# Problem with Smart Collection based on Keyword



## spmakwana (Nov 18, 2013)

Hello folks,
I've found something like flaw in creating smart collection based on keywords.
I have set of collection and I create smart collection using keywords to arrange them like albums i.e. photos with keyword Bird which have all photos of bird.
Now I have 2 keyword "bird" and "Khijadiya bird sanctuary", Now when I created a collection for bird, it included all photos that have keyword bird, or Khijadiya bird sanctuary because it also contain the keyword bird in it. So Bird collection also contain the photos which should not be included. How can i create a collection that will only contain the photos which have bird keyword, and does not included Khijadiya bird sanctury because of it contain bird.


----------



## Selwin (Nov 18, 2013)

Hi spmakwana, welcome to the forum!

Lightroom has both images in the collection, because it is designed to search for all images containing the keyword "Bird". If you wish to build a smart collection for *only* birds and not the sanctuary, you can add a second rule:

"Keywords" "doesn't contain" "Sanctuary" 

and make sure that on top you have "Match *all* of the following rules".


----------



## erro (Nov 18, 2013)

The downside of using "doesn't contain" is that you have to add all your exceptions. If you have many keywords that contain the word "bird" in an unwanted combination, you will end up with lots of exceptions.

My solution to this is to make multi-worded keywords to single-worded by using the _

So, for me, the keyword "Khijadiya bird sanctuary" would be "Khijadiya_bird_sanctuary", which is only one word. That way, searching for "contains word" and "bird" will not match in the sanctuary.

Some people disagree with me, saying it is bad to introduce "fake" characters in the keywords. For me, the pros are greater than the cons.

Unfortunately, Lightroom allows you to enter multi-worded keywords (key-phrases), but it will not let you search/filter for those complete key-phrases in any simple way.


----------



## Selwin (Nov 18, 2013)

Good addition Robert, now spmakwana can choose among different options 

I usually try to avoid duplicate words in my keywords list, exactly for this purpose. But I do have a lot of keyword phrases so it's hard to keep track of them. I would like to have some added functionality in LR6 to filter for duplicate keywords in keywords phrases, preferably already upon keyword creation.


----------



## johnbeardy (Nov 18, 2013)

Yes, I'm very much against fake keywords. I don't blame people who feel that is their only alternative, though I'd rather do the right thing and moan at Adobe till they fix it. Somewhere down the line workarounds and bad practices in general have a nasty way of coming back to bite you.

An uncontrolled keyword list with duplicates is perhaps the price you pay for the huge flexibility of hierarchical keywords. The keyword filter box (at the top of the list) can help you detect them.

John


----------



## Selwin (Nov 18, 2013)

Quite, John. I agree. I would fancy an option to search for duplicate keywords, like iTunes has the option to search for duplicate songs. May add a feature request for it.


----------



## spmakwana (Nov 19, 2013)

I know that I can add second rule to do this, but it don't seems like proper way to do this. All keywords are listed separated by comma so my point is Lightroom should include some option to identify keyword rather that identify word from the keyword string; and it will be the proper way. In Adobe Bridge it can look for keyword rather than matching word.


----------



## spmakwana (Nov 19, 2013)

Why should I use "_" to combine multiple word keyword. Instead there should be a way because all keywords are stored separated by comma so it can identify the whole keyword if it is programmed like that instead of checking the word in keyword string.


----------



## spmakwana (Nov 19, 2013)

Selwin said:


> Good addition Robert, now spmakwana can choose among different options
> 
> I usually try to avoid duplicate words in my keywords list, exactly for this purpose. But I do have a lot of keyword phrases so it's hard to keep track of them. I would like to have some added functionality in LR6 to filter for duplicate keywords in keywords phrases, preferably already upon keyword creation.



I try to avoid duplication of word in keyword but we can't always avoid duplicate word, sometimes we have to include duplicate word in keyword list.
Like my case bird keyword should be there in bird photo and 'Khijadiya Bird sanctuary' is place name so I can't choose another name for that. Same like 'New Jersy' and 'New York', you have to include New in both keyword.


----------



## Selwin (Nov 19, 2013)

spmakwana said:


> Why should I use "_" to combine multiple word keyword. Instead there should be a way because all keywords are stored separated by comma so it can identify the whole keyword if it is programmed like that instead of checking the word in keyword string.



Hi spmakwana,

Unfortunately, Lightroom is programmed this way, so currently it is the only way to do what you want to do. You have two options:
1. Add "_" and leave no spaces in your keyword sentences
2. Use additional rule(s) in the smart collection settings


----------



## erro (Nov 19, 2013)

spmakwana said:


> Why should I use "_" to combine multiple word keyword. Instead there should be a way because all keywords are stored separated by comma so it can identify the whole keyword if it is programmed like that instead of checking the word in keyword string.



LR is designed this way. I dislike it just as much as you do, and I hope Adobe someday will handle keywords properly. Until then, my solution is to use the _ to make my multi-worded keywords into single words.


----------



## Imagenomad (Nov 30, 2013)

Another option is to use another keyword that is typically associated with "bird". An example here would be "avian", a keyword unlikely to be included in a shot of "Khidajiya Bird Sanctuary" and a relevant keyword to be associated with a bird if you're shooting for stock, say.

You could also set it up so that your keyword "bird" automatically adds "avian" as a synonym when you're keywording your images. 

Your Smart Collection then must include both "bird" and "avian" for your bird shots and if there's anything with "avian" in the keywords that isn't a bird, that can be excluded too.


----------



## Tony Jay (Dec 1, 2013)

Imagenomad said:


> Another option is to use another keyword that is typically associated with "bird". An example here would be "avian", a keyword unlikely to be included in a shot of "Khidajiya Bird Sanctuary" and a relevant keyword to be associated with a bird if you're shooting for stock, say.
> 
> You could also set it up so that your keyword "bird" automatically adds "avian" as a synonym when you're keywording your images.
> 
> Your Smart Collection then must include both "bird" and "avian" for your bird shots and if there's anything with "avian" in the keywords that isn't a bird, that can be excluded too.



In this context just using the keyword "avian" (or "aves" in my keyword collection) alone will give the desired result.
Of course synonyms will not always help but in this situation the use of a synonym is an elegant solution.

Tony Jay


----------



## Selwin (Dec 1, 2013)

Selwin said:


> [/FONT][/SIZE]Hi spmakwana,
> 
> You have *three* options:
> 1. Add "_" and leave no spaces in your keyword sentences
> 2. Use additional rule(s) in the smart collection settings


*3. Use synonyms the way Imagenomad suggested*

Imagenomad: you came up with a brilliant solution!


----------



## Imagenomad (Dec 3, 2013)

Thanks for the comments Tony - I have to say I dropped "aves" from my bird keywords simply because I don't think it would ever be used as a search term to find an image of a bird. On the other hand, it would be exceptional to confuse it with another keyword and you can always make it a non-exported keyword.

As to using "avian" or "aves" alone, I wouldn't. I think it's best to have redundancy (i.e. double checking) if possible. I know it's unlikely, but as an example, you may happen to photograph somewhere or something with "aves" or "avian" in its name so using the single keyword might not get you the Smart Collection desired result.

@Selwin - thanks!

To the OP, I think that even if there was a "one keyword" solution to your problem of picking our the difference between "keyword" and "<something> keyword <something>", I'd still employ an inherently redundant Smart Collection filter to catch those rare exceptions. But that might just be me.


----------



## Tony Jay (Dec 4, 2013)

Imagenomad said:


> Thanks for the comments Tony - I have to say I dropped "aves" from my bird keywords simply because I don't think it would ever be used as a search term to find an image of a bird. On the other hand, it would be exceptional to confuse it with another keyword and you can always make it a non-exported keyword.
> 
> As to using "avian" or "aves" alone, I wouldn't. I think it's best to have redundancy (i.e. double checking) if possible. I know it's unlikely, but as an example, you may happen to photograph somewhere or something with "aves" or "avian" in its name so using the single keyword might not get you the Smart Collection desired result.



Just for clarification "aves" is not a standalone keyword in my keyword collection. It is a synonym to the keyword "Birds".
Every image that has a bird of some sort keyworded will also have "aves" as a synonym due to the hierarchical nature of the keywording.

So, as you mention, there is unlikely to be confusion, and thus, for your purposes, an* ideal keyword to base a Smart collection for birds.*

Tony Jay


----------



## Imagenomad (Dec 4, 2013)

Tony Jay said:


> Just for clarification "aves" is not a standalone keyword in my keyword collection. It is a synonym to the keyword "Birds".
> Every image that has a bird of some sort keyworded will also have "aves" as a synonym due to the hierarchical nature of the keywording.
> 
> So, as you mention, there is unlikely to be confusion, and thus, for your purposes, an* ideal keyword to base a Smart collection for birds.*
> ...



As long as you don't have photos of the headquarters of this company in your archive. 

I know this example is an extreme and highly unlikely one (and it's a proper noun) but I never know what I might end up shooting so my practise is to use a system with built-in redundancy just in case. Doing it in all cases, even unlikely ones, means I don't forget to do it for the more likely cases. 

I accept you will think me unreasonably zealous. And I'll add that I *don't* think you're unreasonably slack.

Interesting discussion, this.

Russell


----------



## Tony Jay (Dec 5, 2013)

Imagenomad said:


> As long as you don't have photos of the headquarters of this company in your archive...
> 
> Russell


True enough, but if one did a simple second condition to the Smart Collection criteria could exclude those unwanted corporate images..

Tony Jay


----------



## Imagenomad (Dec 5, 2013)

Tony Jay said:


> True enough, but if one did a simple second condition to the Smart Collection criteria could exclude those unwanted corporate images..
> 
> Tony Jay



Which is *exactly* what I'm saying.


----------

