Any way to Process Output and Overwrite Files?

Comments

38 comments

  • charlie chipman
    There is not. I'd suggest making a feature request. You're not the only one to ask about this.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • C-M-B
    I hope that won't change because this prevents accidental data loss.
    Image you had just finished working for hours on some images in Photoshop and then you accidentally hit the "Export"-button in CaptureOne.
    All that work would be gone and there'd be no way to recover it.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • RobiWan
    [quote="C-M-B" wrote:
    I hope that won't change because this prevents accidental data loss.
    ...
    ...
    All that work would be gone and there'd be no way to recover it.


    But this can be realized optionally - something like - "Override existing files yes/no"
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • C-M-B
    Sure but the sheer possibility that an assistant could potentially overwrite files by ticking the box accidentally - or you forget to untick the box the next time is just too great.
    Honestly I think it's better to not even give the option to overwrite files at all.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • OddS.
    [quote="C-M-B" wrote:
    ...I think it's better to not even give the option to overwrite files at all.


    That may be fine for some users/situations, but not for all. Few things really decode to the binary yes-no. A ternary yes-no-ask may serve some users/situations better.

    The task of removing output files before reprocessing can be annoying at times if further automatic or semi-automatic use of output files depends on filenames; like building web pages outside C1 to name one example. Any output file accidentally deleted or overwritten due to a name conflict, ought to be reproducible by C1 reprocessing the image source variant or by the user re-copying from the foreign source image repository.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • C-M-B
    The potential for being annoying is one thing.
    The potential for data loss is another.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • WPNL
    C1 is the only application on my pc that does not give an overwrite option of any kind, not even Windows Explorer's ...
    Go figure what is "normal" or "preferred"

    Plus I don't think it's the application's fault it the user decides to overwrite files, he should pay better attention, no excuses...
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • IanS
    [quote="WPNL" wrote:
    C1 is the only application on my pc that does not give an overwrite option of any kind, not even Windows Explorer's ...
    Go figure what is "normal" or "preferred"

    Plus I don't think it's the application's fault it the user decides to overwrite files, he should pay better attention, no excuses...


    Totally agree. I put in a feature request some months ago asking for this "normalising" of C1's behaviour. I don't know of any other photo / video image app that absolutely prevents over write of files.

    Understand not touching raw files but C1 is a parametric editor so you still have the image in the catalogue?? My guess this is an individuals "idiosyncrasy" at PhaseOne and they must be high enough up to be able to ignore users and common sense. Or they are right and every other program is getting it wrong ๐Ÿ˜Š

    I am not holding my breath for change with this one but you have to keep asking, you never know whoever it is might leave or retire ๐Ÿ˜Š

    Ian
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Ian Leslie
    I too would like an overwrite option. I view my raw files as the important files any files I produce are just temporary. So, for me anytime I re-export it is because I have made a mistake or need to adjust something. I will never export to create master files. Therefore it would be nice to tweak a setting to get that behaviour.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • SFA
    I don't often edit processed files in another application and so do not use a workflow that might, for example, export a tiff file, see that processed in PS and put back in the "originals" folder alongside the original raw file or perhaps in an associated sub-folder for both the original processed/exported file and the PS version.

    So for my understanding, what amount of checking would be required to allow an overwrite automatically EXCEPT for any instances where the previously processed file had already been further processed outside C1 but saved with the same name?


    Grant
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • WPNL
    Ay the moment you want to modify the TIF ou have to work on RAW again and export a TIF again, at that moment you might consider to overwrite or rename.

    This however was not the method of the op if I understood right.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • OddS.
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    ...So for my understanding, what amount of checking would be required to allow an overwrite automatically EXCEPT for any instances where the previously processed file had already been further processed outside C1 but saved with the same name?


    Those who keep round trip TIFFs in the capture folder should not suffer data loss when C1 processes/exports to the output folder. A yes-no-ask option for the output folder would probably work well for many users. Users who prefer to mix originals, round trip files and output files in the same folder, should just keep the yes-no-ask option set to "No".
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • SFA
    [quote="WPNL" wrote:
    Ay the moment you want to modify the TIF ou have to work on RAW again and export a TIF again, at that moment you might consider to overwrite or rename.

    This however was not the method of the op if I understood right.


    It does not matter much what the OP's needs were when discussing the broader principle of what is required from an accidental overwrite protection system.

    In any case, why would you need to re-export again? If you are selectively doing so and want to discard the original TIF (or whatever) complete with its "third party application" changes I don't see that you would have a problem. Delete or move the previous work and repeat the process. It's the user's clear decision.

    The problem of an accidentally overwrite is more likely to come form some sort of batch process with one or more previously processed images being accidentally reprocessed and overwritten.

    If, in the example I offered, all that happened what that the TIF (or other format) previously output file was simply replaced with the same output it would not matter at all. However, if that file had been processed by a another application and then returned to the original folder using the same name the external work would be lost if the only check was name matching.

    Is name matching at a specific location (folder) the only identification required for a replace/do not replace decision?

    If we settle on the "Ask" option to resolve possible conflicts - how does the user know how to respond to the question? What information access needs to be allowed at that point for the user to be able to make the replace/do not replace decision?
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • SFA
    [quote="OddS" wrote:
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    ...So for my understanding, what amount of checking would be required to allow an overwrite automatically EXCEPT for any instances where the previously processed file had already been further processed outside C1 but saved with the same name?


    Those who keep round trip TIFFs in the capture folder should not suffer data loss when C1 processes/exports to the output folder. A yes-no-ask option for the output folder would probably work well for many users. Users who prefer to mix originals, round trip files and output files in the same folder, should just keep the yes-no-ask option set to "No".


    I would agree OddS, but I suggest there will be people out there who will not want to take on the decision making and who would expect "a professional application" to make the decisions for them without needing to define the rules in advance.

    It would probably be better for the developers to address these matters in advance should they decide to undertake to provide such a facility.

    Grant
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Mike Katz
    I also would like this option, and as said above every other software I know simply asks whether to overwrite. It's standard practice.

    One reason I need this even more, though, is because the preview window in Capture One is not that accurate. So, I export and then review outside of Capture One, and I frequently need to make a small adjustment and re-export.

    I have also filed a feature update request, but it looks like they are not interested.

    Sometimes software developers are like this. I know, I was one myself ๐Ÿ™„ !

    This one is almost like WhatsApp telling me they won't release version on the iPad because it's not a mobile device (!), and then subsequently releasing a version for my Windows desktop (!!!).
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • OddS.
    [quote="SFA" wrote:

    I would agree OddS, but I suggest there will be people out there who will not want to take on the decision making and who would expect "a professional application" to make the decisions for them without needing to define the rules in advance.


    Like they do with the "Delete" actions, right? ๐Ÿ˜Ž
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • SFA
    [quote="OddS" wrote:
    [quote="SFA" wrote:

    I would agree OddS, but I suggest there will be people out there who will not want to take on the decision making and who would expect "a professional application" to make the decisions for them without needing to define the rules in advance.


    Like they do with the "Delete" actions, right? ๐Ÿ˜Ž


    I suspect that that is another example of "doing things for the user so they don't have to" which would be much in demand from some people and totally opposed by others.

    I am not sure but it seems to fit with the Apple way of doing things so that people just accept what is offered and make use of it whereas Windows users are more used to having to get their "hands dirty".

    Linux users, at the other extreme, positively insist that nothing is goiong to work as they need it to unless they are forced to get their hands very dirty!


    ๐Ÿ˜‰


    And then there are the phone manufacturers and apps ...

    At some time in the past decade all of my family have had cameras of one sort of another, usually decent quality compacts from various manufacturers.

    Now they only use their phones to take stills and video. They get some good results - very much fit for the purpose they intend for the shots they take. And very happy despite the limited options they deploy for image manipulation.

    This thread subject may have very little to discuss within the next decade. Indeed the entire forum may have very little to chat about by then.


    Grant
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • WPNL
    [quote="OddS" wrote:
    [quote="SFA" wrote:

    I would agree OddS, but I suggest there will be people out there who will not want to take on the decision making and who would expect "a professional application" to make the decisions for them without needing to define the rules in advance.


    Like they do with the "Delete" actions, right? ๐Ÿ˜Ž


    ... I don't expect a professional program to generate files with different names than which I have set in my output settings...
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • SFA
    [quote="WPNL" wrote:
    [quote="OddS" wrote:
    [quote="SFA" wrote:

    I would agree OddS, but I suggest there will be people out there who will not want to take on the decision making and who would expect "a professional application" to make the decisions for them without needing to define the rules in advance.


    Like they do with the "Delete" actions, right? ๐Ÿ˜Ž


    ... I don't expect a professional program to generate files with different names than which I have set in my output settings...


    Best option then is to suspend the output processing and put up a warning message.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • WPNL
    That would be an improvement indeed, and if this message gave the option to cancel / overwrite / rename we should be "done" ๐Ÿ˜Š
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • SFA
    So, just like a windows copy routine then?

    The thing is when that asks me if I want to overwrite or skip, sometimes the answer is obvious, sometimes not at all obvious. Especially not for several hundreds or thousands of files.

    But if that works for the purpose then an instant "available today" solution that adds very little overhead would be to write the revised output files to a new folder, thus avoiding any additions to the name, and then use the OS's copy routine to replace the originals in the original folder using the facilities the OS provides.

    Job done, adds a few seconds to the task if you keep a window open to facilitate the copy knowing that you about to do it.

    For a one-off file replacement simply delete the one you are going to replace first and then reprocess. (Assuming that the output files are not themselves being treated as "originals" as far as C1 is concerned.)


    Grant
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • NN635071005880730612UL
    Has there been an update to allow the overwrite of files on export ?

    It would be handy when processing 1000 images and then go back to make a few changes - then just re-export to same location.

    My current workaound is to export to new different folder, then drag the new files to the old folder ..

    If there isn't a way to overwrite (as in LR) then fair enough - just need to know !

    Mike
    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Ian Wilson
    [quote="NN635071005880730612UL" wrote:

    If there isn't a way to overwrite (as in LR) then fair enough - just need to know !

    Mike

    There isn't!

    Ian
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • MD'
    [quote="NN635071005880730612UL" wrote:
    It would be handy when processing 1000 images and then go back to make a few changes - then just re-export to same location.

    Exactly my workflow as well. One of the first things in fact that sold me on shooting Raw, long ago.

    My current workaound is to export to new different folder, then drag the new files to the old folder ..

    The single most annoying thing to have to do. How do they not see this issue!?

    "Capture One is built to minimize your workload and maximize your efficiency. Design your own workspace and find your way of working in Capture One." ๐Ÿ™„
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Mike Katz
    [quote="Maurice01" wrote:
    [quote="NN635071005880730612UL" wrote:
    It would be handy when processing 1000 images and then go back to make a few changes - then just re-export to same location.

    Exactly my workflow as well. One of the first things in fact that sold me on shooting Raw, long ago.

    My current workaound is to export to new different folder, then drag the new files to the old folder ..

    The single most annoying thing to have to do. How do they not see this issue!?

    "Capture One is built to minimize your workload and maximize your efficiency. Design your own workspace and find your way of working in Capture One." ๐Ÿ™„

    +1
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Benjamin Liddle
    I suggest sending us a formal feature request via the link in my profile.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • WPNL
    Did so quite some time and versions ago ๐Ÿ˜Š
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Mike Katz
    [quote="WPNL" wrote:
    Did so quite some time and versions ago ๐Ÿ˜Š

    Me too.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Jmouritsen
    Coming from Lightroom with a pretty solid workflow for managing images for book projects with lots of images.
    I regularly update images during the design phase. The way Lightroom handles overwriting files with a dialog showing the files that will be updated, works perfectly, and I have never overwritten a file by mistake.
    I really hope C1 will consider to implement a similar feature.

    Anyway on OSX i found a simple workaround, it is not the most elegant, but at least it is automated.
    I created a folder action on a folder that C1 temporarily export to, with a single action to "Move Finder Items" to the final destination. (With the option to replace existing files).
    This works, but is is not so flexible, because the destination path i fixed, so the folder action would have to be recreated for each output destination.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Jim Hughes
    Isn't there ANY way to force C1 to overwrite an output file in a Process Recipe?
    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.