Skip to main content

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived.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

Smart(er) Catalogue definition strategies

Comments

6 comments

  • NN635124459955142762UL
    Nothing that I can think of. Match All/Any is a global setting, it needs to be local. Hierarchical, in fact:


    Keywords Contain A
    or {
    Keywords Contain B
    and {
    Keywords Contain C
    } but not {
    Keywords Contain D
    }
    } and {
    Name equals "ccc"
    }


    It's also worth pointing out that you can't get an exact keyword match for nested keywords. Given:


    Key1
    subkey1


    you can match "contains subkey1" but not "equals subkey1".

    Worse:


    Key1
    subkey1
    subkey2
    Key2
    subkey1
    subkey2

    "contains subkey1" will match two keywords and the only way to prevent this is to add a match for the parent keyword. Which is messy. And if you have to add more keywords with "subkey1" as children you have to adjust all your smart folders to match.

    Like with much of CO, the basics are solid some attention needs paying to the details.
    0
  • tomr7
    Thank you for your cogent and focused reply.

    You know ... right after posting that message I thought that perhaps nothing short of embedding some more "structured" grammar in the text field for Keywords would really work here because we'd still need parenthesis to ensure that the boolean operators distributed correctly over compound statements ... .

    Perhaps I should re-think how I'm using keywords? In all fairness to the Capture One engineering team: most photographers are too busy with business and aesthetic details (more so the former than latter) to bother with boolean expressions syntax!

    TR
    0
  • SFA
    The Smart routines, so far as I know (I use sessions not catalogues but I assume the principles are much the same) use searches to define their Smartness.

    However you can also deploy filters on a Smart collection (i.e. a Search) via the filter tool, for example.

    In the search window the filters are applied on top of the Search criteria as "Any" filters as selections.

    The filter tool allows that to be toggled to "All" filters. In other words it modifies the selection on top of the Search definition and therefore makes, in effect, 2 smart selections from one Smart search.

    Would that sort of approach provide a workable solution rather than having possibly multiple Smart searches for any possible combination that one might think of? (Tempting as that prospect may be ....)



    Grant
    0
  • peter Frings
    Actually, you can create hierarchical filters, but the UI is not so clear (I also believe there's a bug in it, but there's a work around.

    Suppose you want (keyword = K1 OR keyword = K2) AND rating > 2

    Then in the filter dialog, do the following:
    1. Select "Match All conditions"
    2. Click the + under "Search criteria" -> you get a new "Any" criterium
    3. Click the + at the end of that criteria -> you get a new group with a "Match all" choice and 2 criteria.
    4. Select "Match any" for that group, and set the 2 criteria for the keywords
    5. Click the + in *front* of the last criterium -> You get a new criterium, and this one also has + and - at the end
    6. Click the + at the end of this new criterium. -> You get a new group with a Match all choice and 2 criteria.
    7. Set the first criteria of this new group to "Rating > 2".
    8. Leave the 2nd criteria as is, or uncheck it. Don't delete it.

    This is what you should get:

    HTH,
    Peter.
    0
  • peter Frings
    BTW, it would've been so much easier to be able to type multiple keywords into a single criterium, just like you kan do with filenames in the "Any" criterium. Although, that one is not very reliable, I find.
    0
  • tomr7
    Thank you for the excellent and helpful replies. It would appear that at least a few adept users have also found the need to do some of these things.

    At the end of the day these workarounds are possible, but, considering these suggestions in their totality suggests that the issue of generalized keywords would likely require a commitment to add software and documentation to support these changes--- and this would likely happen in the next release.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.