I've just spotted that 6 images in on of my LR folders are showing the exclamation mark, telling me "Conflict Detected" in my Metadata.
I know at least one of these I edited recently (not sure about others, I have about 6 saved backups so I could check, but I suspect its not particularly releveant at the moment).
However before simply doing a CTRL + S, I'd like to see if there is an easy way to spot where the conflict is, in case the on-disk xmp file is actually the correct version.
I'd also like to get a feeling for why there is a conflict. I suspect it is Human Idiot syndrome, and it is something I'm doing, but I would like to find out what, so I can change how I work with these files.
I did look at the xmp file in a text editor, and its not easy to see clearly what is what, and its even more difficult to see what is different in the LR database.
Is there any way to interrogate the DB and find the conflict?
These flags often happen in the most innocuous fashion. There are a couple of metadata fields that probably are what LR is comparing to report that the metadata is out of sync with the data stored in LR. These two fields are Date Modified and Date Accessed. Opening the image file with another program capable of making changes can update the Date Modified and Date Accessed fields even though no change has been made. Even opening the XMP sidecar file with a text editor to view the contents and clicking save will update these two date fields. It could also be your backup software updating the archive bit. This can be what is triggering the (!). All LR knows is that there is a possible difference. It does not know what. If you are always diligent and never use an external editor outside of the LR environment, you have nothing to worry about and can ignore the (!) or resync the metadata at your discretion.
I must admit I do open amages outside LR, when I'm playing with Elements ( I often follow magazine tutorials) but I'm very careful about saving them with a new name, but obviously date access ed etc will be altered. I hadn't realised that would show up.
I just feel very nervous that a database tells me it knows there are "errors" but gives me no more info. I did have a look at Windows live photo gallery recently, but I believe that it may update metadata, so I quickly left.
It would still be nice to see thes variations. they probably are trivial, but one day I just know I'll end up overwriting something I shouldn't.
Colin, LR is not saying that there is a error, just the potential for one. Look upon the (!) as a question to you asking it you know of change that you made outside of LR. If you never intend to change metadata outside of LR, then you have all the information you need to resolve the flagged images. I think any changes to metadata that are important changes must be intentional (for example adding a geotag). I agree that it would be nice to know what changed (I get anxious too), but LR maintains a lastSynchronisedHash & a lastSynchronisedTimestamp. It is these two fields that (I think) tell LR quickly that something is different between the database and the file header. These fields provide a quick answer but not a detailed answer.