Focused File Behavior Suggestion

[Erik]

When I am working in the primary pane with all our thumbnails, I might come across a set of files that are part of a stack.  Let's say for instance that I have a stack of 20 images that are expanded.  If the 20th file in the stack has the focus, and I collapse the stack (Shift + C), the stack collapses.  However, the selected file is not whatever file is now 20th (or 19th perhaps) from the collapsed stack.  When the stacks are larger it becomes challenging if I am working through a series of files (category, folder, collection, etc) to have to now move back to the stack or the file immediately after the stack because I've suddenly "skipped" ahead some files because I collapsed the stack.


Feature Request:  If a user collapses a stack (regular stack or version set), the focus should be on the visible top of the now collapsed stack.   This way if a user is working through their files, the current focused file will be the stack that was just collapsed and they can work forward from that point.


Note:  I could add that a similar behavior to the initial description also occurs if I am working in a category or collection and I remove the files from the category or selection.  For instance if I select 20 images and remove them from a collection, the focused file is now 20 images from the spot where the removal occurred.

If I think about it in terms of index notation.  If I have items 11-30 selected (20 items) [and item 30 is probably the focused file] and I remove those items from the category, it seems that IMatch will keep the focused position as item 30.  However, the image that was at item 31 has now moved into the #11 spot, and it seems like that is the file that should receive the focus. 

Final Note:  This probably isn't as easy to implement as I might think, but it would be nice.  Again this would seem to aid in a linear workflow.  It gets challenging when working through a 100+ files to navigate back to where I left off because the files have shifted but the focused one hasn't.

-Erik