Ask Tim Grey

Today’s Question: When I make a synchronized collection public [in Lightroom Classic] and use the provided link to view the collection, the images seem to be in some random order and I can’t find any way to force them to sort, such as by capture time. If I log into Lightroom in a browser and look at the collection it is sorted the same way as I see it in Lightroom Classic. Is there any way to change the sort order when using the link?

Tim’s Quick Answer: You can set the sort order for a public collection by using the Custom Order option for sorting the images in the collection in Lightroom Classic.

More Detail: When you enable synchronization for a collection in Lightroom Classic, that collection can be viewed from virtually anywhere with an internet connection using the Lightroom app on a mobile device or in a web browser by signing in at https://lightroom.adobe.com.

In addition, you can make a synchronized collection public so that anyone can view the images in that collection if you share the link for that public collection with them. To make a synchronized collection public go to the grid view display for the collection and click the “Make Public” button found at the top-right of the thumbnails of pixels in the grid view.

A custom link will appear to the left of the button, which at this point will be labeled “Make Private”. You can click the link to open the collection in a web browser, or right-click on the link and choose “Copy to Clipboard” so you can then paste the link to send to someone else, such as via email or text message.

If you want the images in the public album to be sorted in a specific order, you should set the sort order to “Custom Order” using the Sort popup below the grid view display when viewing the collection. After selecting “Custom Order” you can drag the thumbnails around to change the order of the images to anything you like. Once those changes have had a chance to synchronize to the cloud, you can refresh the web browser to update the sort order for the public album.

If the sort order appears completely random when you initially make the synchronized collection public, I suspect it is because you had previously adjusted the Custom Order sort for that collection of images. Otherwise, the images would generally be sorted by capture time rather than a random order. Fortunately, however, you can use the Custom Order sort option to change the order to anything you’d like, and the updates will be synchronized to the cloud.

Today’s Question: I’ve heard you talk several times about using star ratings and color labels as options for marking your photos in Lightroom Classic. Is there a reason you don’t use pick flags instead of star ratings to identify your best photos?

Tim’s Quick Answer: The key reasons I prefer star ratings over the pick flag are that the pick flag and the related reject flag are not supported as a standard metadata field, and star ratings provide the ability to stack-rank photos.

More Detail: The main reason I don’t use the pick flag attribute in Lightroom Classic is that this option is not part of an established metadata standard. That means the pick (and reject) flag is only supported within the Lightroom Classic catalog. Other software would not be able to see the pick (or reject) flag, and if I lost my Lightroom Classic catalog I would lose these attributes altogether.

Because of this issue, I treat the pick and reject flags as “temporary” settings, because I would lose them if I ever lost my catalog. I use a reject flag to mark photos for deletion, but I don’t use a pick flag to mark favorite photos.

Instead, I use star ratings to identify favorite photos. Another key reason I prefer star ratings for this purpose is that they provide a stack-ranking capability, meaning there is a difference between a “favorite” photo and a “very best” photos.

As a very broad way of thinking about the way I use star ratings, I start with a one-star rating for any image that is a “keeper”, meaning a photo I think I might possibly use for some purpose. A two-star rating represents a favorite from a given photo trip or outing. Three stars is for images that can be thought as being a best photo of the year, while four stars is the rating I think of as being “best of the decade”. A five-star rating to me signifies “best of all time”, meaning an image I would put in my portfolio of very best photos.

I also use color labels as a supplemental tool in my workflow, with a red color label being used to mark photos (and folders) that still need to be reviewed to identify favorites and outtakes.

Once I’ve reviewed all photos from a given trip or outing I will review the photos I marked with a reject flag, and delete those photos once I’m confident I really don’t need to keep any of them.

By the way, I cover my full workflow for identifying favorite photos versus outtakes in the “Identifying Favorites and Outtakes” lesson included in my “Lightroom Lectures” course featuring long-form lessons on key topics in Lightroom Classic. This course is included in the “Mastering Lightroom Classic” bundle that you can find on the GreyLearning website here:

https://www.greylearning.com/bundles/lightroom-classic-bundle

Today’s Question: Is there a way in Lightroom Classic to search for photos captured on a particular date but for any year? For example, could I find all photos captured on my birthday or wedding anniversary for all years?

Tim’s Quick Answer: Yes, you can search for all photos captured on a given date (month and day) for any year using the Month and Day options on the Metadata tab of the Library Filter bar in Lightroom Classic.

More Detail: I suspect most photographers using Lightroom Classic are aware that they can search for photos based on a specific date or range of dates using the Date column on the Metadata tab of the Library Filter bar. What I find many photographers don’t appreciate is the potential value of the Month and Day columns.

With the Date column on the Metadata tab of the Library Filter bar you can select an individual date or range of dates. You can also select an individual month or group of months, as well as a year or group of years. But this option mostly enables you to select a range of dates, since it wouldn’t be very easy to select a single month for every year that is represented by the metadata of your photos, for example.

However, the Month and Day columns make this task an easy one to accomplish.

To start off, you’ll want to select the “All Photographs” collection from the Catalog section near the top of the left panel in the Library module, so you’re viewing all photographs in your entire Lightroom Classic catalog.

Next, select Month from the popup on the heading for one of the columns on the Metadata tab of the Library Filter bar. You would generally use the left-most column for this purpose unless you needed to specify other filter criteria first. For example, since my birthday is in May I might select “May” from the Month column after selecting “Month” from the popup in the first column of the Metadata tab.

You can then select “Day” from the popup at the header for the column to the right of the column that is currently set to Month. Then select the specific date for the selected month that you want to search for. For example, my birthday is on May 20th, so I could select “20” from the “Day” column.

At this point the grid view display will show every single image that was (in my example) captured on May 20th of any year, based on the metadata for the photos in my Lightroom Classic catalog. I could, of course, use other criteria to further filter the photos. For example, I might use another column on the Metadata tab, or I could use the Attribute tab to specify a star rating as an additional setting for my filter.

The point is that the Month and Day columns on the Metadata tab of the Library Filter bar make it easy to locate photos captured in a specific month or on a specific date, but for any year for which you have captured photos.

And happy birthday or anniversary, as the case may be!

Today’s Question: I greatly enjoyed your class on “Find Any Photo” as part of the Lightroom Virtual Summit. One follow-up question: You mentioned that smart collections are like saved search results. You also talked about saving a search. When would you use one over the other?

Tim’s Quick Answer: In general, I would say that a smart collection is the better solution if you want the search to be more easily discovered and active across your entire Lightroom Classic catalog. A saved search is the better option when you want to search a particular folder or collection for photos that match specific criteria, rather than searching across your entire catalog.

More Detail: I think it is a good analogy to think of a smart collection as a saved search result. After all, you create a smart collection by specifying the search (or filter) criteria you want to use for the smart collection. For example, you might create a smart collection for “Best Sunsets” that includes photos that have “sunset” as a keyword with a star rating of 3-stars or more. This smart collection would then automatically include all photos in your entire catalog that match both criteria.

Similarly, you could specify the same criteria using the Library Filter bar, and then save those filter settings using the popup at the top-right of the Library Filter bar (or at the top-right of the filmstrip). The key difference is that when you select a saved search with the Library Filter bar, the filter criteria will only be applied based on the current folder or collection.

If you are browsing the “All Photographs” collection in the Catalog section of the left panel in the Library module when you select a saved search from the Library Filter bar, then the results will be the same as a smart collection with the same criteria. However, you could also navigate to a particular folder or collection first so that only photos in the location you’re currently browsing that also match the filter criteria will be displayed.

So, both a smart collection and a saved search are effectively saved searches. The only real difference is scope. A smart collection searches across your entire catalog unless you’ve included a folder or collection location as part of the filter criteria. A saved search on the Library Filter bar will only show images that match the specified criteria in the location you’re currently browsing.

Today’s Question: I have a desktop [older] version of Photoshop 6 and don’t want a subscription. I tried Lightroom but didn’t like it. Wondering if the new version of Photoshop Elements is a better alternative with updated features beyond Photoshop 6? Any experience or thoughts appreciated.

Tim’s Quick Answer: Photoshop Elements is a reasonable alternative to Photoshop for photographers, though it does lack some of the power of Photoshop. I do think the Adobe Creative Cloud Photography Plan (https://timgrey.me/ccplans) represents a good overall value for photographers. If you don’t want a subscription plan, another option worth looking at is Affinity Photo (https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/photo/).

More Detail: There are a variety of software tools that aim to compete on some level with Adobe Photoshop. In fact, there are several new entrants to the market that I am currently evaluating and will be reporting on soon.

In the meantime, I think Affinity Photo may be a better solution for photographers than Photoshop Elements in terms of providing more features that are closer to the power of Photoshop. You can learn more about Affinity Photo here:

https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/photo/

Of course, I also think it makes sense for photographers to consider getting past the understandable frustration of the subscription model for software, especially considering that such a large number of software tools are now available only via subscription. You can learn more about the options for the Creative Cloud Photography Plan here:

https://timgrey.me/ccplans

Today’s Question: How far apart, physically, from each other do you keep the two backup drives?

Tim’s Quick Answer: I recommend keeping backup copies of your data at two different locations, though for my local backups I do keep all copies at my office when I’m not traveling. I supplement this local backup, however, with an online backup using Backblaze (https://timgrey.me/onlinebackup).

More Detail: Under ideal circumstances I recommend keeping copies of your local backups of photos and other important data at two separate physical locations. In practice, of course, this is not always particularly feasible.

For my local backups I do keep the original and both backup copies in separate rooms at my office, though I do have the partial comfort of the fact that the building is protected by fire sprinklers. I should keep an additional local copy at my storage unit across town, but the reality is that I don’t.

When I’m traveling (which is significantly less than it used to be due to the pandemic) I carry the original and one backup for my key data, leaving another backup at my home office.

It is less than ideal to keep all backup copies at the same physical location in terms of the potential for losing all data should the location itself be seriously damaged or destroyed. While I should add an additional backup at a different location, I instead supplement my local backups with an online backup using Backblaze (https://timgrey.me/onlinebackup).

Admittedly, at times the online backup will lag behind my local backup since the online backup by its nature requires an internet connection. However in practice since I’m not adding a significant amount of data at any given time and my internet connection is quite fast, my online backup is able to keep up with my ongoing data production. The initial backup with Backblaze can require considerable time, but ongoing backup updates generally won’t take much time at all.

Using a third-party service for a remote backup isn’t quite perfect in terms of not being able to personally manage that data storage, but in the context of my overall backup workflow I’m comfortable with the system I’ve implemented. After all, so far (knock on wood) the only reason I’ve had to recover from a backup is that a drive has failed (multiple times) or because I’ve accidentally deleted files (this is rare, fortunately).

At some point if I do experience a catastrophic data loss at home, I’m sure I’ll get more serious about maintaining backup copies at multiple physical locations that I directly control. But for now I feel that my backup workflow is working very well for me.

Today’s Question: I’m in the process of creating my first GoodSync backups of both my C drive [with the operating system] and my internal Photos drive (E). If I need to restore my main hard drive as you described in the Sept. 27 newsletter, is it really as simple as plugging in the backup drive? Another colleague said the backup was not a bootable drive, meaning it would not allow me to start the machine. Thanks for any clarification.

Tim’s Quick Answer: Recovering from a failed bootable hard drive would not be as simple as simply installing the backup drive in place of the failed drive if you had used software such as GoodSync (http://timgrey.me/greybackup) to create a synchronized backup. For secondary drives (such as the E: drive in this example) the synchronized backup would provide an easy recovery solution.

More Detail: If the bootable hard drive that contains the operating system were to fail (on either a Windows or Macintosh computer) recovery would not be as simple as replacing the failed drive with the backup drive. Rather, a recovery process would be necessary, which could involve installing the operating system fresh. This is something I would recommend in any event because the failed drive could have created corruption issues that would be reflected in the backup as well.

You can recover from a full system backup using tools provided as part of the operating system. For Windows that means using the Backup and Restore feature in the System and Maintenance section of Control Panel. For Macintosh users that means maintaining a Time Machine backup of the system hard drive. In both cases these backups can streamline the recovery process, but that will still involve an actual restore process rather than just swapping out a hard drive.

For non-bootable hard drives that only contain user data, a GoodSync backup will indeed enable you to simply swap out the failed drive with a backup drive, and then make sure the replacement drive has the same drive letter (Windows) or volume label (Macintosh) so that data will still be found where it is expected for software such as Lightroom Classic.

You can still use GoodSync to back up your personal data on the system hard drive, such as the documents, pictures, and downloads folders. However, I do not recommend backing up the entire system hard drive with GoodSync. In fact, in the latest version of GoodSync in won’t even allow you to create a backup that includes all system files.

So, for data-only drives you can create a backup that is a clone of the original drive using GoodSync, and recovering from a failure will be simple. For the bootable system drive you can back up your personal data, and recovery would involve copying that data again to the system drive after you have recovered the operating system and applications to that drive.