Behavior when applying data to full version set

[OldRadioGuy]

When adding information to the "Description" field under Details -> Descriptions, if I check Apply to full version set, the previously entered data is deleted, and I have to start with an empty field.

Is this the intended behavior of this operation, or is it just me being a dunce, still learning the software?

Bob

[fbungarz]

Is this the intended behavior of this operation, or is it just me being a dunce, still learning the software?

I think it is an unfortunate consequence of PSU's behavior not to display metadata if several images are selected. There is probably a Mantis feature request, but I think Hert is loath to implement such a feature for fear it has the potential to slow down or even freeze the application. The problem is that across several images metadata can be significantly different and even if only the matching data fields were to display their content this would incur require an enormous amount of data to be checked - if a large amount of images are selected.

[vlad]

Frank may be right about the "unfortunate consequence" part, but I still consider the behavior reported by OldRadioGuy to be odd (sub-optimal) from the user's perspective.

PSU could at least preserve (for display + further editing) the text or values of those metadata fields that have been edited (added or changed) right before checking "Apply to full version set". (Perhaps they should also be highlighted, to make clear that they will replace any prior values in those metadata fields.) Such an improvement wouldn't require any costly checks on existing metadata.

[vlad]

That's funny: I've just noticed that the highlighting of label properties about to be changed (overwritten) is already implemented in the label details panel, whenever multiple labels are selected and edited at the same time. A very nice touch - and a perfect example of how simple refinements could improve the user experience! Let's hope a similar refinement will make its way to the Image Details panel too.

[space]

I'm glad someone has brought this up. Its now become my biggest bug bear when using PSu. If Lightroom can manage this, can't see why PSu can't do the same. In LR, if you select a bunch of images, it easy to see which items of metadata are common to all images and which are not - as in who took the picture, their title, who the description write was, email address, URL and so forth. And, if they are not the same - as they should be in most cases - where there usually only one personn using the application, etc.

Case in point, I've just changed my web site URL. Meaning to say I've now got to change and insert the new URL across all my images - as in 135,000 of them. If LR was my preferred DAM (which its not), this change is so easy to implement. With PSu, its a touch heavy handed. And, even then, there's always some doubt whether these changes have been applied to all the selected images.

While on topic, for the life of me, cannot figure out why some fields have an auto-complete thing going - as in typing in Ph and getting Photographer and yet, when it comes to email addresses, URLs and few other items - there's nothing. Again, with Lightroom, no issue. Seems like maybe I need to do a Mantis thing here or something? Observations people, observations...

[vlad]

In LR, if you select a bunch of images, it easy to see which items of metadata are common to all images and which are not - as in who took the picture, their title, who the description write was, email address, URL and so forth.

Are you saying it's easy to see all common metadata - and that function works reasonably well (fast) even for 135,000 images?

And, if they are not the same - as they should be in most cases - where there usually only one personn using the application, etc.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean here. What happens if 134,999 images share a common URL and the 135,000th image is missing the URL or is storing a different one?

Case in point, I've just changed my web site URL. Meaning to say I've now got to change and insert the new URL across all my images - as in 135,000 of them. If LR was my preferred DAM (which its not), this change is so easy to implement. With PSu, its a touch heavy handed. And, even then, there's always some doubt whether these changes have been applied to all the selected images.

Yep, I could see how that's a concern (especially for 135,000 images).