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⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived.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. ⚠️

Capture One 6 and cache folders

V62
Hello.
Every time i open a folder of images in C1 v6 creates a cache folder with two subfolders (Cache and Settings50). Is there any way to do that would not create these folders or configure where to create this cache. I believe that this existed in previous versions.
Thanks.
0

Kommentare

10 Kommentare

Datum Stimmen
  • Paul Steunebrink
    This is the way it works and can not be changed. A central location for settings and previews is a thing from the past (CO3).
    0
  • Eigil Skovgaard
    "This is the way it works.."

    - but it should rather work that way in the background.

    This is how a session folder looks by default (the subfolders for New Session will be added inside these folders and will not be visible at this level):

    New Session
    Capture
    Output
    Selects
    Trash

    And this is the picture, when a new content is added to the top session folder.
    It looks a bit overloaded and strange to me, as the "CaptureOne" folder is not a logical part of the entity:

    New Session
    Capture
    CaptureOne
    Output
    Selects
    Trash

    Why must the "CaptureOne" folder be visible here?

    While it's possible to open C1 by double clicking the .col file, this is not an option with a .cos file (not on my PC at least - Win7 asks me to define the .cos file type), though double clicking on the .cos file could have the function that C1 opened with the chosen image selected.

    The same CaptureOne folder pops up anywhere where C1 has refered an image on the PC, for example on the Desktop.

    This is a small problem of aesthetic nature, but the general picture would be more smooth without these drifting CaptureOne folders.
    0
  • Paul Steunebrink
    [quote="Eigil Skovgaard" wrote:
    ...This is a small problem of aesthetic nature, but the general picture would be more smooth without these drifting CaptureOne folders.

    I think this relates to how you organize your images, for example from one main folder down into several sub folders or session folders. The CaptureOne sub folders only show where applicable.

    I think it also relates to how you use Capture One. Personally I do not use it as a generic image browser. My copy of Capture One has never visited the Desktop folder, for example (nor are any images stored on the Desktop for that matter).

    Basically, it is in your control whether your systems has CaptureOne sub folders all over the place or not.
    0
  • Eigil Skovgaard
    Yes, it’s possible to avoid them - the “PhaseOne†folders - with good manners..!

    To be a bonus pater I make a session for each of my tasks (thus avoiding the PO folders), but if I for example made a session for each customer and then added succeeding takes for the same customer as Session Favourites (like the Image Professor shows here: ) I would inevitable create a PhaseOne folder in the place I showed earlier. It is not neat.

    Not a big thing though. It must be reminiscence from old days. But as far as I know the image data could as well be stored in a central system folder - to spare our eyes (isn’t that what Lightroom does?).
    0
  • V62
    I hope that in any next update resolve this issue.
    Thanks
    0
  • Paul Steunebrink
    [quote="V62" wrote:
    I hope that in any next update resolve this issue.

    The settings/proxies per image folder is a design decision per CO4 and something I expect to stay.
    0
  • Eigil Skovgaard
    Paul wrote: The settings/proxies per image folder is a design decision per CO4 and something I expect to stay.


    Yes, a decision it must be, and old decisions can be changed. It's called renewal.
    Especially the visible design would be more elegant without the "CaptureOne" folders.
    So, there must have been good reasons to choose the current solution in stead of the "invisible" one, and it could be interesting to learn what the reasons were/are for keeping a less elegant visual design alive?
    0
  • NN634708402639857718UL
    This may help with the "why it is done as it is".

    0
  • Eigil Skovgaard
    SteveCase2 points at this tread:


    It seems that there are a number of good technical reasons for using this design.
    As mentioned before, it's merely the visual impression that bothers.
    0
  • duartix
    For me this is a non-issue.
    After processing I sporadically run to the root of my processed tree and search for "Cache". Select all and straight to oblivion without the right to go through Recycle Bin.
    0

Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.