Need primer on versioning

[tstoddard]

mrl,

Depending on the mode in which you are viewing your collection, if you have a version set with 8 files in it, you could see 8 thumbnails. Each thumbnail should have a different tab selected. One thing you should probably do after running version detection is to reload the current collection. You can do it by using the keyboard shortcut Ctl+r or by right clicking the tab and selecting the reload option. That won't change the results of version detection but it sometimes helps to get the thumbnails and version tabs synched up correctly. Before reloading a collection, I often have strange results such as the wrong thumbnails and/or file names being displayed.

I suspect that the issues you are having is related to either your file naming scheme and/or the way in which version detection is being invoked. I think that version detection is highly dependent on file names but I don't know that for a fact. The algorithms it uses are not documented anywhere that I am aware of. I just know that it's always been reliable for me but I usually only use version detection when I verify folders. I shoot to raw so my initial import is always comprised of unique files and then I generate jpg's later and use verify folder to import them. I would say that at least 99% of the time, versions are correctly detected for me.

I'm thinking that your issue is either because of the file names or the fact that you are invoking version detection on a set of files that are already imported. I think when you run version detection during an import it probably only looks at the new file that's being imported and looks to see if it could be a version of an existing file. I'll have to try do tests when I get a chance later. I have some theories but don't want to confuse anybody by guessing out loud.

[mrl]

Thanks for the input. I give up. I tried this on other folders, with the same result. Ctrl-r did nothing to help. I assume that the "main version detection scope" setting is wrong and should be something other than the default, but when I cross out the default, nothing else appears. In the absence of instructions, there's no point in my trying to guess at what it's supposed to be. I had thought that versioning might be a reason to use the program, but I obviously can't get it to work. Thanks, though, for your help.

[Mike Buckley]

In the absence of instructions

That's a sad fact. It's especially sad considering that 16% of the people who have responded to the thread asking what we like most about using Supreme mentioned versioning.

[Mke]

Thanks for the input. I give up. I tried this on other folders, with the same result. Ctrl-r did nothing to help. I assume that the "main version detection scope" setting is wrong and should be something other than the default, but when I cross out the default, nothing else appears. In the absence of instructions, there's no point in my trying to guess at what it's supposed to be. I had thought that versioning might be a reason to use the program, but I obviously can't get it to work. Thanks, though, for your help.

I've used versioning extensively, and had close to 100% reliability. I'm not sure, but I get the impression that it's the similarity of the file name that is used for versioning. If so, then I suspect that it might be the shortness of your file names that are causing the problem; mine are 20+ characters long, with the only difference between version file names being a short suffix or the file extension. Might be worth experimenting?

[tstoddard]

Here's an example. I get 8 version sets each of which has the following files (where X is the common file name): X-30.NEF; X-3.NEF; X-31.NEF; X-32.NEF; X-32-edit.tif; X-33.NEF; X-34.NEF and X-35.NEF.

mrl,

After rereading this sentence I'm thinking that your issue may be a result of your naming conventions. The first time I read it I didn't notice the file named "X-3.NEF". This means that "X-3" is the common file name, not "X" as you've stated. If that 3 had been padded with a 0 "X-03.NEF" this might not have happened. If you think about it, it makes sense. For example if the 3 was not a number, imagine you have a file named FileName-A.NEF and then you have files named, "FileName-A1.NEF", "FileName-A1.tif", "FileName-A2.NEF", "FileName-A3.NEF". All of the files begin with FileName-A and there is one and only one file that is named FileName-A with no other characters after the A. Logically, FileName-A looks like the original file and the others look like versions of that file. If there was no "FileName-A.NEF" then version detection would probably assume each of the other files were not versions of another file.

I hope you're still following this discussion and that you haven't given up completely. This may not help you resolve your issues but if it does, and you want to be able to use versioning on existing files, you will probably need to rename your existing files. This is an area in which Photo Supreme excels. Perhaps after you've experimented with that functionality you will find that Photo Supreme has a lot more value than just its ability to manage versions. Some people find versions very helpful but I think there are many more compelling reasons to use Photo Supreme over Lightroom for cataloging. I hope you will give it a chance.

[mrl]

Thanks to both of you for that input. I notice that I had posted on this forum about versioning in Idimager years ago, so out of curiosity I looked back and saw that that program had an option for determining how it chose the files for each version set. My frustration with Photo Supreme is that (a) the one setting that I saw in the program that seemed to control this was incomprehensible, and the absence of instructions made it useless, and (b) the very experienced users on this forum have had to make guesses -- educated guesses, to be sure -- about what is happening. I am truly grateful for the effort you've made on my behalf, but I would have thought that the program itself would come with instructions for use of a function that, as Mike pointed out, many users find the most compelling reason to use the program. So, again, many thanks but unless and until those instructions are issued, I have to conclude -- reluctantly -- that this program isn't for me.