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⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived.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

Suggestions and wishes for a future version

Kommentare

3 Kommentare

  • SFA

    Martin,

    There are some aspects of what seems to have been intended with the new features that may not be so readily available in "plug-in" applications and, of course, one still has the option to use other applications. However in general I share your opinion.

    The problem is that almost everything that could be added to an application like C1 could either be claimed to already exist elsewhere or would require the addition of a pixel editor type product. Or a DAM product that would then take attention off in yet another direction!

    I'm not so sure about multiple colour markers, to be honest. My gut feel it so try to simplify things as much as possible. However, it's an interesting idea that is worth airing and discussing. 

    There is a dedicated section of the forum for Feature Requests  (not platform specific) and I would highly recommend copying your post over there where it is likely gain more attention over time - from both users and whoever in the staff pool is likely to be monitoring the content.

    0
  • MartinG

    SFA,

    Of course, you can still use other products to achieve better results. But IF a feature is implemented in the existing application (and many speaks for it), then it should work! At least within the range of a good standard. This also applies to the alignment of the images. LR has been showing how to do this for years, and I have been eagerly waiting for this feature.

    I do not know if an extension of the color selection would greatly complicate the usability. But I could imagine many use cases where a multiple selection of color markers would be helpful.

    I will try to find the right section, thank you!

     

    0
  • SFA

    https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/community/topics/360000154057-Feature-Requests 

     

    I agree with your sentiments about completeness of functionality or, on the other hand, clearly managing expectations compared to the development's objectives might also be useful. 

    New products and features have to start somewhere and will always be likely to satisfy some people, dissatisfy others and probably leave the silent majority unengaged as usual!

    My personal expectations based on my predictions of what would result in terms of user responses were pretty much what we have seen in the comments. However, what is currently available seems broadly to work better for some things than I expected. And it is certainly simple and quite fast in my personal experience. That may not be the case for everyone.

    As you observe, other products have a head start. What we cannot know for certain is whether aspects of the C1 approach will allow them to catch up and possibly move beyond what is available elsewhere quite quickly with the benefit of user feedback. Technology has moved on (for good or bad) since the pre-existing products were created and there might be a case to present that suggests they are all out of date and will need to be redeveloped. Effectively the AI approach - which, if it is to work at all, needs to eliminate any and all of a user's "manual" input. If it can't do that sufficiently well there is no point in trying. (Or at least that might be considered a reasonable consumer observation.)

    The question of whether the starting point is good enough to support the concept of a "new version" and be part of the upgrade cost justification (for those on a perpetual license basis) is a different discussion and not something you brought up but I mention it because others who may comment here are likely to put forward their opinions on that which would probably deflect from the discussion of your points.

    0

Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.