Layer madness
1. delete the layers from all images before copying
2. delete the older now useless layers manual later
both options add a lot more work and are also a source of failures. seems clear the folks at p1 did not have those user in mind which are working with multiple images, like photographers doing focus stacking or using multiple images for compositions. in my view they have added a rather useless option - copying a single layers - but destroyed the usability.
-
ian, don't take it offensive but I´m curious do you actually work with large amount of files and lot of layers or are you only interested in the theoretical discourse ?
not being an native speaker what would be the better word to describe a problem which leads to extra work is an unnecessary source for mistakes and does nothing to improve the experience ?
1 -
I prefer the older method by far. I wish I could check a preference to use the old behavior.
1 -
i more and more have the feeling that most of the issues c1 has are somehow related to very bad software design, just look at the unmatched record breaking number of sidecar files this software produces. this bad design has probably consequences and makes fixing even simple things difficult because I don't believe they are not aware of the burden this change has brought to many professional user.
0 -
Beta testing - who does it? Has anyone ever been offered? I’ve been using C1 for over a decade, I’ve put hundreds of thousands of files through it, I’d be happy to beta test. They’re clearly not that bothered about long time users....
1 -
Beta testing - who does it? Has anyone ever been offered?
Capture One does it. Go to captureone.com. Log in if necessary. Click on the person icon. One of the items on the resulting page is "Capture One Beta". Before release that took me to a page on their web site where once I agreed to the terms and conditions I could download the beta version. I haven't clicked on that page since the latest release.
As far as I know the Beta was open to anyone.
0 -
I don’t seem to have that option on my login page? Hmm...
0 -
You wouldn't have an option to sign up for beta testing at the moment, I should think. The beta programme is finished as the new version 21 is now out of beta and has been released.
Ian
0 -
hello Ian, I´m not surprised you didn´t answer my simple question a few post back because i suspect that most user who arguing here in favour of c1 seem not to have the same background or experience as those who see this as a problem.
0 -
Agree. C1 is a batch processing/studio tethering app. In trying to go after the Lightroom audience, they’ve made is less good at both. Ignoring their original and core pro audience in favour of hobbyists.
0 -
@CSP - if you insist on a reply, then here is one, which I suppose you won't like. I didn't respond because there seemed to be nothing more to say that would be constructive. I have agreed that there would be value in an option (check-box or in Preferences) to choose between the two possible layer-copying behaviours. Beyond that, if you want me to agree that Capture One suffers from "very bad software design" as you said yesterday, or several of the other negative things that you have said, I won't. I am sick of people using this forum for complaining about almost everything about Capture One. If we have something useful to say, to help other users, or to suggest improvements in a constructive spirit, let's say it. If it's only a case of sounding off about things you don't like, I am not up for it. And if anyone finds Capture One is so bad, there are other apps out there that they could use instead.
And no, you're right, my photography generally does not involve copying layers on large numbers of files.
Ian
1 -
yes mark, sad development !
and all this noises and nonsense you can read here coming from self appointed experts and amateurs about what is wrong or right for pro user or the stupid workarounds they see the need to share is disturbing. I understand that without a large audience no company can survive but when they prefer to make a in fact really bad dehaze filter instead of improving things for working professionals you know it is too late.
0 -
of course Ian, what else !
so when it makes you sick reading my postings why not just stop lecturing me and others here first with useless comments about a problem you don't experience ? I did not sign a agreement that I´m not allowed to have a negative opinion about this company. and did I lie when I posted that c1 floods our computers with files no other raw converter does ?
have a nice weekend
0 -
Yes, enjoy yours too.
Ian
0 -
Are there any updates planned on this issue? Really annoying change which will get reverted soon, hopefully...
0 -
.......this would need that they listen to us and understand the problem which they are obvious incapable.
1 -
What about: Reset all photos except one, delete the layers of the remaining photo, copy the adjustments back to all photos.
-1 -
Walter,
The thing about Layers is that they are in two parts - adjustments and masks.
A further complication for layers is that, other than the changed-since-this-discussion-began use of dedicated Clone and Heal "layers" and the possible auto-recognition of Gradient Mask layers for restricted purpose types, a layer can contain anything and there is no current enforcement of naming standards.
The ability to auto replace layers used to exist and was in fact the only option but that was unrewarding and limiting in many ways. Work could easily be lost.
The revised "no loss" option was not well received since replacement there was no easy way to deactivate or replace existing layers. (And of course there are a limited number of layers available.)
There is a fairly simple possible process to create a NEW Variant of an image and copy to it some revised layer settings and a mask. It's quite a simple total replacement process requiring very few steps to deal with a revised set of replacement setting layers using a new variant.
The decision about replacing or retaining masks is not so easy to manage unless one can be sure that Old mask OR the New mask will suffice. If that was the case one could set a flag to copy both the revised layers and their masks or, in a sufficiently controlled operational model, use the existing masks for the new version of the variant.
The challenge comes when, in a less well controlled environment, one is trying to match one set of layer adjustments with an existing set of adjustments in a bulk change across multiple images. AND retain the masks - or maybe create a revised mask.
Working in a very controlled environment - say a studio - with very specific client dictated requirements it may well be that the appropriate controls for terminology (consistently named layers used consistently) and method of working (mass change needs always run a certain way) might well be possible. For Mac users the Applescript option may be useful.
But unless one can be completely in control of a very well defined and executed process and fully understand the implications whilst taking great care to check and double-check what one has selected, the concept of a mass copy and paste replacement of a large number of images may be fraught with the risk of losing results that one did not wish to lose.
For the hobbyist user that might be really annoying. Probably not more than once before they made a mental note to never use the process for mass change ever again.
For a Pro-studio, such loose control (or, to look at it another way, "flexibility") over the process is, as one can tell from earlier comments, an annoyance. And time-consuming when one can predict that clients will make demands for that type of adjustment because they know they can and because it's not their problem to deliver.
The proper solution would be to provide dedicated chunk of functionality, perhaps mostly aimed at the "Enterprise" market version, which would allow users to establish conventions and rules for the use of Layers that would then control the process, make the right decisions and allow the choice of retaining or replacing masks according to production needs.
As part of the process a list of possible anomalies should be provided and, optionally, a "before and after comparison of some sort to provide a rapidly accessible visual assessment of the changes made.
Finally a "Reversal" facility should be available, either for all images or selected images.
That would be a part of a starting point specification for a tool to efficiently and effectively make extensive changes to large number of images in a batch. There are many additional features that one could think of to add to such a facility should there be enough use cases out there to make them desireable.
0 -
The ability to auto replace layers used to exist and was in fact the only option but that was unrewarding and limiting in many ways. Work could easily be lost.
this is why every other software on the market does work this way ?
the real difference is that this other developer seem to better understand photographer and workflow needs while here people are in charge thinking they now better and remove long standing functionality without notice and call it a improvement, so no surprise after they crippled the layer handling they damaged the export tool makes me wonder what is next on their list to make c1 fool proof for idiot user.
0 -
I noticed yesterday that C1 seems to have stopped doing this. Have they quietly reverted back to the old behaviour?
Now don’t get me started on the stupid new export ‘feature’…
0 -
Very harsh and constantly negative tone, CSP. I‘m off here…
-1 -
mark sadly no,
seems only a kind of online riot and change.org petition makes them move a little and respond. the layer issue effects less user so they keep on doing what they do best ignoring the needs of user. the ones utilising the coming HDR and Pano tools will also very much appreciate this great change.... ;-)
1
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
81 comments