Applying keywords to a version set

[rolandgifford]

I know that I have asked for something similar recently but it has occurred to me that I was asking for the wrong thing.

What I actually want is for keywords/GPS/location/whatever that I enter against a master in a version set to be immediately entered against all of the versions too as if I had them all visible and selected. I asked this as propagation without write-back but it isn't really that, propagation is much more than this.

I have a filter to hide buddy files as the vast majority of my photos are raw/jpg pairs and I don't need the clutter of seeing both when cataloguing.

Sort of 'propagation lite' and sort of not propagation at all.

[Mario]

Metadata (like keywords) is propagated when you write back.
This is an really complicated process and it's hard enough to get it right in one point (write-back).
IMatch automatically propagates rating and label, collections, categories (all internal IMatch data) when you change the master. But not metadata.

If this causes issues in your specific workflow, maybe consider to force IMatch to write-back immediately after every metadata change. This will also trigger propagation. This is off by default because it may be a performance drag.

[rolandgifford]

Metadata (like keywords) is propagated when you write back.
This is an really complicated process and it's hard enough to get it right in one point (write-back).
IMatch automatically propagates rating and label, collections, categories (all internal IMatch data) when you change the master. But not metadata.

If this causes issues in your specific workflow, maybe consider to force IMatch to write-back immediately after every metadata change. This will also trigger propagation. This is off by default because it may be a performance drag.

I understood from your previous reply that propagation (which involves duplication within the metadata, etc) is complex. I'm only really interested in keywords being applied throughout the version set, but asked slightly differently as other people may have slightly wider interests. I can already do it by turning my filter off and selecting all files so was hopeful it could be simpler to effectively select hidden images.

I'll leave the immediate write-back off as I'm only really interested after completing each small set (6 to 20 images or that sort of order) during the final phase and doing a write-back at the end rather than with every change is probably less of a performance drag.

[Mario]

(...) could be simpler to effectively select hidden images.

Files hidden by stacks or filtered out are not loaded into the File Window. They hence cannot be selected.