Zum Hauptinhalt gehen

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived. The information contained here may no longer be accurate or up-to-date. ⚠️

Using 'Sub Name' in the Advanced tab of a process recipe?

SFA
Hi all,

I had never worked out what this was for when I was testing V5 a way back and assumed it just didn't do anythind much.

Looked at it again recently in V6 and discovered what it does - I assume that what I see, the text in the 'Sub Name' field being added to the output file name as a prefix, is what it is meant to do. I don't think I ever found the proper description in the user guides.

Anyway, that's fine and i made use of it. Trouble is I can't seem to change it. Or get rid of it. The value now appears at the start of the same for every new file I process (currently a lot of realtively small files or web displays.)

Single file or batch it's the same.

Change session - the same.

Quit and re-start - still there.

In fact due to some self generated issues I ended up in one session completely re-generating the Process Recipe I am using from the system default. The Sub Name text is still there when I process.

Clearly it's stuck in a file of some sort somewhere - but which and where. Can I get rid of it through the application? Or by deleting some sort of workfile that will be recreated as required? Or by editing a file somewhere?

Happy to consider all options - or log a case with support if this is something previously unknown.


Thanks in advance for all suggestions.

Grant Perkins
0

Kommentare

4 Kommentare

Datum Stimmen
  • Paul Steunebrink
    Some tips which you might have done already. Just checking:
    - clear the Sub Name field for your process recipe in the Process Recipe tool, Advanced tab
    - in the Output Naming tool, Format field, remove the Sub Name token
    If that does not work, delete the process recipes from the Process Recipes (plural) tool and create it again. Alternatively you can add a new recipe first which rebuilds the original you have problems with.
    0
  • SFA
    Ah Ha!

    Thanks for the fast reply Paul and of course you are correct and I have simply confused myself (as you have reminded me). Trying to do too many things at the same time and forgetting to check some basic stuff.

    The problem is indeed the Output Naming entry, nothing to do with the Sub Name field in this case because it had not registered with me how that is used.

    I knew about the Job Name in the Output Naming. However for some reason the Output Naming tool had gone missing from the Output menu stack on the installation I am using at the moment and I just forgot all about it .... Doh!

    That and the problem I actually have never previously found out what Sub Name does BUT, having entered the same text there as I did for the Job Name (which in itself was a work around for the Sub Name apparently not doing anything ....) I just mangled my impression of what was going on and simply forgot about Output Naming because the tool had 'gone walkabout' as they say in Australia.

    Thanks very much - back to 'normal' now. Problem solved.

    Better than that - I have also realised how the Sub Name entry is used, so it was worth asking the question even if it was the wrong question!


    Thanks again,

    Grant Perkins
    0
  • Paul Steunebrink
    Good to hear all is solved now. Some summarizing notes:

    A tool can easily be removed with CO Pro/DB, accidentally. Just open your preferred workspace again from the Window menu to restore your tools.

    Both Job Name and Sub Name are tokens or variables that can be used with file renaming on output. The Job Name is generic for all process recipes, where a Sub Name is specific for a recipe.
    Note that you can use the Job Name token also in Batch Rename, and on import but not for tethering, which has a designated Name token.
    0
  • SFA
    More thanks Paul,

    It's great to have some of these more specific things explained and confirmed rather than trying to work them out over time.

    This is especially true for functionality that, for many including me until now, may not look like it is a primary day to day requirement. That is until one starts to realise the potential for an enhanced work flow or, in this case, a more readily managable new output process. I had looked but missed some of the information and its relevance.

    As for tools 'disappearing' from menus - yep, it is easy as you say. I would rate the ease of change as a positive under normal circumstances. The odd thing here is it has been a very rare occurrence for me so I don't subconsciously check (or just happen to notice) and changes. Normally I have used the Output Naming tool but for the current batch of work I have been trying to avoid it - so didn't notice the loss but was puzzled by the results and confused it with the apparent Sub Name problem ...

    It's the well know 'familiarity' problem that comes along from time to time to test our expertise (at what ever level we have achieved.). From time to time one forgets to check the basics.

    As yet I have not really felt a need to look at the Workspace concept closely. I do not really consider that I work sufficiently differently from 'normal' often enough to justify anything more the establishing a 'most used' toolset in the Quick menu. I may rethink that.

    Once again thanks for your help Paul, much appreciated.


    Grant Perkins
    0

Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.