メインコンテンツへスキップ

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived.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

7 small features that would make my workflow more effective

ettore.causa
I have being using very intensively C1 (which I truly love!) in the last days, and here are some little things that I am really missing coming from my previous experience with Aperture and Lr

-1 Metadata preset in the importer window
-2 Be able to select multiple folders when importing
-3 Be able to select multiple folders when exporting from C1
-4 A "reject" flag (for those images that will be later on deleted
-5 Getting a "warning" if a file is not imported in C1
-6 On/Off switch for each adjustment tool
-7 Adjustments history

Thanks for listening

Ettore
0

コメント

7件のコメント

日付 投票
  • Paul Steunebrink
    > 1. For me, it is already there (style)

    > 4. Could 5-star rating and/or 7 colors for tagging do the trick?
    0
  • ettore.causa
    [quote="Paul_Steunebrink" wrote:
    > 1. For me, it is already there (style)

    > 4. Could 5-star rating and/or 7 colors for tagging do the trick?


    Thanks Paul

    I had completely missed that in "Style" you can import metadata keywords
    I am happy to see that!


    Concerning point 4,yes i had thought the same but having a dedicated flag for rejected photos its safer and it would avoid misunderstanding when sharing the workflow with other users.

    Ettore
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="NNN635022403475152212" wrote:


    [color=#0000FF:36gltofn]-1 Metadata preset in the importer window[/color:36gltofn]

    As Paul said that can be done although perhaps it could be made easier. However imprting first, creating a "master" Metadata preset or style and then applying it for the entire batch (or not according to need) is quite quick when needed and makes little difference to the workflow.

    [color=#0000FF:36gltofn]-2 Be able to select multiple folders when importing [/color:36gltofn]

    I assume you are looking for an option to select a "random" group of folders.

    You can select subfolders - which is part of the way there.

    Or copy the separate "random" folders to anotherplace/drive under a single folder and then import (if you feel a need to - you don't have to if using sessions) from there.

    [color=#0000FF:36gltofn]-3 Be able to select multiple folders when exporting from C1 [/color:36gltofn]

    [color=#FF0000:36gltofn]Exporting[/color:36gltofn] from multiple folders is possible if you can define the selection from all the separate folders as a "rule" for a smart folder collection. There may be other ways too. However ...

    [color=#FF0000:36gltofn]Processing[/color:36gltofn] allows you to create recipes that also allow you to specify different destination folders if that is part of your need.

    Alternatively the batch option, where the batch process runs separately from C1 in the backgound, means that even processing from multiple folders as separate batch selections per folder is not really a difficult or time consuming activity in most cases. (There may be exceptions!)


    [color=#0000FF:36gltofn]-4 A "reject" flag (for those images that will be later on deleted[/color:36gltofn]

    C1 offers the "Move to Trash" function for this, retaining the option to reverse the selection if required.

    I tend to set a 1 flag then filter and delete at some point later.

    [color=#0000FF:36gltofn]
    -5 Getting a "warning" if a file is not imported in C1    [/color:36gltofn]

    Iirc you get an error is a valid file fails to import for some reason. I think to include errors for any file that does not import (i.e. that C1 does not recognise as an image file) might have some interesting decisions to be debated nsince file extensions alone are not entirely reliable identifiers. A good challenge though.

    [color=#0000FF:36gltofn]-6 On/Off switch for each adjustment tool[/color:36gltofn]

    You can temporarily disable (interactively) one tool at a time but it's not exactly an on/off switch.

    There are other workarounds but I tend to agree that a straight on off switch per tool would be useful. (Assuming that the way the different tools interact makes some sense to allow that - it's possible that is not the case, or at least may not always present the result in a way that is as useful as you think it is! I don't know for certain but my experiments with a different application that does have on/off switches and a very similar approach to the UI can exhibit slightly unexpected changes form time to time.

    [color=#0000FF:36gltofn]-7 Adjustments history [/color:36gltofn]

    Personally speaking and coming from a system that had a complete history per image within its current session ... I realised I rarely used it after a while and don't miss it in C1. However if it could be provided without noticable additional overhead such a feature is potentially useful. It would, presumably, have to be per variant though ... and that starts to get into an area for debate I would think.


    Thanks for listening

    Ettore


    A nice list Ettore. It is good to be prompted to look at these things with fresh eyes from time to time.

    Indeed my responses are based on my experience using Sessions and it is quite possible that catalogues, functionality with which I am not familiar, have different constraints at this time. And also I am looking at the Pro version whereas you or others might be working with a different version.



    Grant Perkins
    0
  • ettore.causa

    -2 Be able to select multiple folders when importing
    I assume you are looking for an option to select a "random" group of folders.

    Yes i do! but I still think It would be much easier just to keep pressed the command key and select all the folders I want to import

    -3 Be able to select multiple folders when exporting from C1
    Exporting from multiple folders is possible if you can define the selection from all the separate folders as a "rule" for a smart folder collection. There may be other ways too. However ...

    Processing allows you to create recipes that also allow you to specify different destination folders if that is part of your need.

    Alternatively the batch option, where the batch process runs separately from C1 in the backgound, means that even processing from multiple folders as separate batch selections per folder is not really a difficult or time consuming activity in most cases. (There may be exceptions!)




    I am not sure what you mean with " if you can define the selection from all the separate folders as a "rule" for a smart folder collection"
    You see what I meant is, ...lets say that i have in my catalog 15 folders which I want to export to a laptop, right now I have to do it one by one...
    and since i am speaking about the original raw(with the adjustment to) I can't use the batch option
    on LR or Aperture the command key does the job 😊

    -5 Getting a "warning" if a file is not imported in C1

    Iirc you get an error is a valid file fails to import for some reason. I think to include errors for any file that does not import (i.e. that C1 does not recognise as an image file) might have some interesting decisions to be debated nsince file extensions alone are not entirely reliable identifiers. A good challenge though.


    You would assume that a Tiff or DNG file should be imported by C1
    I discovered just by chance that there were many of my Tiff,Psd and DNG files (which worked perfectly with PS,Lr,Aperture,iPhoto,Pixelmator,etc.) that were not imported !!!
    I think a warning that a image file was not added for what ever reason its a must in a pro environment !!


    Thanks so much for your input!
    Best
    Ettore
    0
  • SFA
    Ettore,

    Re: Exporting.

    I see you are referring to Catalogues (with internally stored original files?) and the Export export rather than 'Process' - which people have been known to use interchangably in past discussions - hence why I mentioned both.

    As I mentioned before I am not familiar with Catalogue functionality so I will leave that one for others to respond to you.

    Things seem a little more flexible with sessions. Not surprising - they have been around longer in C1.

    I was thinking you might be able to use Groups/Projects for your Export needs. However if you want to retain the separate folder after export that may not be quite so simple based what I have read so far. Whether you need to retain the folder structure would be an obvious starting point for a design discussion.

    RE: Import.

    I see your point although what is available has been fine for my purposes. I tend to assign names on a per folder basis anyway (when I remember!) during import so folder by folder gives me a point of control to remind me and check that things are as I want them. My main cameras use mass folders (rather than folder assigned monthly or daily or whetever) so I suppose it is less of an issue (per source) for me.

    Re: Warnings.

    I understand what you are saying although I would guess that after an initial load and once you know which files are not supported the requirement is more easily managed.

    I guess at the moment the import process is designed to work only with files it "recognises" as files it can work with.

    There are, potentially a great many files in the system that is would not recognise and are rightly ignored.

    Somewhere in the mix will be others that might be assumed to be image files within the market but that are not currently usable with C1. C1 does not recognise them so they are included with the rest. The option is to find a way to identify unsupported files - which mean you then have to recognise them and then decline to process them before you can offer a warning. (The alternative simple solution is that you provide a warning for EVERY unrecognised file and in some cases I suppose that could be a very long list - if you tick "Include subfolders" for example!)

    That seems to be a good one to present to the developers!

    Maybe a warning about "xxxx file not imported. Do you want to see a list?" would work.

    If the list allowed you to filter by something (file extension? Size? Part of name? Etc.) to check for only those you would be disappointed to missout might that be enough in most cases? If not it may be easier to find a way to to something with the files and important them, perhaps with some restrictions. The problem, I fear, is that the unrecognised image files cannot be imported without losing their existing integrity. It may be more of a philosophical thing than a technical problem, though there may be some licencing issues involved for any technical solution delivered.

    A few more thoughts, for what they are worth.


    Grant Perkins


    Grant Perkins
    0
  • Christian Gruner
    4)

    I think this is a matter of taste, patience and mood 😉

    I use this workflow:
    1: Go through all the pictures rating between 1 and 2 stars.
    2: Using the Focus Mask overlay (and the Filters tool), I check focus on all 2 star shots. Pictures out of focus gets 1 star, and gets removed from the Browser automatically.
    3: Create a Web Contact Sheet for my customer for a rough selection.
    4: I receive the customers rough collection, and give those 3 stars
    5: I will then continue with 4 stars, and then end up with 5 stars for the final ones.

    It might seem like a tedious process, but has certain advantages afterwards:
    - I can delete all pictures marked with 1 star before archiving.
    - If the customer requests more pictures later on, I still have a prioritized list of both 3 and 4 starred pictures. If I only had "rejects", I would have to to do the sorting all over again.
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="Christian Gr" wrote:
    4)

    I think this is a matter of taste, patience and mood 😉

    I use this workflow:
    1: Go through all the pictures rating between 1 and 2 stars.
    2: Using the Focus Mask overlay (and the Filters tool), I check focus on all 2 star shots. Pictures out of focus gets 1 star, and gets removed from the Browser automatically.
    3: Create a Web Contact Sheet for my customer for a rough selection.
    4: I receive the customers rough collection, and give those 3 stars
    5: I will then continue with 4 stars, and then end up with 5 stars for the final ones.

    It might seem like a tedious process, but has certain advantages afterwards:
    - I can delete all pictures marked with 1 star before archiving.
    - If the customer requests more pictures later on, I still have a prioritized list of both 3 and 4 starred pictures. If I only had "rejects", I would have to to do the sorting all over again.


    Thats very much like my approach. The difference is that as I often shoot events resulting in large numbers of images for multiple 'prospective clients' I don't often consider using the Contact Sheet step - or at least not in the same way. The only difference perhaps is that I leave 1 (obvious delete) and 2 (might be ok for social media) star images separate (easy enough to delete both if required later) and may allocate both 3 and 4 stars to my selection leaving 5 for the customer selection. (Or, if the shoot might involve multiple clients for the same images, I tend to use a colour tag to select per customer and processes output(s) to a sub folder for each customer separately at that stage. For electronic distribution that makes it easier to re-ship should the need arise.)

    What I will also do is use a colour tag along with the rating to select sub-sets for interim processing when I know that some images will have specific appeal for some people - or if there is a press deadline to meet. This is later adapted for processed output selection.

    Using Keywords would also be advantgeous but to get it right for the mix of content would likely take too long more often than not. More than half of the problem is identifying the subject matter accurately before even considering what keywords to use!

    It's much faster (though not fast in any application when working carefully through several thousand images) to do that on a visual basis. It's unlikely, to my mind, that the time and effort spent attempting detailed keywording would have a payback benefit at any future point. I might be wrong there but I would be surprised based on experinces so far.

    Grant Perkins
    0

投稿コメントは受け付けていません。