Renaming Variants Without Renaming Original
Is there a way to rename a new or cloned variant WITHOUT renaming it's original?
Can't seem to figure that out. And what is the difference between New and Clone Variant?
Can't seem to figure that out. And what is the difference between New and Clone Variant?
0
-
1. Only when you apply new name to output files
2. A clone is a clone = exact copy of the relating source: if for instance you produce a b&w form the original and then clone that b&W conversion a new version of the b&w appears in the browser = 2 x B&W
3. A new variant is a copy of the original=source file: if for instance you produce a b&w form the original and then produce a new variant, a new version of the original file appears in the browser. = 1x B&W 1x coloured = original w/o any adjustments.
For further in check out the POne/COne video channel on youtube0 -
That's what I thought regarding Output.
What would be ideal is to rename the New Variant only.
I shoot fitness step by steps and sometimes one images is used several times so I'd like to be able to keep the master and then rename as many variants as I can so it's less confusing if I need to go back to the master's original name0 -
I, too, would like the ability to name variants independently of each other and of the master image name. That would provide a great deal more cataloging flexibility. 1 -
Not sure why I even bother since when I Batch rename, i get the rainbow wheel most of the time.
Crazy that I paid $99 for an upgrade that made it more like Lightroom when in the first place I liked how C1 was different than lightroom....Now it's just similar and buggy and crashes about once/hour 🤓0 -
[quote="PhaseoneUser50155" wrote:
Not sure why I even bother since when I Batch rename, i get the rainbow wheel most of the time.
Crazy that I paid $99 for an upgrade that made it more like Lightroom when in the first place I liked how C1 was different than lightroom....Now it's just similar and buggy and crashes about once/hour 🤓
I'm just running the 60-day trial version, but I'm having no crashes at all.
Mac OS X 10.8.2
Mac Pro 16GB RAM, NVIDEA GeForce 8800GT 512MB RAM
OpenCL off via Preferences
You?0 -
[quote="PhaseoneUser50155" wrote:
Not sure why I even bother since when I Batch rename, i get the rainbow wheel most of the time.
Crazy that I paid $99 for an upgrade that made it more like Lightroom when in the first place I liked how C1 was different than lightroom....Now it's just similar and buggy and crashes about once/hour 🤓
Maybe you might consider skip using COne and going with LR!
Why, for gods sake, there are always users who claim that all available RAW converters in the market shall be like LR!0 -
[quote="Thomas248" wrote:
Maybe you might consider skip using COne and going with LR!
Why, for gods sake, there are always users who claim that all available RAW converters in the market shall be like LR!
I, for one, would NOT like C1 Pro to be like Lightroom. I really dislike Lightroom's interface, although I can't complain about its image output quality or its place in the RAW converter world.
What I would like is for C1 Pro to improve its DAM features.0 -
Bob, I suppose that this seems only be possible "halfway".
I am a user of either COne starting from 3.7 until the recent 7.1 version as well as a user of iViewMedia, Expression Media, and finally made the (necessary) switch to Media Pro.
There have aways been trials to include the capabilities either into Microsofts development and office products as well as into COne. Microsoft started with a lot of effort to make it happen but really fast stopped the efforts and the development to enable EM as their DAM tool. It resided for more then 2 years in MS cellar - not in their official EM development suites - and it was really difficult to gain access to its place in MS website - officially they even stopped to market or promote it until it was sold to POne.
POne started to integrate/improve MP with regard to integrate it somehow into COne, but at least it did not really happen. If I remember right, they started like MS with efforts claiming to improve and integrate it into COne, but it still remained as a "step-child" in their portfolio but never was fully integrated or at least functionally associated with COne. Even all new version were promoted to be a step towards integration, but it is just as it is: a standalone piece of software with some "brides" into COne. I gave up the vision that ever it will ever be fully integrated into One besides it was done with COne 7. The step from COne 7.0x to 7.1 is - in my opinion - a step back. As we all experience and discuss here the more capabilities were tried to embed into COne the buggier it became. The latest effort were the catalogues in COne, but there seems to be no feasible way to do this. Still coexisting catalogues and databases in either product are compatible - with session in COne it quite feasible can coexist but there seems a border in architecture that cannot be crossed w/o heavy vulnerabilities on both sides.
With further integration both applications seem to loose stability and capabilities and my conclusion is to stay with MP1.3 and COne with only using sessions, because most of the errors and bugs in COne reported and discusses here are seemingly related to the introduction of catalogues.
Lightroom as well had and has its problems in stability and capabilities by trying to brew one application, being able to fit both sides of the coins: The processing and editing in LR is at least a little bit more than PSE and less than PS/CS. On the other hand the DAM capabilities of LT have never reached the possibilities, that were able even as MP was iViewMedia. One of the largest problems in LR is, compared to iView/EM2/MP, its poor capability in handling a lot of coexisting, shareable and joinable catalogues. LR1, 2, and 3did only support one single catalogue at a time. Since more than one catalogues are possible to create and handle, LR problems arose. One of the mayor problems - as it occurs now on POne's side as well - seems to be the SQLite database. For just handling catalogues like in MP there is not one larger problem. But when t comes to try to "marry" the DAM functionality with editing and storing the various editing step for variants etc. the database fails. This is well known in the developers communities: real and performant polyinstantiation is not possible with SQLite. SQLite was never intended to be able to do this, not in it's primary release and not now in version 3.
If sometimes a solution of COne will be presented with full MP functionality as is possible now and integration into the photo editing/raw converting application like COne, SQLite must be substituted with a different database, which is possible to perform polyinstantiation, fully parallel execution of SQL commands, and if this future "integrated COne" shall be used to collaborate on shared platforms with multiuser functionality, polymorphism in the database must be present as well. There exist database, that can do that, but they are called, DB2, SQL-Server, Postgres, Informix, Oracle and others - but theses databases for their own are such large and complex environments - not applications - which need administrative overhead, that will be far beyond in being implemented "into" a "simple" application like COne, PS/CS or LR: in other words this will be an overkill.
so: staying with COne and MP as coexisting applications with "some" bridges" will be the better choice today. What might be possible in the future - besides using those database hogs, might be non-relational databases, but these are far away from being used as integrated features in applications AND for sure will need a complete redesign.
saludos redondos -
tom0 -
Aperture does a fine job, for my needs, with DAM. If C1 could get that far, it would be wonderful! 0 -
Yes,
- but the image quality resulting from COne is - despite the bugs - imho superior
- the DAM features are nice, but do not reach the capabilities of handling catalogues and the underlying database(s) are much larger than those in MP
... and btw: Aperture was built completely from scratch regarding both sides - the rendering AND the DAM features
Conclusio: "What I like to have I can't get and what I have I don't like" - today it is yet a compromise 😊)
saludos redondos -
tom0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
10 comments