I understand in theory why some people might find the stacking "feature" useful. For myself the only thing I ever do is unstack everything that LR has decided to stack by default. By now this amounts to thousands of wasted and annoying mouse/menu operations.

Is there any way to tell LR to STOP stacking. In particular once I have marked an image with colour or star ratings then edit it in PS or DXO the edited copy gets automatically hidden at the bottom of an annoying stack (usually without any star ratings or colours applied). So I have to find the original, unstack, re-apply all the markers. It's driving me slowly insane.

Please help.

Regards,
Craig

Haha, yes thank you.

I managed to find that checkbox only minutes after my post. *slaps forehead*

Two things would be nice:
1. If I wasn't so stupid.
2. If there was a way to switch off that checkbox by default.

I selected all the picture in the library from the folder view and unstacked them all, which solves my "lots of small stacks - hiding all the versions I like" problem.

I also re-watched the MR & JS section on stacking. Maybe my problem (apart from an exceedingly low IQ) is that I'm not using stacking enough. On the other hand the main reasons for stacking really don't seem to apply to my pictures. I don't do studio work or sports or even exposure bracketing. It's all "decisive moment" type stuff - or snapshots as those who see my pictures call them. :-)

It also sort-of occurs to me that a stack of 2 pictures is more of an annoyance than a stack. When is a stack a useful stack?

I don't think so. Lightroom's stacking feature is mainly designed for "best of burst" and hiding pictures. That can be ideal when you're face to face with a client and not wanting the clutter of alternative frames. Unfortunately, the feature has been stretched by Adobe and by users (eg to group panorama and HDR component frames) and is insufficiently finished. For example, stacking the Photoshopped file with the original is only of any value if you want your finished files to sit in the same folders as the originals (stacking should have been designed on a per catalogue basis, not per folder). Another example of its limitations is that metadata entry is messy - you have to expand a stack to apply keywords or copyright to the hidden items. While this might be OK in a best of burst situation where the hidden items are rejects, it doesn't work too well otherwise, and is inconsistent with how stacks behave when you drag a stack to another folder (they all move). Polishing the stacking feature isn't a high priority - nor should it be - so it's perfectly reasonable to question its value.

John