recover that original copy that came off the camera card and stored in the "Make a Second Copy..." folder.

I’m not sure I understand what you are saying here. If you do rename on import, then the backup images in the ‘Make a Second Copy’ folder will be renamed as well.

 

[clee01l]

I’m not sure I understand what you are saying here.

Repeating: "I never rename my original files". Should I need to go back to the "Make a Second Copy "folder or the original camera card, there always is a 1:1 correspondence in file names.

 

[Johan Elzenga]

OK, now it’s clear. I know you don’t rename. My confusion was that if you do rename, then your second copy will be renamed too, so you’ll keep a 1:1 correspondence between the file name in Lightroom and in the second copy folder. Because most people, including me, reformat their camera card to reuse it, I didn’t realise you want to keep that correspondence with the camera card too.

BTW, since the last update of Lightroom Classic the original file name is preserved in metadata, also when you rename on import. Previously it was only preserved if you renamed later.

 

[Bernard]

That should not be a problem.

The situation I described in the first post happened to me, it's not just trying to find bugs.
And I did not realize immediately that I had two VC of the same name, and I could not understand why some development changes were , sometimes, not applied, because I was looking at the 'other' VC #2 . Very confusing !
Despite all what you said, which I understand perfectly well, I stick to my philosophy to avoid having two photos or two VC of the same name.
Bernard

 

[PhilBurton]

BTW, since the last update of Lightroom Classic the original file name is preserved in metadata, also when you rename on import. Previously it was only preserved if you renamed later.

Nice to know. That might simplify my workflow a bit.