ACDSee metadata "Image Edited" is not being set in a useful way.

[greyguru]

When I'm processing a new batch of photos, I have a mix of some that have been processed in develop mode, some in edit mode, and some marked for deletion (I use the tag for that). To get a list of images I might still need to process, I thought I would be able to use the new advanced search in Ultimate 2023. I set up criteria: Image developed: False AND Image Edited: False AND Tagged False.

When I ran the search, I was seeing images that I was sure I had edited. To make a long story shorter, I eventually found out that "Image Edited" is not set in a number of cases where I would expect it to be. For instance:

• a photo merge
• a focus stack
• an image created in edit mode and saved using "save as" or "save as a copy"

The only case I've come across where it is set is when a jpg image is opened in edit mode, changed and then saved "over" the original.

I rarely use edit mode - I shoot almost exclusively RAW and almost anything I need to do I can do in develop mode, so this didn't matter much before, and anyway, I couldn't create this filtering effect in 2022 because I couldn't do a "NOT tagged" (if I recall correctly). However, this came to light because I was trying out panoramas.

Am I wrong to believe "image edited" should be set on ANY image that has been created or changed within edit mode? It would make selections like mine possible, and I contend that it's a more logical definition.

[Greyfox]

..Am I wrong to believe "image edited" should be set on [B]ANY image that has been created or changed within edit mode

Interesting topic.
I think this may be a matter of how one views the terminology.

When I edit a JPG or TIFF image in Edit mode, and click on "Save", the image has been "edited". In Manage mode, the thumbnail for that image will now show the "Edited" overlay. If the Group is set to Processed state it will be grouped under "Edited" in the table of contents.

When I edit a JPG or TIFF image in Edit mode however, and export it using an export option, then the original is unchanged (so has not been edited), and the exported image will not show the "Edited" overlay, because it is a "New" image, not an "Edited" image.

When I open a RAW image in Edit mode, and make changes that don't involve layers, then all of the options (save as, save a copy, or use one of the exports then the saved images are all "New" images in a different format, so their thumbnails don't show either the "Edited" or "Developed" overlays.

The result of a "photo merge","photo stack", or "panorama" is a new image, so not "edited". The source images used in the process are not altered, so again not "edited".

If a either a RAW, TIFF or JPG is processed in Develop mode and a "Done then Save" used, then the thumbnail will have the "Developed" overlay. If the Group is set to Processed state it will be grouped under "Developed" in the table of contents. If Export or Save as is used, the resulting image is considered New, so no overlay.

It appears that when the thumbnails have either the "Developed" or "Edited" overlays, the option to "Restore to original" is available.

[Regor250]

When I ran the search, I was seeing images that I was sure I had edited. To make a long story shorter, I eventually found out that "Image Edited" is not set in a number of cases where I would expect it to be. For instance:

• a photo merge
• a focus stack
• an image created in edit mode and saved using "save as" or "save as a copy"

V
The only case I've come across where it is set is when a jpg image is opened in edit mode, changed and then saved "over" the original.

I rarely use edit mode - I shoot almost exclusively RAW and almost anything I need to do I can do in develop mode, so this didn't matter much before, and anyway, I couldn't create this filtering effect in 2022 because I couldn't do a "NOT tagged" (if I recall correctly). However, this came to light because I was trying out panoramas.

Am I wrong to believe "image edited" should be set on ANY image that has been created or changed within edit mode? It would make selections like mine possible, and I contend that it's a more logical definition.

I agree with Greyfox and think ACDSee is quite correct. All 3 instances are not edits of an existing image, but new images by themselves and the pattern is consistent throughout; logical. That said, it would be useful if ACDSee would embed metadata into a new file stating what it is a version of what other original file to facilitate version management, then one could easily search for and even more useful group by related files that aren't exact duplicates. Right now the only way to do that is by preserving the original file name within the new name and sort by name.

[Conrad]

Late entry: I have exactly the opposite problem. When I develop the images of an assignment (or just a day out in the woods), I run a preset on all the images after selecting the good ones. This, of course, marks all the images as edited - no chance to distinguish between those that were just "preseted" and those eventually edited.

I don't think the "edit tag" has any real use. I see it more as a technical thing, and you can see it from Greyfox or greyguru side. But for me, it more or less doesn't matter. I make up my own rules and use labels and numbers to mark the images the way i need it.

[Conrad]

Just stumbled across: In the German Version there are separate Meta-Tags for "Bild bearbeitet" and "Bild entwickelt".

And BTW: Does anyone know how to search for b/w- and color pictures separately?

[Greyfox]

..When I develop the images of an assignment (or just a day out in the woods), I run a preset on all the images after selecting the good ones. This, of course, marks all the images as edited - no chance to distinguish between those that were just "preseted" and those eventually edited.

When you change an image, it doesn't matter if the change is done with a preset, or done in Develop Mode, or done in Edit mode, and it doesn't matter what exactly is changed. The iomage has been "Edited". And that is all that particular tag does, it identifies images that have been edited. There are other methods you can use if you want to identify individual stages in your particular work flow.

Like many other things in ACDSee, you don't have to use the "Edited" tag if you don't want to. Each individual will develops their own workflow, and will use or not use some of the options accordingly.

Depending on the setting in Tools\Options\Face Detection, ACDSee can set to re-run face detection on images that have been changed since the last time Face Detection was run, in case the changes (edits) have made the original detection data invalid. I don't know whether the "edited" tag is used for that option, but it might be.

I don't think the "edit tag" has any real use.

That's OK, every one is entitled to their own view.

Depending on the setting in Tools\Options]Face Detection, ACDSee can be set to re-run face detection on images that have been changed since the last time Face Detection was run, in case the changes (edits) have made the original detection data invalid. I don't know whether the "edited" tag is used for that option, but it might be.

[Greyfox]

..And BTW: Does anyone know how to search for b/w- and color pictures separately?

That begs the question "what identifies a B/W image?


This looks like a B/W image, but it is in fact a 24 bit color scan of a very old "B/W" photo.
One could assign a keywords to images they consider to be B&W, and then use that keyword in the search.

[Conrad]

Thanks Greyfox

Regarding "Edited" I guess I dindn't make my point straight. On this topic I agree 100%!

Regarding b/w - If I use the b/w-mode in Ultimate to develop a picture it should be easy for Ultimate to store this information. Of course if you import a b/w - picture I'm not sure. If it is a true b/w it shoud have only a single 8 or 16 Bit "color" space instead of 8 or 16 Bit RGB - shouldn't it?

[Regor250]

For what it's worth, for one I use the following Categories: OOC, Processed, RAW (although this one is redundant really), and Scan to manage my workflow. As for B&W, I use B&W keyword as a photographic style. The point is we all have our own needs when it comes to tagging, and ACDSee does provide a way to track just about anything thing you can think of, albeit it takes some discipline at times.

[Greyfox]

If it is a true b/w it shoud have only a single 8 or 16 Bit "color" space instead of 8 or 16 Bit RGB - shouldn't it?

No, "True" B/W would have a color depth of 1 bit (0=Black, 1=White), but one can have Greyscale images with bit depths of 2 upwards

When you convert say a JPG from a 24 bit color image to a "B/W" image in ACDSee's Edit mode, using the "Convert to Black and White" option in the Filter menu, and then execute a "Done, then Save" the resulting "Black and White" JPG image still has a 24 bit color depth, though it is visually greyscale.

Optionally you could Export the converted image as an 8 bit Greyscale JPG, or if you export as a TIFF, you have multiple color depth options as shown below. If you Export as "1 bit greyscale" then ACDSee identifies that image as "Black and White"



Here is an example of the same image exported from ACDSee as "8 bit - greyscale" and "1 bit - greyscale"



There is lots of information about color depth available on line, for example http://preservationtutorial.library..../intro-04.html

[Conrad]

Thanks a lot Greyfox - I have learned again a little bit.

Regor250 I agree that this is something that can be easily organized by keywords or categories, if you start from scratch. But I already have hundreds of b/w pictures without a special tag, so I just wondered, if Ultmate has a feature to find them easily.

[greyguru]

First, my apologies - I don't post here often, and I was rather expecting an email notification when there was activity. I have just clicked "subscribed" which might achieve that. But I'm sorry if you all thought I was ignoring your replies.

I see (apart from the separate B&W conversation) the focus has been on what the Edited tag means. I'm not arguing that it's wrongly applied, I'm arguing that it could have been more usefully applied.

Maybe it would help if I asked two questions:

(1) Does anyone make use of the edited tag as it stands? How do you use it?
(2) With the edited tag the way it is now, how can I easily select images which have not yet been processed within either EDIT or DEVELOP?

If no-one wants to change the definition of "edited", would it make any sense to add "Sent to Edit", "Part of a panorama", "Part of a focus stack" and so on, which would be rather clumsy, but at least it would allow one to string them all into a "What haven't I processed?" query.

[Greyfox]

..
(1) Does anyone make use of the edited tag as it stands? How do you use it?

Yes, I use both the Edited and Developed tags. Rarely in searches, usually by simple reference to the overlay icons for those tags on thumbnails.

I take a lot of photos of animals, many done using burst mode, and they tend to be JPG's. After the initial cull, I'm left with many images that I consider need no processing, and those that I might decide to tweak to optimize for a particular use. Mostly that tweak gets done in Develop mode, and my save method leaves the tweaked image in the source folder, and the original image retained in the [Originals] sub folder along with the xmp file with the changes made. I can easily identify which JPG's in the source folder are originals, and which have been "Developed" by the "Developed" overlay icon on the thumbnail.

A lesser quantity I sometimes chose to tweak in Edit mode, perhaps because I want to use a 3rd party plug in on them. If there has been no use of layers, or if a "flatten image" has been applied then a Save leaves the tweaked image in the source folder and places the original in the [Originals] folder. Though it doesn't save the changes themselves, it does provide the option of being able to restore the original. Those images are clearly identified by the "Edited" overlay icon on the thumbnail.

(2) With the edited tag the way it is now, how can I easily select images which have not yet been processed within either EDIT or DEVELOP?

As far as I am aware there is no automatic tags created in ACDSee which unequivocally indicates the passage of an image through any particular mode. (or through multiple modes, or in what order that might have been).

If being able to identify images that have had passage through a particular mode, or multiple modes, and perhaps even what order that might have been in, is important to your work flow, then you can assign keywords, categories or collections to identify that passage or process, and apply it to each image that you consider should have that identification.

It happens that I want to be able to include the orientation of images in searches (whether the images are landscape, portrait or square) There are no automatic tags for this so I assign all my images to one of those three categories. It takes some discipline to make it work, and there are times when I forget to assign an orientation category, so every so often I have to run a check for files that I've missed and then assign them accordingly.

So you can add your own "sent to Edit", "Part of a panorama", "Part of a focus stack" tags, as keywords or categories if that helps you being able get the search results you need.

[greyguru]

Thanks Greyfox. I have always been aware that I can assign my own keywords/categories. In fact, I recently started using ACDSee to keep track of video clips and completed videos. As you say, it requires some discipline. I would much prefer that ACDSee provided a set of robust attributes that it can automatically update for us to use in the existing tools. (Like portrait/landscape, which seems like a no-brainer.)

I did hear back from Support. James says that the meaning of "Image Edited" is that an original copy exists, and so the edit can be reverted. I suggested that they add a couple of processing status attributes and he has passed that suggestion on. I wait with bated breath.

Thanks for your thoughtful replies.

[Regor250]

Has anyone tried a search on EXIF Orientation value? Just a thought, I have not tried.