INTERACT FORUM

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)  (Read 7299 times)

marko

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8972

*I think :)*

Adobe Photoshop Elements has a couple of features in its photo browser called 'stacks' and 'version sets'

Stacks:
About stacks
You can create stacks  to visually group a set of similar photos together, making them easy to manage. Stacks are useful for keeping multiple photos of the same subject in one place, and they reduce clutter in the Photo Browser.
For instance, create a stack to group together multiple photos of your family taken with the same pose; or for photos taken at a sports event using your camera’s burst mode or auto-bracket feature. Generally, when you take photos this way, you end up with many similar variations of the same photo, but only really want the best one to appear in the Photo Browser. Stacking the photos lets you easily access them all in one place instead of scattered across rows of thumbnails.
Stacking photos saves space and keeps related photos together

Version Sets
A version set  is a type of stack that contains one original photo and its edited versions. Version sets make it easy to find both the edited versions of an image and the original, because they are visually stacked together instead of scattered throughout the Photo Browser.

When you edit the photo by choosing Edit > Auto Smart Fix, the Organizer automatically puts the photo and its edited copy together in a version set. When you edit the photo in Standard Edit or Quick Fix, and choose File > Save As, you can select the Save In Version Set With Original option to put the photo and its edited copy together in a version set.
If you edit a photo that’s already in a stack, the photo and its edited copy are put in a version set that is nested in the original stack. If you edit a photo that’s already in a version set, the edited copy is placed at the top of the existing version set. Photoshop Elements does not nest version sets within version sets—a version set can contain only one original and its edited versions.

I've often said that mostly, use of MC is limited only by your imagination. Version Sets and Stacks are two of the many image handling features I want to see introduced into MC, so, while I wait for native support, I decided to see what could be achieved with the tools we have. Using a few custom fields and database expressions, I reckon I'm pretty close to a working solution.

So, in the examples posted below, I take all the pictures of the baby in the high chair and 'stack' them, so that while browsing I see one photo instead of thirteen, and I choose which one of the thirteen gets displayed. The thumbnail text shows a little flag (±) to inform me that this image is, in fact, a stack of similar images.

The meerkats photo below is a 'Version Set' example.
Using MC's send to.. > external options, you can send a photo to your favourite image editor. Use "save as..." to save the edited image as new image, import the new image into MC, set the edited image as the 'top image' and then while browsing, you only see the edited image, unless you specifically ask to view all photos in the version set (via 'right click > locate'). The thumbnail text shows a little flag (°) to indicate that this is not the original image.
(the jungle drums are saying that the next MC will have "auto import" which will make version sets a little easier to work with.)

While generally browsing, or importing photos, I can quickly and easily stack images on top of each other, and choose the "top image" using the tag info window.


While generally browsing photos, photo stacks are discreetly flagged. It's possible to use the "right click > locate" command to instantly view the whole stack, then the [back] button to return to the previous browsing position


The same applies to version sets:


I've also managed to set up "workshop" viewschemes that allow me to work with stacks or version sets specifically.
browse by stack:


or by version set:



-marko.

Doof

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 5907
  • Farm Animal Stupid
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2006, 01:38:03 pm »

Yeah, I would. For starters... what are you talking about? ;)
Logged

hit_ny

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3310
  • nothing more to say...
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2006, 01:47:22 am »

Thx for the post marko, still trying to digest what you are doing here. Have not imported images into MC yet, so not so aware with media specific ways of handling them.

Do you find the panes in MC work better at finding/organising photos than whatever is in Elements ?

The next question is what does MC require to replace Elements if at all.
Logged

marko

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8972
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #3 on: June 01, 2006, 03:30:21 am »

one of the problems for me was that if, for example, I wanted to run a quick slideshow of all the baby photos on the TV while there was music playing, "[people]=vada" wasn't cutting it because of runs of 13 photos of "baby in high chair eating chocolate" or similar = boring.

or it would trot out both the original version along with any edited versions of the original file. = boring and irritating.

Possible solutions:
Only import those files you wish to be displayed via MC. Not an answer for me. I've struggled for too long trying to maintain a photoshop elements and an MC image library and I've had little to no success in finding a good workflow for that system. The closest I got was a tag within elements called 'exported to MC'
The solution needs to be able to handle all of my images, not just a select few. So, because of the plus-points mentioned below, I thought I'd have a go at getting MC to do these things with my images too. I think I'm quite close to it. I'll try to find time to knock up all the details of what I've done and post them. I made some notes along the way, as it wasn't all plain sailing, involving many blind allys, some of which I didn't discover 'till a long way up them. I've thought I'd nailed it a few times, only to discover another thing I hadn't thought of, if you know what I mean ::)

I was hoping to pique the interest of others that are caught between the two to see if perhaps I've done some things the long way round or have missed out something pretty fundamental or important. I can tell you right now, viewing 'Version Sets' using MC's library browser (the meerkats above) beats Elements "right click > version set > reveal items in version set", or "find > all version sets" hands down. No contest.

Some of the things I like about Elements:
I really like the fact that I can send a photo(s) to photoshop from Elements via a hotkey press, and that the photo arrives in photoshop with it's new name, ready to save, and when it's saved, Elements automatically links the original and its edited version, but only displays the edited copy. It also passes tags down the set, so if I apply a tag to the displayed, edited file, it is also applied to the original file. You can right click on a 'stack' or a 'version set' and have Elements 'flatten' them. Which means all but the visible file get deleted. So simple. So effective.

Captions applied to images in Elements are written to IPTC tags, whiich can, in turn, be read by many other applications.
Elements allows you some creativity with regard to creating things like online photo albums, slideshows, VCD's etc.
Elements is not so good with actual file naming and location management, with just basic move/copy commands.
Elements does 'close' matches, which are rather good. it means that if I ask for all the pictures of Vada, it gives me them, just those with her alone in them, but also gives me 'close matches' that include photos of Vada with other people in them. (MC wants this one real bad ;) )

Some of the things I don't like in Elements:
Tagging in Elements is done mostly via drag 'n' drop, either photo(s) to tag or tag(s) to photo(s). Sounds simple enough, but for some reason, it doesn't cut it for me. MC's panes win hands down in this department.
Finding files in Elements feels cumbersome compared with MC. You can tick a tag(s) for Elements to filter by, or right click and ask elements to exclude a tag from view. There's a 'find' option which is actually not too bad....

it just feels too far removed. that's the best I can explain it really. Finding things in the tag pane is a real pain too. It can get quite long and scrolling up and down all the time is tiresome, MC's Tag Info window can be a bit like that at times. Again, for me, MC wins hands down here too.

What does MC require?
I'm not too keen on those kind of questions to be honest. Everyone and his dog has their own opinion as to "what MC requires", and generally speaking, I prefer to keep mine to myself and just deal with what MC has at the time. I'm constantly lobbying for improved image support though, I trust that the team is well aware of what's needed and will take whatever's on offer.

Here goes then, on this occasion, I'll try an answer...

I would like for MC, (hoped for 11 --> 11.1 --> maybe 12?) to step up to the plate and take on my image library like it did for my audio. In some places, it's so close it's painful.
We can upload html albums using MC and this is great, but we can't specify a field to be displayed either beneath the thumbnail or the main image, and after clicking a thumbnail to see the full size image, the only way back to the thumbnails is via the "Back" button, but there's nothing to indicate that. (seems obvious, but my Mum needed to ask me!) Imagine how good it would be if MC could manage an index page of photo albums... You'd only need to share one link and everyone would have access to all uploaded albums!

e-mailing images... MC can only create a simple email with the file as a regular attachment. The simple email is created with an advert for MC. While that is pretty standard practice, I don't like it and always remove it. I would like for MC to also (not everyone likes html email) be able to create an email with the pictures in the message body, with our choice of field as a caption.

Previewing images in MC is pretty much a non-starter, but agian, is painfully close. So, with music playing while you work, you want to preview some recently aquired photos. I've found the best way to do this in MC is to use an 'always on top' windowed view. Works great... untill you hit an image that needs fixing. My desire is to tag it as such, red eye, crop, brightness, whatever, and move on to the next image. Not possible though. It's like running into a brick wall at full tilt.
Check out Doof's Captionator plugin thread... imo, that should be a default image viewing option within MC with full access to the Tag Info window. I think it would work very well indeed.

those are some of the things MC needs to be taken seriously with regard to image management/handling, (imho, of course), you'll notice I didn't venture anywhere near things like access to EXIF data... we'll leave that for another day.
For tagging, searching, organising and viewing (on TV) nothing comes close to MC. It's just too rough around the edges atm with very little else possible once all that's done. Unlike audio, which is largely shackled by the RIAA and their ilk, photos are largely for sharing, and sadly, MC doesn't offer much creativity in that dept. The only reason I'm willing to invest some time bending MC to my will, is that MC supports global drag and drop. So I can open up, say a DVD slideshow creator, and drop images from MC directly into it, which is handy. The only bind being that nothing out there can read the proprietry MJMD tags, so I have to retype all the captions etc.

-marko.

marko

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8972
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #4 on: June 01, 2006, 04:34:42 am »

might also be worth mentioning the fact that while I'm pretty well up to speed with commonly accepted 'good practice' as far as audio files are concerned, transcoding is not good, converting a 128 mp3 to a 320 is silly etc. etc. my knowledge of these things in the image file world is really limited.

My camera doesn't do .raw files, only .jpg
I understand that everytime I save a jpg as a jpg, degradation occurs. On the monitor, one or two revisions are not noticeably poorer quality to my eyes
I don't understand why the saved, edited file is often larger (more megs) than the original
If I do any serious/complex editing, I sometimes keep the psd file for reference. Was sad to find MC can't thumbnail these, and won't launch them in photoshop unless they're categorised as "data" files.

If anyone who knows better sees me committing cardinal image sins, I'd appreciate it if you took the trouble to show me the error of my ways. :)

-marko.

park

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2357
  • I wish I had more to say!
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #5 on: June 01, 2006, 06:23:50 am »

Your ideas on image stacks and version stacks is interesting.

My way around this so far, has been to rely on the rating field. I make my top level Images viewscheme filter to show only 4 star images and above.
I have created a custom tag called "Photo Album" which allows multiple values and I use a subviewscheme in panes view to tag all the images as i import them, and just rate the best version of a shot as 4 stars.

so if I ever want to look at images or watch a slideshow, I just use the top level "Images" viewscheme, and if I ever want to compare different shots, or versions of an image I use my "Organization" viewscheme. To be honest I rarely go into "organization" for previously tagged files.

I have found that to be able to find photos quickly (without having to name or write comments for each individual photo), I need to have all of my images tagged with the following info as a minimum:
Subject (People/Places/Objexts/Textures)
Country
Area
Place
Photo Album
People
Rating

All fields are semi colon delimited, so that they can belong in more than one category.

The adobe way of grouping them into stacks does sound very practicle though. Exactly what you would do with the physical media. I guess that in media center, this could be achieved with a "Shot" field and the tiles view. Some simple right click command like "Stack selected files" which assigns selected files a common value for the "shot" field.
This would only really be useful if you could see the bottom files list as stacked tiles too though, so that indivual shots are always grouped/stacked down below, and you can use the top tiles view to go through the broader strokes navigation to narrow down the list.
Logged

marko

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8972
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #6 on: June 01, 2006, 06:43:01 am »

park, 1st of all, MC+images chat is way too scarce, so, thanks for chipping in.

you've touched on one of my main doubts about the system I'm trying out here....

So far, all my 'top level' nodes are setup to suit my most frequent needs for that media group. Less drilling is better, huh?

To get this to work as described, for now, I've had to sacrifice my top level Image node. This is so that the 'right click > locate' function will work, and I'm not sure how well this will wear. Time will tell. I've got a bit more tweaking to do, and while I'm doing that, long term useability is hard to judge.

Interesting idea you have there too. How do you maintain relationships between edited versions of a file and the original?

park

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2357
  • I wish I had more to say!
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #7 on: June 01, 2006, 08:33:03 am »

Since I tag all files with the same properties as they come in and only make one of them 4 stars, I can get to them pretty easily in the organization viewscheme just by clicking on a couple of filters till i see them. My "Photo Albums" field is pretty broad and has values varying from "Friends" to "Aikido demonstration X year". I can usually narrow the list down quite a lot just by clicking on an area or place name.

This helps me find related shots, but as for different versions/edits of a shot, I tend to take all my photos as camera raw. At maximum, I would only have one edited jpeg (for redeye etc.) exported from this raw file, so i dont really have to worry about multiple versions. If i want a smaller version for an e-mail or something, i export it as a small jpeg to my desktop, send it and then delete it. Currently i use the exported jpeg as the 4 star file and keep unedited raw files as 3 star in the organization viewsheme.

My biggest request is for MC to recognize changes in settings made to raw files, like adobe bridge seems to be able to do. EG; if i change the white balance setting of the raw file, bridge shows the file with the new settings whenever you open it. No need to export to jpeg at all.

Currently I dont use MC at all to manage or browse my work. My work is majority photoshop and illustrator files, and it isnt worth the effort yet i think. I guess if MC ever gets to show thumbnails of photoshop files then organizing different versions of  files would become more of an issue.
Logged

glynor

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 19608
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #8 on: June 01, 2006, 10:41:58 am »

If anyone who knows better sees me committing cardinal image sins, I'd appreciate it if you took the trouble to show me the error of my ways. :)

I haven't waded through the entirety of your posts yet Marko, though this does look very interesting (and since I use MC/Elements pretty heavily for images it could be very useful once I do wade through it).  I thought I might take a minute or two and explain some things though...

Multiple-save JPEG degradation certainly exists.  I've put together a small set of images that clearly illustrates this.  In the ZIP file, there are two images with a simple white->black gradient.  The TIFF file is the original image.  The JPEG is a 4th generation JPEG (saved each time at Quality = 8 in Photoshop's Dialog).  The small white dots on the right side I added to keep track of how many generations I had created, and to be able to visually ID the TIFF easily when zoomed out.  Also, you also need to change the JPEG in order to get Photoshop to actually do the JPEG recompression (it's smart enough that it doesn't do it even if you force it by doing File-Save As if nothing changed).

Open both of these images up in Photoshop.  Zoom in to about 400-500% on both images (try to get roughly the same area, though this isn't essential).  Flip back and forth (or put one on each monitor if you have more than one).  The JPEG clearly has vertical banding, where the TIFF is much more smooth (neither is absolutely perfect, because I used 8-bit/channel files to keep the file size down).  Also, if you look at the Histogram info tool (make sure to click the ! triangle to make the histogram preview reflect the actual image data), you can clearly see the "combing" in the histogram of the JPEG while the TIFF is completely smooth. 

While I did 4 generations to make the effect pretty obvious, you can see the banding even after 2 JPEG generations, once you know what to look for.  While this effect is much more obvious in a simple gradient, it does also appear in regular photos.  It generally manifests as a color "halo" (or rainbow "fringes") around high-contrast items in the photo.  When extreme, it also can result in "blocky-ness" in any solid-color areas of images (dark shadows especially).

As far as the file size increase... That is very likely because Photoshop is embedding a color profile in the image when you save it.  The profiles, while small, do take up some space and Photoshop embeds them by default (if you really want the best quality color reproduction, be sure to switch the default RGB Working space from SRGB to Adobe RGB 1998 and always convert to the working space if you are going to edit it).  It could also be because you are saving it with a higher quality setting than the camera is using, though if you aren't manually changing the Quality dialog this is less likely.

As far as your PSD dilemma, I'd just avoid it and use TIFFs instead.  With Photoshop CS (and CS2), TIFF files are completely equal to PSD files (in every way that matters unless you are using an offset press, and CMYK color-separated plates with Spot Colors).  They can now use all the same cool PSD-features, but are vastly more compatible with other software applications (which will just ignore the Photoshop-only tags in the TIFFs).

Generally, for both safety and convenience, it is ALWAYS best to save a JPEG-original as a TIFF first before you do any editing (and then do all future edits on the TIFF).  If you need a JPEG-format final version, you can always re-save a flattened JPEG.  TIFFs on the other hand can have layers, adjustment layers (and it's always best to use them instead of regular adjustments when you can), and all the fun masks (if you ever spend more than 10 seconds on creating a selection, why not save it as a mask in case you need it again).  JPEGs are good for exchanging files (because everyone can open them) and web use (because they can be made very small), but that's really about it.
Logged
"Some cultures are defined by their relationship to cheese."

Visit me on the Interweb Thingie: http://glynor.com/

marko

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8972
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #9 on: June 05, 2006, 03:49:25 pm »

this was always going to be a long job... too many images to tag etc. etc.

One of the reasons why I've never really tackled it in earnest before is that I need to feel confident that what I'm doing is not a complete waste of time. Before I get anywhere near my digital photos, I want to get my "scanned photos" project back on track.

I've stopped scanning a while back because I'd been scanning directly to jpg untill it dawned on me that this might not be the brightest choice in the world. 99% of them are in need of some form of post processing due to the fact that most of them have been living in shoe boxes for the past ten years, hence my desire to protect the originals. I have to set the EXIF 'date/time original' for the scans manually too, resulting in many a lively family discussion over "what was the year" :)

Now, although I was absolutely gutted to discover that MC can't read the EXIF data from a .tif file, it can, at least display them. While a tad tiresome, I can get around the dates issue by using something else to get the date into the filename, and then updating the library from there instead, so, all in all, this .tif format is quite interesting.

If I save a .jpg as .tif file, and then use layers and comments to track any editing I do, is there any need to keep the original jpg? I'm thinking that if I don't touch the background layer, it's always there as an archive of the original file?
Any flaws in this theory?

-marko.

glynor

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 19608
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #10 on: June 06, 2006, 02:18:07 pm »

Now, although I was absolutely gutted to discover that MC can't read the EXIF data from a .tif file, it can, at least display them. While a tad tiresome, I can get around the dates issue by using something else to get the date into the filename, and then updating the library from there instead, so, all in all, this .tif format is quite interesting.

That's generally how I do it.  I too haven't been keeping up on my "old pictures" scanning project.  If only I had used slide film all along (my Nikon Coolscan 5000 with the batch slide loader would make quick work of those).  Oh well!!

If I save a .jpg as .tif file, and then use layers and comments to track any editing I do, is there any need to keep the original jpg? I'm thinking that if I don't touch the background layer, it's always there as an archive of the original file?
Any flaws in this theory?

Its personal preference, but that is often how I do it.  There's no real flaw in that theory, and (in fact) that's how many books on the subject recommend you do it.  For no particular reason other than convenience, I sometimes create separate files (the "original" TIFF and the "edited" TIFF).  Just make sure you never flatten those files unless you're saving it as a copy (I'm so paranoid that I generally do the Save As before I flatten).

With my new camera, I just save the CR2 file (the camera's RAW file) as my original.

All in all though, it would be REALLY nice if MC offered full EXIF and XMP metadata support for image filetypes.   My co-workers who are photographers really need to be able to look at a "stack" of images from a particular shoot and figure out the F-Stop and Exposure settings (and sometmes which camera/lens we used) for the images we like best.  When you spend 3-4 hours setting up lighting for a product shoot to test exposures, using the EXIF data automatically recorded sure beats a paper and pen (and recording each frame's serial number)!  Unfortunately, the fact that MC can't do this rules out serious use of it for them!

I'm fairly confident that this is something that JRiver acknowledges is a deficiency of the program, but I hope that it is something they target for fixing in v12.
Logged
"Some cultures are defined by their relationship to cheese."

Visit me on the Interweb Thingie: http://glynor.com/

rpalmer68

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2639
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #11 on: June 06, 2006, 08:37:42 pm »

Hi marko,

I'm also embarking on the "sorting those photos" exercise and am trying to find a solution to my requirements.

I use MC11 on my HTPC in the lounge in theater view for playback of music and would love to also use it to playback photo albums for family & friends. 

I see that the playback of photos like you said doesn't want to include 10 photos of the same thing, but would be albums that I have setup to ensure duplicates and those "my bum looks fat" photos the wife doesn't want on public display are also excluded!

For me my requirements are simple:  I can  easily categorize the photos and then publish them to my coppermine photo server for sharing with others, and then those same albums (and maybe a few extras) are also available on my HTPC.  Although versioning and stacks do appeal now that you mention them!

I still haven't made a decision on what software to use to manage the photos, and would LOVE to use MC as it keeps everything in one system/database.

I have also been evaluating iMatch, which I must say for me is very easy to manage photos with.  It has the concept of a category tree where an image can be in as many categories as you want so I can have a category for each family member, each location and what coppermine album the image should go into.

Is there a way of doing something similar in MC?

With iMatch I can also upload to coppermine using a script written in SAX Basic, now I know JRiver were testing uploading to coppermine from MC at one stage, but it just never come into a released version. 
(Maybe MC12?  - JRiver any hint on if this is still "in the works", or has it been dropped?)

The only thing I can't do with iMatch and that I need to be able to do is browse my albums in Theater View under MC. 
But I'd be interested in any suggetions on how I might be able to do this from anybody..

For me if MC can make the categorization as simple/quick as a couple of clicks and also upload to coppermine I'd be a VERY happy boy because like you I don't want to invest huge amounts of time getting everything setup in one system (either iMatch or MC) to find that I've gone down the wrong path and have to do all the work again! 

Maybe we're just embarking on this adventure a few months too early...


Regards
Richard
Logged

park

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2357
  • I wish I had more to say!
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #12 on: June 06, 2006, 10:39:43 pm »

MC's Tagging mode is similar in deisgn to that program. You just select files and tick the boxes to categorise them.

Logged

marko

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8972
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2006, 02:55:20 am »

Wahay, morning rpalmer, glad you joined in. I'm sure, as glynor points out, that jriver are all too aware of the 'major issues'. I feel we need a lot more image related chatter around here. I admit that as things stand right now, it's hard to do that without every thread turning into a frustrated biatch-fest....

the problem for us as end users is underlined by JimH when he said:
We know there is interest in EXIF tags, and we'll get around to it, but there are higher priorities right now.  Thanks for your patience.
While in the past I've had one or two stabs at getting a workflow set up, I always ended up hopelessly lost, and as I would only trust the testing to copies of images, I wound up with a lot of dupes and wasted HDD space. From early experience, the only words of caution I have to offer are, "be very careful if you want to try using the image editor provided with MC. It's actually quite a handy little tool, but currently, it cannot preserve any tags in edited images. Use save as to preserve the original, then import and tag the new file, or, if you do simply 'save', remember to to an "update tags from library" on the new file immediately after saving. Personally, I prefer to use the "send to.. > external" option, and then save as.., and it looks like 'auto import' is on the horizon, so MC will add the new image to the library as soon as it's saved, which will be nice :)

With v11.1, database expressions have opened right up. We can now use them to create standard library fields, we can use them in the thumbnail text area, and we can also use them in the player display area. This, along with v11.1's far superior tree and library browser setup, is what prompted me to sit down and have another look at the challenge.

While still early days, (need to get a good cross section of files tagged to be able to set it up 'just so'), I am still in quite a positive frame of mind about the whole thing.

I have to say, I much prefer MC's tagging system (panes) to the tree system shown in your screenshot. That looks like a lot of drilling to me, and I don't like that :) Though it might be worth a mention that you can also tag a bunch of files in MC by dropping them on a tree item.

As far as browsing albums in theatre view goes, I think (naturally ;) ) that the following tip is currently my top "image related" tip:

By default, MC populates the album field using the dd/mm/yyyy part of the image's date/time. I find this more useful than I thought I would. Very convenient for quickly tracking down files if you happen to know the date. If you later place photos into more descriptive albums, more suitable for theatre view, or transfer to ipod, you will find that simply using [album] in theatre view is utter pants because your own albums are listed waaay down the bottom below all the 'default date' albums.
You can set up a 'photo album' viewscheme option for theatre view using the following string in "Step 4" of the edit viewscheme dialogue:

-[=mid([album],2,1)]=//

which ensures that when the user chooses 'albums', only your personal albums will be listed, and none of the 'default date' ones.
there are always alternatives with MC of course. You could create your own photo album library field and use that instead, which might be a more suitable option, because if you make it a semi-colon delimited field, you could put the same photo in more than one album. Whatever your preference, the tools are there for you to build it. I think the fact that it's not pre-built puts a lot of people off, but I prefer it that way. We all want different things from MC, and by and large, we can all get what we want using the tools provided.

Once again, EXIF, IPTC and XMP rear their heads, as shown in your iMatch screenie. Unlike music, images are for sharing. What's the point of me captioning a load of photos in MC and sending them to my Mum? She'll never be able to see the captions unless she buys MC, and no disrespect, but my Mum and MC simply wouldn't mix :)
I could send you photos captioned using Elements, and your iMatch software would read the caption. For me, this is a 'no-brainer' and is probably the single biggest issue stopping people from getting down and dirty with MC and their photos. You have to take this into consideration when deciding on your next step.

I'll try to knock out a detailed step by step for this stacks and version sets thing I'm working on by the weekend. I think it's working quite well, but it's not fail-safe, and if maybe interested parties can help with some of those issues.

glynor, thanks again for the clarification on .tifs and workflows. All I need to know is that I'm heading in the right direction, and you're the first person to give me the nod. it's appreciated.

park, glad you're still with us. nice screenie, another Opus MC (blue) fan I see. That skin never seems to age for me, nice bit of work from dragyn there.
That's how I do mine too, image tagging coming up.... get that tree out of the way!!
------

tsk, another marathon post... apologies... :)

-marko.

IanG

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 528
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #14 on: June 07, 2006, 03:21:55 am »

If only I had used slide film all along (my Nikon Coolscan 5000 with the batch slide loader would make quick work of those).  Oh well!!

Can the Coolscan handle negatives?  My Epson (can't remember the model) will scan a strip, reverse the colour and split the results into individual images on the fly.  The Epson UI is very poor, but the results are good.

Ian G.
Logged

darichman

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #15 on: June 07, 2006, 07:30:18 am »

One of the reasons why I've never really tackled it in earnest before is that I need to feel confident that what I'm doing is not a complete waste of time.

Here here.

I recently purchased a multi-function centre thingy with an automatic document feeder that I can use to finally scan my mountainous piles of photos.... I'm still trying to figure out the best way to handle the scanning, tagging, organising process so that I don't lose information OR quality along the way.

I like to use MC to look at and start preliminary tagging of photos I haven't really sorted through yet (love the lossless rotation feature as well). This is great. It is usually at this stage, however, that I pick up photos that need to be cropped or edited in other ways. This requires that I open the file in another program and lose any tag information I've managed to fill out.

So far I haven't been keeping files in the "sets" that you mentioned Marko, but I can see that's maybe something I should have been doing :( And I definitely agree that there needs to be more image-related discussion around here :) It's always good to hear what others are doing...

Logged

rpalmer68

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2639
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #16 on: June 07, 2006, 08:35:30 am »

Thanks park, you know I'd never realised I could switch on tagging mode!  All this time tagging my audio files and I'd never noticed this!


marko, thanks for your detailed response, I think I'll dive into the MC area and see if I can setup a tagging structure that works for me as I would rather not have to use a second app to manage photos, but then I do need to get them online as well and I'd prefer to use coppermine or gallery2 rather than html albums.

So I guess stage one is to work out the way to setup my tags so I can find things the way I need to or might need to in the future.... hmm predicting the future that's a worry!

My two pet projects are managing my photos and Theater View developemnts, so I'll keep the image management "chatter" going if I can!

Cheers
Richard
Logged

glynor

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 19608
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #17 on: June 07, 2006, 08:52:12 am »

Can the Coolscan handle negatives?  My Epson (can't remember the model) will scan a strip, reverse the colour and split the results into individual images on the fly.  The Epson UI is very poor, but the results are good.

It can.  Keep in mind that the Coolscan 5000 is a film scanner, not a flatbed, so it CANNOT scan paper-sized documents.  It is, however, a spectacular performer at what it does.  You have to buy some of the "adapters" separately (such as the 50-slide bulk loader and the "microscope slide" adapter) if you want them, but it is fast and puts out beautiful scans.

As far as the UI.  They all stink (I actually happen to like the Nikon provided one a little bit, but not enough to use it).  That's why I don't use the TWAIN drivers for any of my scanners!

If you do any large amount of scanning regularly, I highly recommend you check out VueScan.  It is a wonderful app that you can use to completely replace the usually crap-tastic software that comes with the scanner (you don't need to install the TWAIN drivers at all, they're all built in to the app).  It isn't free (there is a trial), but it doesn't cost anywhere near the price of similarly powerful applications (such as SilverFast).  Also, the guy who does the software seems to be almost as dedicated as JRiver, and new versions come out almost as fast as they do for MC (when it's in a public beta cycle).  Most importantly though, nothing out there can touch it's batch-scanning capabilities.  They're a little daunting to use (there's a ton of options), but the fact that I can set up my Epson 1680 (PDF Fact-Sheet Link) with a whole tray full of 4x3 negs and click "Scan" once makes figuring out the "Crop" tab in the application VERY worthwhile.

It also puts out very high-quality scans.  It gives you full control of all the "auto-correct" options, sharpening, cleaning, and the like.  So, if you're like me (usually) and you don't want anything but the raw scan, you can get it.  If you want to use the "Digital ICE" style auto-fixing options, they're there too.  It's really a perfect scanning app for those of us who like MC (you know... control freaks).   ;)
Logged
"Some cultures are defined by their relationship to cheese."

Visit me on the Interweb Thingie: http://glynor.com/

RobOK

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
  • long time MC user for PC, iPod and Tivo
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #18 on: August 01, 2006, 05:45:06 pm »

Marko, thanks for this, i am just seeing it now but am going to try it out.  Please post if you have made any updates to your stacking approach.

I am also looking for MC 12 to have more photo features.  I have posted in some other threads in the past:


MC12 Photo Requests:
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=28958.msg200920#msg200920

XMP Photo Tagging
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=29031.msg200583#msg200583

Picassa style features
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=26596.msg185502#msg185502


I am [maybe naively] optimistic that MC 12 will take on more of these issues.  To be honest, I have not been using MC for photos lately, but your post from June has reinvigorated me.

Logged

marko

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8972
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #19 on: August 01, 2006, 06:57:20 pm »

RobOK, yes, I've more or less persevered with my original foundations, and things are looking quite positive.

I need to get another 1000 or so files tagged (!!!) yet.

Most of my focus so far has been based around work orientated viewschemes and thumbnail text choices, my next step being to concentrate on search and playback viewschemes that make good use of all that tagging work.

As the project progresses, I'm definately feeling that I'm doing a lot of donkey work that MC could/should be doing for me, but untill then, the pros still outweigh the cons for me. I've started many attempts at managing my image library with MC alone, and while I still don't think that's quite possible yet, this is the furthest I've come with it yet. I'd say I'm still a few weeks off setting up general playback viewschemes, and while I've kept notes, I don't want to post the project untill I'm entirely satisfied that I've got the best I can out of it. Once I am, I'll chuck it out there and see what kind of feedback I get. I think the foundation is pretty sound, but the building may be able to be improved/streamlined somewhat, we'll see, in time. I did manage to throw this expression together for use as a display caption for slideshow playback, I think it might need a little tweaking to be just right, for the most part, it works quite well as it is for me atm.

Thank you for your interest. Nice to know I'm not alone in my desire to have MC step up to the plate as far as my photos are concerned.

RobOK

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
  • long time MC user for PC, iPod and Tivo
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #20 on: August 01, 2006, 07:33:22 pm »

I am re-reading your original post and don't really understand what you've done!

But now I see in your most recent post that you are considering posting more detailed steps, I hope you do!

I have an eight month old daughter... pre-daughter I had tons of locations, people, things, etc. to tag with and I created some tagging view schemes.  Post-daughter, I have thousands of pictures of various poses of one person, almost exclusively in our house!!   LOL!  One person, one location, thousands of pictures.  I guess I could classify by smiling, crying, in focus, blurry.... LOL.

So I think I need seperate schemes with and without my daughter!


I did pick up a fundamental organization point from this though:

*  have different view schemes for Organizing/Tagging/Processing vs. Displaying/Searching/Slideshows


I think I also have to think about  what is the END PRODUCT for the photos.  For music, that is relatively easy.  Play music I like for a given mood or circumstance on my PC, in my car, on my iPod or in some other room in the house (which I do via Tivo).  For photos, to me, it is not as clear:

*  publish in a hard cover book in Shutterfly
* share in web sites - Flickr, etc.
* publish to my own web site, currently in Gallery 2 (open source)
* print -- currently do this via Shutterfly
*  create DVD or VCD for sharing with family, especially MS Photo Story 3
* screensaver for PC
* slideshow on the big screen TV with music (which MC tivo server cannot do)

Right now, I don't do ANY of these from within MC.  I think I could do the web publishing from MC, but it has not been compelling for me to switch.  Maybe I could make DVD's from withing MC, I'm not sure.

For all of these outputs, I may or may not want to edit the photos composition, size, or content itself, resulting in many versions.

So while I do WANT to use MC for photos and images, the only one I am really using it for is Screensaver.

Someone in one of this threads pointed to a big difference between Images and Music, that Images are meant to be shared vs. Music is being discouraged from sharing for legal/copyright reasons.  I would like MC to enhance sharing/publishing of Images and having multiple versions of the same image that can be worked with logically.  More features to allow images to get on the web in various ways,.  [and as a sidebar -- the opposite, for images on the web to get INTO MC.   Think subscribing to a friend's Flickr feed -- an image PodCast that would have to be dealt with a little differently than audio or video podcasts]


I hope some of these thoughts are helpful,

Rob.

Logged

RobOK

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
  • long time MC user for PC, iPod and Tivo
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #21 on: August 03, 2006, 06:23:32 pm »


As far as browsing albums in theatre view goes, I think (naturally ;) ) that the following tip is currently my top "image related" tip:

By default, MC populates the album field using the dd/mm/yyyy part of the image's date/time. I find this more useful than I thought I would.  [snip]   You can set up a 'photo album' viewscheme option for theatre view using the following string in "Step 4" of the edit viewscheme dialogue:

-[=mid([album],2,1)]=//

which ensures that when the user chooses 'albums', only your personal albums will be listed, and none of the 'default date' ones.




My Albums have a single digit Month, and so this only works for Two digit months.  i.e. I have an album like  5/23/2006   for May 23, 2006.   I don't know what controls this format of the date, maybe a Windows (OS) setting, I have not seen it in MC.

Would an alternative be to count in from the end four characters?  Or maybe a "contains" function?

I don't think I can use a Date function since it is now in a Text field.

I would like to keep it simple/short if possible.

Any ideas?

Thanks,
Rob.
Logged

marko

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8972
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #22 on: August 03, 2006, 07:06:51 pm »

we can't count in from the right, but we should be able to get something from contains...

I can't test it right now, but this should get the same result:

-[=isequal([album],//,8)]=1

-marko.

RobOK

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
  • long time MC user for PC, iPod and Tivo
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #23 on: August 04, 2006, 06:55:47 am »

Yes, that worked!  Thanks!

BTW, could you describe your viewscheme for tagging/organizing?  (not all the stacking and sets business, but just your basic tagging).

I'm trying to revise my approach.  I think my focus is going to be on Albums and Ratings.  (Less so on People and Places and Things).  In an organizing view put all photos into albums; in a viewing mode, veiw the Albums with only the top rated photos showing.  Something like that.


Location tagging might be good in some ways, but let's say we took 3 trips to London, would I really want to see those photos mixed together, or would i rather have 3 distinct albums.  I'm trying to think of when I would want all the pictures of a specific location together.

Any thoughts on Image Viewschems appreciated (or links to other threads).

Rob.
Logged

fidelio

  • Regular Member
  • Recent member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
  • Change this by choosing profile
Some ideas about organizing pictures
« Reply #24 on: August 09, 2006, 07:43:09 pm »

-- wrote here lots of stuff, then the server was down... starting from scratch: --

I am a happy MC user with music, now I would like to use it also for photos.

I definitely would like to see improved functionality in MC12.

My requirements are:

1) use MC as the central data base for pictures, similar to music files
2) have a smooth integration with a web photo gallery (in the following short: PG)

Being a non-PRO photographer, I have looked into some alternative approaches for a good PG and how to structure my pictures.

I find that there are two different appraoches of organizing:
a) via categories (also multiple)
e.g. landscape, acre, sunflower, portrait, female, blond
Often used by professionals to categorize their pictures.
b) via (nested) albums
Sample structure:
Family
Football
Vacation
   I----- South America Vacation 2005
               I--- Peru
               !--- Ecuador
Each album has a picture on its cover.

Basically there are three main stream PG'S today:
1) 4images:  supports the category approach very well
2) Gallery2:  comes more from the album approach
3) Coppermine: a mixture of both
If you google you will find their homepages, sorry, in my initial post the links were included.
These PG'S generally have an own repository, just like MC:
The pictures in the PG are always a subset of MC pictures.
Since some of the PGs support also user rating, this would also be synchronized.
Don't you also feel this job has some similarity with music synchronization of the Ipod?

I for my part favourize the album approach and would like to define the album structure in MC and map it automatically into my web page via an enhanced ftp module.
Also the creation of thumbnails and exchange of tags would be included.

For further ideas, here some sample of web galleries:

http://www.cpzhao.com/gallery
(my personal favourite, folks, this guy enjoys frequent vacations and has a pretty wife):
http://tautologous.com/

category approach:
http://www.finfond.net/4images/
http://www.positudes.net/mobilehome/

Here the sample of someone who uses a category approach but actually for the purpose of structuring in albums:
http://www.heli-dive.org/4images/

Looking forward to picture enhancements in MC1x soon!
Logged

RobOK

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
  • long time MC user for PC, iPod and Tivo
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #25 on: August 10, 2006, 07:06:43 am »

I think using MC to drive a gallery would be good.  I think you missed a category of Gallery types though, and that is a program that generates web pages of thumbnails and lets you upload the webpages as a basic gallery.  That is what MC can do now I think, although I have not used it.

I use Gallery2, and although I like a lot of the features and customizations, it is overwhelming.  Gallery2 is good for a community that wants user logins, commenting, picture rating, etc.   I get  a lot of comments on my gallery, but it is a bit of a chore to maintain.

In many ways I would like a very simple gallery, like using SimpleViewer (http://www.airtightinteractive.com/photos/), but have not invested time to see if it does what i want.

I think JRiver has explored using Coppermine as a Gallery that they might integrate with, do a search here on Coppermine.

My "integration" between MC and Gallery is that I downloaded the Gallery upload tool (java).  I can pick pictures in MC (either manually or using a SmartList) and drag and drop them into a Gallery2 folder and hit upload.

One pet peeve I have woth many people's Galleries are when they show ALL of someones pictures.  I think you should be more selective and just post the really good ones.  I'm not perfect on this score, but I have been trying to get better.

Thanks for the post fidelio!
Logged

marko

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8972
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #26 on: August 29, 2006, 12:41:46 pm »

things are progressing pretty well with my project.

tags are proving to be a problem atm, and inspiration has so far deserted me...

the problem I need to skirt around is this:

I have images that have been flagged for editing, and a viewscheme created for working with them.
I can filter the list down by general editing task, 'red eye fix', for example, select a file, send it to an external editor, make the edit and save it as a new file.
Now, ideally, I'd like the new file to display next to the original, to make immediate tag editing simple, but that won't happen because the new file does not contain any MJMD tags, and so gets excluded by the filtered viewscheme....

I'll get something worked out... surely... I'm not ready to give up on this just yet, spent too much time on it already!!!

darichman

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #27 on: August 29, 2006, 08:31:16 pm »

Only a workaround (and a lengthy one at that!), Marko, but you can try tricking MC into thinking the "edited" files are the "original" files and then updating tags from library:

It all depends on how you store originals and edits on the hard drive though, so this might not suit you... but I experimented a bit and found that you could achieve this by doing the following:

1. Have separate "Original" and "Edit" folders for each album.

Eg. "G:\Photos\2005\Marko's Fabulous Beach Party\Originals"
   & "G:\Photos\2005\Marko's Fabulous Beach Party\Edits"

Within each of these folders, for each file set (ie the original of a photo and its edit) must have the same filename. The ones in the "Originals" folder should be tagged, and the "Edits" won't have MC tags.

2. Using explorer, rename the "Originals" folder to "Originals2" (or whatever) and rename the "Edits" folder to "Originals". MC should now think the edits are the original files (provided the filenames were identical)

3. From MC, do an "Update Tags from Library"

4. Rename the new "Originals" folder back to "Edits" and the "Originals2" folder back to "Originals"

5. Import the photos from the "Edits" folder. They should have the updated MC tags. You could then change them (eg add a suffix to the [Name] field or whatever) to reflect the changes you made...

Not a simple solution, but it does get the job done :) Instead of using "Edits" you could use separate ones like "Red Eye Fix" etc... I guess it just relies on you saving your files into new folders from whichever external editing program you use!
Logged

NickM

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
  • Simplicity isn't always best, but it's easy to fix
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #28 on: August 29, 2006, 09:19:00 pm »

Thanks Markko for pointing me to your (long) discussion on this.  I did remember reading your post before, but couldn't find it.  For me, this all started last month when I bought a Mac and, without reference to the manual or help file, managed to do 99% of what you have been discussing.  This is no mean task and it appears that iPhoto storage has 3 components:- a database, a folder with the original files and a folder with files that have been edited.  The filenames of the edited files match those of the original.

I guess that darichman is nearly there but it would obviously be easier to somehow keep the process within MC.

So, would it be possible to mix and match the suggestions so far...

1. Keep the original files unedited in JPEG and use MC to do all the tagging with these.
2. When a file is edited, save it as TIFF
3. If a TIFF file with the same name exisits, then diplay this instead.

The distinction between original and final version is then JPEG or TIFF ( this limits to only one final versin rather than the edited in-between versions.

Stacks, groups, albums, rolls (iPhoto term I think) etc would then all run on top of this underlying orinial / final file structure.

[You're solving a twitcher's problem, I'm solving a diving problem(!)  7,000 photos in the last 2 years of digital diving photography.  I hate to imagine going back to anything I created earlier and dealing with negatives...]


Logged

marko

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8972
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #29 on: August 30, 2006, 02:50:49 am »

darichman, no offense, but for me, that's too much. Working with version sets is just a part of the project, and the aim of the project is to get MC to do as much of the work as possible, and for the stuff it can't be made to do itself, it must do everything it can to make the job as easy as possible for the user.
btw, you asked about 'where is it' on another board, and I only realised a short time ago that you would have missed the reply, which went a bit like:
OT - Marko, just wondering, what is your "Where is it?" view scheme (in the root of the tree)?

It has piqued my interest :)
read all about it: Use MC as total music index?

What do you think?
It's not the fastest loading viewscheme in the world, but I find it very useful.

NickM, interesting thought about filetypes...
The foundations of my project are built around the file names, and up 'till now, I hadn't considered using rules based around file types. I shall look more closely at this. My first reaction to your suggestion was along the lines of, interesting idea, but MC cannot read any tag info from .tiff files, so I think that's a non-starter, but I could be wrong.
Underwater photography eh? interesting stuff. Any shark stories?


For a short time, v12 beta builds were publically available, so it's probably common knowledge that v12 has auto-import. I'm trying to utilise that in such a way that when the new file is saved, MC will grab it, and display it along side the original, and then it would be a simple job job to select the two files and synch their tags.
I have it working here right now, but it involves two clicks inside panes to get the files on show, and I'd rather that no clicks were needed...

I'm beginning to think I might take a break and start to properly catalogue what I've got so far, and then pick it up again...
this thread has become a tad unwieldy, hasn't it!!
I'm just delighted that there's finally some serious image chatter going on around here ;)

-marko

NickM

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
  • Simplicity isn't always best, but it's easy to fix
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #30 on: August 30, 2006, 07:20:50 am »

I realised that MC cannot read info from TIFF...  What I was suggesting was that the information is ALWAYS read from the underlying JPEG, and then if the image is edited, MC displays the TIFF (whilst retaining the image data from the JPEG) instead.  Just like always working with the original photo, but choosing to display an edited version.

Yes, swimming with sharks is always exciting.  Non-divers assume that this is dangerous and frightening.  It's not; unless you do something stupid, of course.  They are more scared of us, than we of them.  Just back from the most amazing trip with white tipped, black tipped, reef, nurse, guitar, hammerhead and whale sharks.  Not to mention the mantas, rays, eels and everything else.  But I am digressing here (sorry).  I was stuck on a boat with a Mac and that's how all this started.
Logged

darichman

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #31 on: August 31, 2006, 03:26:02 am »

darichman,
btw, you asked about 'where is it' on another board, and I only realised a short time ago that you would have missed the reply

What do you think?
It's not the fastest loading viewscheme in the world, but I find it very useful.

I like. My next big job (after photos :P) is to properly catalog all my archived media as well and this is exactly what I'd like to achieve.... Unfortunately, I have, up until now, been far less organised than you!

Thanks for the well explained and useful writeup, Marko -- I've saved it for future reference :) You've helped me sort out a fair few of my MC-related problems/projects/aspirations on more than one occasion...
Logged

marko

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8972
Re: mimicing PS Elements' stacks and version sets... (success)
« Reply #32 on: August 31, 2006, 04:11:07 am »

you're welcome.

I started writing up this image handling setup, and you know what, really, I think it might be a bit crazy!!
I've started, so I'll finish, as the great Magnus used to say, but as I have set about this by doing a little here and a little there, I had not realised how deeply I had got into this till now!!

It does work, and pretty well really, and once it's set, it's set, but I'm not entirely convinced the ends justify the means...
we'll see :)
Pages: [1]   Go Up