# 2015.6 breaks publishing checks



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 22, 2016)

See discussion and notes from Smugmug developer near end: 

LR Plugin / LR CC issue during sync - Digital Grin Photography Forum

They recommend rolling back to the prior version.  

This is specific to both the Smugmug Plug and Mac, so only if you have and use both does this matter.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 23, 2016)

This could be worse -- it is possible it affects Windows, and that it is automatically marking every single photo ever sent as modified and needing to be re-sent.  That's speculation, but I just looked at mine and it seemed to be true.

Just in a FWIW.

if the underlying change is in Adobe's code (as the SM guy seems to indicate) I wonder if this might affect other plugins?   Again... more speculation.  

Just something to be aware of.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 24, 2016)

I'm surprised no one else has seen this.  I hope someone who uses Smugmug can take a look, or even flickr.

On my system what happens is this: I go into a previously published gallery.  All show published.  I sit there for a while, and as each one (apparently) loads its preview, it marks itself as needing to be republished, until every image in the gallery needs to publish.

The only galleries that do not do this, so far, are those I created after the 2015.6 update.

Since you have to sit and wait for each image to mark itself as needing to publish, there's no way to mark them all as up to date individually, without going into each gallery and waiting.  At least that I have seen so far.


----------



## tspear (Jun 24, 2016)

I like the very vague accusations of problems and performance issues with nothing to back it up.
There really is very little information there.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 24, 2016)

Let me see if I can explain what I see.  Ignore the performance per se, it is the issue at the end.

Inside Lightroom's catalog is some kind of mechanism to track when a photo is modified, and if in a publishing plugin and modified, it marks it as needing to be republished.

The implication in the posting I referenced is that this mechanism changed, and at least for me what I am seeing is that now EVERY photo that I had, and was previously up to date, is shifting to "modified" and needs to be republished.

It is doing it in a bit of a strange fashion -- when I open a gallery that has been published and should be up to date, it very slowly and spontaneously marks each one as modified.  I think this is because it is building a preview and "notices" the changed data.  I happen to have had no previews at the time, which may be changing the timing, but I do not think affects the "modified" aspect (I've frequently deleted previews in the past when moving catalogs around). 

So far I've experimented with a lot of galleries and every one does it EXCEPT the few I have created since 2015.6 was installed. 

If I wait patiently for each to shift to "modified" status, I can select-all and mark-as-up-to-date, which fixes it for that gallery, but I have hundreds of galleries. 

If someone else is a Smugmug Plugin user especially, and has upgraded to 2015.6, I would be very curious if this happens to you.  Go into a gallery that should be published.  Just wait.  If waiting doesn't do it, maybe switch from grid to full screen or zoom in -- make Lightroom examine the photo in some form (but do not change it).  See if that shifts it to "modified". 

Maybe I'm having some other issue that causes this, not the one referenced above, but it is consistent.  There's also an indication on JF's blog that Adobe worked on the "when is a photo modified" and fixed some issue he had in 2015.6, so it does look like an algorithm change.


----------



## clee01l (Jun 24, 2016)

I think I have seen a reference to this on another thread.  It is a known issue and I believe that Adobe has said that Plugin developers may need to modify their plugin  code to accommodate the new changes to the API.   If I find the actual reference to the issue I'll report back here.
The reference is for Photoshop 2015.5 not LR 2015.6
FAQ: Photoshop CC 2015.5 now available


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 24, 2016)

clee01l said:


> I think I have seen a reference to this on another thread.  It is a known issue and I believe that Adobe has said that Plugin developers may need to modify their plugin  code to accommodate the new changes to the API.   If I find the actual reference to the issue I'll report back here,



Thanks.  I've tried a few queries but can't apparently find the right keywords to look for.


----------



## PhilBurton (Jun 24, 2016)

clee01l said:


> I think I have seen a reference to this on another thread.  It is a known issue and I believe that Adobe has said that Plugin developers may need to modify their plugin  code to accommodate the new changes to the API.   If I find the actual reference to the issue I'll report back here,


Cletus,

Do you work directly with the Adobe engineers?  Do you know about the quality assurance processes?  Do you know if they provide plugin developers a chance to check their plugins with a pre-release of each version?

Phil


----------



## clee01l (Jun 24, 2016)

I haven't worked with Adobe.  I've worked more closely with Jeffrey Freidl and he laments the communication from Adobe about pre release.  
I've also looked for the report of this being a known issue.  I can't find it.  Maybe I imagined the report.  Maybe I starting to go senile...


----------



## clee01l (Jun 24, 2016)

clee01l said:


> I haven't worked with Adobe.  I've worked more closely with Jeffrey Freidl and he laments the communication from Adobe about pre release.
> I've also looked for the report of this being a known issue.  I can't find it.  Maybe I imagined the report.  Maybe I starting to go senile...


I found the link I was thinking of.  It concerns Photoshop 2015.5 not LR. Sorry for the confusion.
FAQ: Photoshop CC 2015.5 now available


----------



## johnbeardy (Jun 24, 2016)

I don't believe there are any changes in 6.6 that _directly_ affect publish services, and I work with them both as a user and as a coder of one. I know the publish services code pretty well.

The SmugMug developer's comment was "the latest LR update 6.6 has performance issues on Mac which leads to slowness or crashing with our plugin." OK, I suspect there are _some_ performance issues on _some_ computers on both platforms. Whether they affect a plugin is less clear cut. These two areas would usually be quite isolated from each other.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 24, 2016)

The comment of interest is from the David (labeled devbobo), he is the actual author, and I've worked with him quite a bit and he is very sharp on these things.  He said:



> LR stores a hash of the metadata and develop settings for each published photo to determine whether the image is in the "Published" to "To Be Republished" state. I believe that to fix the bug above, Adobe has updated the way it caches the data, which may mean that it think that all photos may need to be republished.
> 
> The easiest way to rectify this issue, is to mark the photos are published by right-clicking and select "Mark as Up-To-Date".



That's consistent with what I'm seeing, but I am unclear why no one else appears to be.

Maybe I should restart the discussion -- when I go into any gallery prior to 2015.6, the photos one by one about once a second start popping up as modified.  They are not modified.  

Why?


----------



## tspear (Jun 24, 2016)

No idea. But I have not seen this problem with JF Folder, Collection or FB publish plugins.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 24, 2016)

Let me elaborate just a bit as I also completed an experiment overnight.

Unrelated (well, the intent was unrelated), I had also deleted all my previews and was letting them rebuild.  I do this periodically as LR is not that good at cleaning house, it will leave behind full size previews that should be deleted, as well as previews from images you delete.  Not all of them, but there is some "leakage", and deleting and rebuilding will reduce space requirements.  It's also handy if you are moving your catalog, as the previews are usually MUCH larger than the catalog.

Anyway.... so shortly after installing 2015.6 I deleted all previews, and in spare time would set them to rebuilding.

Most of the galleries I looked at had no previews, so as I sat and looked at them, this brought them to LR's attention and it built previews for them; you can see this on the screen.  AS it did so, this is when each one got marked "modified" and set up to republish.

So over night I let it build all of one year, and then looked at galleries completely within that year -- the images now had standard previews, and all were already marked as being modified.

I am 100% certain that building previews in prior versions did not result in requiring them to be republished. 

So... especially given that I appear relatively isolated in having this effect... it may be that the 2015.6 change that is hitting me has to do with preview builds.  Loose your preview, rebuild it, and it marks to republish.  That would be very bad, I Think, though it may explain why I am alone in noticing it, as it is not frequent to need to rebuild previews without having changed the image.

When I get some time I think I have 2015.5 (or at least .4) on another computer.  I'll set up a catalog there, build all previews, publish something, then update and see what happens.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 24, 2016)

OK, I've spent a few hours digging into the database content and seeing what Adobe is doing.  I can't say exactly how it differs from the past, other than that it does.

Recall I deleted my previews after upgrading to 2015.6, so anytime I touch a photo it rebuilds the previews.  Normally this is a non-event, and changes nothing.

What is happening now is that the Adobe_ImageDevelopSettings table is being updated when it builds the preview, and the settings are changed to delete the ProspectiveX and ProspectiveY fields, and replace them with a group of settings for Guided Upright.  It also bumps the version in the file from 9.4 (in my case) to 9.6.  No other settings changed, and I never went into develop (much less guided upright) for these images.

The change in the text of the settings changed the develop digest, which in turn caused a mis-match between the digest there and in AgRemotePhoto's digest.  This change, in turn triggered LR to mark the image to republish.

I speculate that in the past when I've deleted previews and rebuilt, either (a) Adobe did not change the develop settings for the image as part of preview build, or (b) they may have changed it, but there were no settings to be different, whereas in this case the new feature required (or caused) a set of defaults to be written into the file, making it different.

Regardless.... that is what happened to me.

Now speculation... 

If you have not removed your previews, this has no effect.  Or possibly it would if you build a preview of a different size.  I'd be very curious if someone who knows they do not have 1:1 previews in place, and has images published prior to 2015.6 could build 1:1 previews for some images and see if it marks them for republish.

But further speculation is if you had previews built prior to 2015.6 and sometime in the future delete them and let them rebuild, you will be in this same situation.  Which is a new "feature" for Lightroom, as it makes the preview folder now a necessary (and needs to be backed up?) part of the catalog.  At least unless you want to end up with every photo you have marked for republish.

At least that's what I have managed to figure out so far.  I'd welcome if someone else wanted to take a look.


----------



## PhilBurton (Jun 24, 2016)

Ferguson said:


> OK, I've spent a few hours digging into the database content and seeing what Adobe is doing.  I can't say exactly how it differs from the past, other than that it does.
> 
> Recall I deleted my previews after upgrading to 2015.6, so anytime I touch a photo it rebuilds the previews.  Normally this is a non-event, and changes nothing.
> 
> ...



Do you think this change in behavior is intentional, or the result of a programming error?  If the former, why?

Phil


----------



## IanL (Jun 24, 2016)

I have experienced photos spontaneously being marked as modified and needing to be republished throughout my use of LightRoom.  Note I do not use Smug mug so my experience is only related in that I see the same thing but I have been seeing it since I started using LR.  The two plugins I use that I see this with are 

Jeffrey's "Export to PicasaWeb" Lightroom Plugin

and

NextGEN Gallery Export - alloyphoto

Thankfully LR separates newly added images from those it things need updating.  Whenever I see a collection has photos marked as needing updating I make judgment call if I really did change anything and just mark them as up to date and then publish any new images and move on happy to my next task .  Only rarely have I actually intentionally made changes I wanted to republish and those times I did the work and went to the collection to republish.  So, if I am adding new images to a collection I pretty much always know that I did not actually make changes to other images that I want to publish so I just mark things as up to date.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 24, 2016)

IanL, the difference here is that it was ALL images.

Phil, I do not know if intentional, and I am not 100% sure what changed.  I mean that I know they are changing the digest for develop settings, and I know the develop settings did change, but not exactly why.   Was it the complete absence of a preview (as opposed, say, to having a minimal and building standard, or having standard and building 1:1)?   

But all that said I believe it should be considered a bug that a preview build should cause a change of the develop digest settings, period.  To do that, one should have to have explicitly made a develop change -- in the develop module, applying a preset, the quick develop settings, etc.

But while I know that my situation triggered a new digest, I am not sure which exact aspect of it did. When I get some spare time going to check a tablet and see if I have a setup there I could use to test a few scenarios other than mass preview delete.


----------



## PhilBurton (Jun 24, 2016)

Ferguson said:


> IanL, the difference here is that it was ALL images.
> 
> Phil, I do not know if intentional, and I am not 100% sure what changed.  I mean that I know they are changing the digest for develop settings, and I know the develop settings did change, but not exactly why.   Was it the complete absence of a preview (as opposed, say, to having a minimal and building standard, or having standard and building 1:1)?
> 
> ...


Ferguson,

When a new release of software has a feature that changes behavior_ and without documentation of the change_, I think it's a safe bet that there is a software bug somewhere.  Adobe should acknowledge this bug as soon as they can reproduce it.

Phil


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 24, 2016)

PhilBurton said:


> Ferguson,
> 
> When a new release of software has a feature that changes behavior_ and without documentation of the change_, I think it's a safe bet that there is a software bug somewhere.  Adobe should acknowledge this bug as soon as they can reproduce it.
> 
> Phil



Perhaps, but I've been around computers long enough to be skeptical when only one person (even me) sees the problem.  Which is why I'm hoping someone else is in a situation where they can experiment a bit.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 27, 2016)

OK, I did another test, and am now fairly sure this is a bug that will eventually hit others.

I tried an experiment.  I had a tablet with LR 2015.4 on it that had never connected to Smugmug, but had previews (regular size).

I did the following:

1) Add SM LR plugin
2) Conenct to Smugmug, and did NOT have options set to sync (I wanted whole separate gallery)
3) Created a new gallery
4) Copied in 15 photos that were already in LR
5) Published, and let it finish.
6) I exited Lightroom, and updated to 2015.6.
7) Went into the gallery - all said "published", no problem so far.
8) Did a build 1:1 preview on the first photo (I did not go into develop or change any develop settings)
9) The photo went into modified state, and needed to be published.

My conclusion from this is any preview build that occurs on a photo that had no preview, or a preview prior to 2015.6, will be marked for republish if a preview is built under 2015.6.  Deleting the previews overall is not required to make this show up, all you need do is build a new size (note this requires the size not be there -- just telling it to build a preview is not adequate, it will only build if it needs, it will not rebuild).

I believe this will lead people who have 2015.6 installed (or presumably later unless they change this) to start seeing photos marked for republish if they do something that causes a preview build, including going to a photo with standard size (only), and rebuilding to 1:1, since that is what I did above.

I'd still love if someone else who has updated and uses publishing plugins could give this a try.  Find an image you haven't build a 1:1 preview for, confirm it is not marked to publish, then build a 1:1 preview and see if it gets marked for publishing.  I think it will (and it should not).


----------



## RikkFlohr (Jun 27, 2016)

Make absolutely sure you are using the latest SmugMug plugin. It is version: 3.0.8 released by SmugMug on 6/20/2016.  The previous version of the plugin didn't play well with LR 2015.6
Adobe Add-ons


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 27, 2016)

RikkFlohr said:


> Make absolutely sure you are using the latest SmugMug plugin. It is version: 3.0.8 released by SmugMug on 6/20/2016.  The previous version of the plugin didn't play well with LR 2015.6
> Adobe Add-ons



Yes, both my initial testing and the tablet test I just did were with 3.0.8.0. I installed it I think on 6/17, the Smugmug site is always a bit ahead of Adobe's site, but i just checked my directory mod dates (since I did post pretty close to that date, above).

The issue doesn't seem to be in the Smugmug plugin, however... I confirmed I had the same issue with Flickr (but I have only about 50 shots there versus almost 50,000 on Smugmug, so going through gallery by gallery to make them up to date was, let's say, not a pleasant experience).


----------



## IanL (Jun 29, 2016)

Ferguson said:


> IanL, the difference here is that it was ALL images.
> 
> Phil, I do not know if intentional, and I am not 100% sure what changed.  I mean that I know they are changing the digest for develop settings, and I know the develop settings did change, but not exactly why.   Was it the complete absence of a preview (as opposed, say, to having a minimal and building standard, or having standard and building 1:1)?



Last night I checked this out on my catalog.  Like I said the tracking of what been modified and needs to be republished is all over the place so it took me a while to find a published collection that I had not edited and was still marked as up to date.  I found one from 2014 and I switched to the folder continuing the image and viewed the image full screen and then switched to 1:1.  Sure enough when I looked at the collection again that image was marked as having been updated and needed to be republished.  Then I found a more recent collection and in that case just switching to the folder view and letting LR update its previews - without even leaving the grid view - was enough to trigger them moving from published to modified and needs to be published.  The more I "looked at" the more flipped from one state to another.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 30, 2016)

Thank you Ian, glad to know I wasn't imagining all this.

It sounds like it is going to be a hidden, continual issue for everyone over time.  I fixed mine by by building all previews (I had deleted mine so I had an empty starting point), then very tediously going one by one to each gallery and marking all up to date.

I also had some issues with LR not always marking things correctly, but in my case it was only the reverse -- certain functions would not reliably mark an image updated (notably some metadata updates, especially indirect ones like changing a keyword in a way that should ripple through).  I never recall having the case of photos getting marked for publish that shouldn't, but regardless, these were relatively rare.  This particular issue in principle sets one up for every photo you have to go (e.g. even if right now you have a 1:1 image, it may purge later, you might rebuild it, and bam... it's marked).


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 22, 2016)

See discussion and notes from Smugmug developer near end: 

LR Plugin / LR CC issue during sync - Digital Grin Photography Forum

They recommend rolling back to the prior version.  

This is specific to both the Smugmug Plug and Mac, so only if you have and use both does this matter.


----------



## Jim Wilde (Jun 30, 2016)

I've tried various publishing plug-ins (hard drive, Flickr, jf Collection Publisher) and have been unable to reproduce the problem. I assume you've tried resetting the preferences? In which case, and as you are able to reliably repro the problem, I suggest you put in a formal bug report using the link at the top of the page


----------



## johnbeardy (Jun 30, 2016)

I have found odd occasions where rebuilding the preview incorrectly moves images from Published to Modified. However, I can't yet see any pattern.

In any case, I have always found this area (how each plugin defines "metadataThatTriggersRepublish") to be flaky, and I know Jeffrey has a similar experience. Being realistic, it's not the kind of thing that gets fixed - it's not sufficiently damaging. 

John


----------



## tspear (Jun 30, 2016)

I just had an odd one. I had the film strip off, and was publishing to FB via Jeffery's plugin. No previews built (I had deleted the caches a few weeks ago, and these were images from 2005), define the smart collection. Click publish, turn on the film strip. Watch all of the images get "published" then jump into the modified and need to republish. 
If I remember, I should have another batch ready to test like this next week.
I think this is a kind of funny big and will be a pain to chase.


----------



## Jim Wilde (Jun 30, 2016)

That sounds like a bug that existed in earlier LR versions, but I thought it had been fixed. You might want to drop Jeffrey an email, I'm sure he would be interested.


----------



## tspear (Jun 30, 2016)

Jim Wilde said:


> That sounds like a bug that existed in earlier LR versions, but I thought it had been fixed. You might want to drop Jeffrey an email, I'm sure he would be interested.



After I repeat it.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 30, 2016)

Jim Wilde said:


> In which case, and as you are able to reliably repro the problem, I suggest you put in a formal bug report using the link at the top of the page



Yeah, Ok, I did (here), but I suspect it is a waste of time.


----------



## IanL (Jun 30, 2016)

Jim Wilde said:


> I've tried various publishing plug-ins (hard drive, Flickr, jf Collection Publisher) and have been unable to reproduce the problem. I assume you've tried resetting the preferences? In which case, and as you are able to reliably repro the problem, I suggest you put in a formal bug report using the link at the top of the page



I have been experiencing this since the beginning of my using output modules in LR.  I'm just ignoring it.  I recently moved my images and catalog to a new HD and that process cleared all my previews (I don't back up previews) so all my collections think all their images need to be republished.  But I know they don't need to be. 

They key seems to be preview generation so if you clear your previews you might be able to reproduce it too.  I am not really bothered by this -> this feature has never worked reliably as far as I can tell.  Things seem to work OK while I am actually tweaking a collection and actually making changes.  In that scenario I have previews already made for everything and LR does correctly notice when I make changes.  Once I am done and everything is published I'm happy.  If at a later date some or all of the images in a collection is incorrectly marked as needing to be republished I know its not really true and if I want to start working with them again I can just mark them as up to date and then start working with the images again.


----------



## IanL (Jun 30, 2016)

Ferguson said:


> Yeah, Ok, I did (here), but I suspect it is a waste of time.



Excellent.  Maybe we'll be lucky.  We have no chance if we never tell them - so thanks.


----------



## Jim Wilde (Jun 30, 2016)

I just retested after trashing the previews cache on both platforms. On OSX I still could not see any problem, but on Windows 10 I did see the problem. So you might want to add to your bug report that the problem seems to be Windows-specific.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Jun 30, 2016)

Jim Wilde said:


> I just retested after trashing the previews cache on both platforms. On OSX I still could not see any problem, but on Windows 10 I did see the problem. So you might want to add to your bug report that the problem seems to be Windows-specific.


Done.


----------

