Organising Session Albums into Folders

mharris

• September 06, 2016 19:42

I originally posted this in the mac section by mistake, but here it is again - seems like it might be a Windows only thing..

Clicking the + icon to add a new Album to my Session, I noticed there is an option there for "Folder". However it seems this is always greyed out. I've tried various things but cannot get that option enabled.

Screenshot here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a5zna36yyunss ... t.png?dl=0

Does anyone know what this option is for, or how to enable it?

I use a single session for all my images, so being able to organise my Albums into sub groups (in much the same way you can in a catalog) would be amazing.

On a slightly related note.. It is intriguing that phase one has developed functionality for Album organisation in Catalogs (Projects, Albums, Groups, etc), but omitted that functionality from Sessions. I wonder why they chose to do that. Surely it must take more effort to develop two distinct Album browsers for the two modes. For no benefit other than robbing the Session users of some useful functionality.

0

• 

  SFA

  • September 08, 2016 00:27

  Sessions came first so the additional functionality is part of the catalogue development within C1.
  
  Although you can certainly use a single session and work that way (as I do) for your purposes it sounds like a catalogue approach would be just as appropriate AND it would provide the organisation opportunities that you desire.
  
  I think the greyed out "folder" function may be part of a "shared" function used by both catalogues, where managed images can be organised within the catalogue "container". The other option is that there is indeed a difference in operation based on what the OS allows or disallows.
  
  Folders within the Albums section are less obviously useful for sessions since you can always use system folders either within the Session folder structure or anywhere else you might choose to locate the folder in your system. Using a folder assumes you wish to physically move the files whereas Albums are user managed lists of referenced files and smart albums are auto-groupings based on search/filter criteria.
  
  My thoughts, for what they are worth.
  
  Others may come along shortly with a better explanation and more useful suggestions.
  
  
  Grant

  0
• 

  mharris

  • September 08, 2016 09:11

  Hi Grant,
  
  Thanks for the reply. I' think I've figured this out, you were along the right lines in saying that this is a shared context menu. However it is shared between the plus icon in Session Albums and the right click > "New Inside" when clicking on a folder in System Folders.
  
  It seems the devs have reused the same menu control and disabled the options that are not relevant. To be honest this is pretty lazy development. A disabled menu item suggests that option is available under different conditions and hints at potential functionality. Much better to create two different menus because the functionality available on a system folder and a session album don't really overlap.
  
  My other ramblings were more to do with the fact that phase one seem to be intentionally distancing sessions from cataogs (probably for marketing and explanation purposes), and deliberately going to the effort of omitting functionality from one or the other. I fully understand the differences: live folder content vs. catalogued DB content, and the differences between where both store their adjustment data. But beyond those fundamental differences, catalogs and sessions aren't that different (or at least they don't need to be). I've chosen to have my adjustment data written to a sidecar folder, so I need to use a Session. The Album organisation features would be very useful for me and its not like they would get in the way of someone using the Session workflow "properly".

  0
• 

  SFA

  • September 08, 2016 11:25

  I would think that if you only use a single session there is indeed little difference between how you might use the session or a catalogue.
  
  If you use multiple sessions, as originally envisaged for the Pro/Studio markets presumably, then there are likely to be significant differences in workflow that are likely to make the a shared folder (physical movement of files) of less interest.
  
  For your workflow, as described, you may as well make use of a catalogue since you gain the functionality you want and lose nothing, so far as I can tell, so long as you keep the original files referenced.
  
  The only clear difference would be that all of the edit instruction files would be contained within the catalogue rather than in subfolders at the source image storage location. Absent multiple catalogue or session requirements using the same images, which does not appear to be something you need, I would think that a catalogue offers some advantages to you.
  
  From my perspective I could see uses for catalogues of finished images but I'm perfectly happy with sessions as a primary ingestion and processing workflow.
  
  
  
  HTH.
  
  
  Grant

  0

Post is closed for comments.