Portfolios and versions

[paulrbarnard]

I am trying to add an image to a portfolio but the entire version stack is visible. The version stack contains several edited versions of the original image. The image count for the portfolio shows 1 image but the entire version stack shows up in the portfolio and doesn't even default to the specific image I added. I have the same problem with the Image Basket.

[RobiWan]

Hi,,
This is a problem with PSU, but also with some other programs. I would be pleased if Hert would change it

[paulrbarnard]

Turns out that if you change the version view from "Always as a set" to "As a set in categories" then only the correct image shows up in the portfolio.but of course they then show up as individual images in folders, timeline etc.

@Hert it would be great if this could be setup so that the places where you want only one image (Portfolios and Image Basket in my case) use the setting As a set in categories and everywhere else uses Always as a set.

[Hert]

The default in PSU is "As a set in categories". That is because PSU wants to represent the truth.

Imaging you have a version set with two images, one has a 2 star rating, and one has a 3 star rating.
When you select Ratings -> 2 Stars then you want to see the 2 star image
When you select Ratings -> 3 Stars then you want to see the 3 star image and not some main version that may have a deviating rating

The same applies to folders, details, timeline, etc. If you want to see the truth then use "As a set in categories". The only thing that images inside the same Version always have in common are the same applied Catalog Labels. Hence the default setting "As a set in Categories".
You can select any version from a version set to represent that version set in a Portfolio Collection.

[RobiWan]

That is because PSU wants to represent the truth.

This ist because it's you point of view, and this ist not "the truth". This is only your "point of view"

I would like to know how many images I have regardless of whether the stack is closed or open - and is this "the troth"? No, this is only my "point of view"

Is your view more correct than mine? I don't think so. I think the art of a developer is to cover different aspects

[fbungarz]

This is because it's you point of view, and this is not "the truth". This is only your "point of view"

I agree. I would love more flexibility how and which images of a version set are displayed where and whether expanded or not. I am convinced this would make versioning a lot more useful. I am also not too fond of the newer, colored instead of the previous tabbed display of an expanded version set. I find it confusing.

[yar]

In my workflow I use versioning mainly to combine raw, jpg, and. sometimes, psd files. For this purpose the current implementation is sufficient although it would be more convenient for me to have an interface button which switches between showing all versions or the main version only in the folder view (Mantis 0003529).
However, I have also version sets with jpg files developed from the same raw file in different ways. For these sets I would appreciate the possibility to turn on visibility of differently developed versions in all modes. A possible solution would be to define visibility of particular version placeholders and to allow to trigger it via menu.

[fbungarz]

However, I have also version sets with jpg files developed from the same raw file in different ways. For these sets I would appreciate the possibility to turn on visibility of differently developed versions in all modes. A possible solution would be to define visibility of particular version placeholders and to allow to trigger it via menu.

I think the best way to resolve all these issues would be if across the application (no matter where):
(1) option to allow versions being displayed as "collapsed vs. expanded".
(2) when versions are collapsed, have an option to filter for a specific version.

That way, version display would be fully customizable and the user could decide what he considers to be the "truth".

[fbungarz]

Imaging you have a version set with two images, one has a 2 star rating, and one has a 3 star rating.
When you select Ratings -> 2 Stars then you want to see the 2 star image
When you select Ratings -> 3 Stars then you want to see the 3 star image and not some main version that may have a deviating rating

Regarding that "truth":
I have never really quite grasped the logic of this. Why rate versions differently? Either an image is 5 star or not.
Same for the color labels.
Is anyone really rating and color labeling different versions differently?
Given that few people use versions, I doubt it. I prefer using the registry hack by Michael Weidner to disable this.

So, for me this "truth" of filtering versions by ratings (or color labels) is quite redundant. For my workflow, much more important is a way to quickly find specific versions of my files. And I would love that flexibility throughout the program.

But of course everyone's workflow is different.

[G8DHE]

I must admit I have used versions from day 1 in PSU, but yes over time they have worked slightly differently but the idea above;
"I think the best way to resolve all these issues would be if across the application (no matter where):
(1) option to allow versions being displayed as "collapsed vs. expanded".
(2) when versions are collapsed, have an option to filter for a specific version."
Strikes me as the best option, allow the method of display to be chosen "on the fly" as needed and filtering as needed.

Stacks also have there place, but I use very infrequently, normally only for Astronomical work and in event photography for burst shots where your looking to capture a specific event, for me buoy turns and contestants falling in! Again the ability to turn on grouped and individual displays would be helpful.

[freudenthaler]

I am also not too fond of the newer, colored instead of the previous tabbed display of an expanded version set. I find it confusing.

I agree on that. It did not improve over the old implementation...

Imaging you have a version set with two images, one has a 2 star rating, and one has a 3 star rating.
When you select Ratings -> 2 Stars then you want to see the 2 star image
When you select Ratings -> 3 Stars then you want to see the 3 star image and not some main version that may have a deviating rating

Regarding that "truth":
I have never really quite grasped the logic of this. Why rate versions differently? Either an image is 5 star or not.
Same for the color labels.
Is anyone really rating and color labeling different versions differently?
Given that few people use versions, I doubt it. I prefer using the registry hack by Michael Weidner to disable this.

Yes, I do . Just think of the same picture processed in color and B/W. Both not necessarily have to be rated the same stars. And color labels can be used in such a different & flexible manner, that this also easily can "fall apart" in version sets...

[fbungarz]

Yes, I do . Just think of the same picture processed in color and B/W. Both not necessarily have to be rated the same stars. And color labels can be used in such a different & flexible manner, that this also easily can "fall apart" in version sets...

Alright, I was actually curious about this, when I wrote it. No problem to keep it "as is". I am quite happy that the registry hack allows for both options.
But that's also my reason to ask for more flexibility generally when displaying versions. I am not even sure, how you rate your different versions differently if in most views these different versions are not even displayed side-by-side? Most likely you rate them and assign color labels by always opening the different versions of a set side-by-side in the light table/viewer? Or do you do this in folder view?

In any case, to add more flexibility I wonder if version display couldn't be implemented similar to the way it is currently possible to select file types. The filter bar currently has a menu that allows you to show all file types, only one specific file format (e.g., NEF. CR2, ARW, JPG ...) or a combination of different formats (e.g., JPG+NEF).
I would love to have a similar option to choose which versions from a set are being displayed: all versions collapsed, all versions separate side-by-side, one specific version only, or even a combination of specific versions (e.g., both my "print" and "edited" versions, but not the main version).

I believe such a feature addition would solve a lot of my current headaches, where I often need to use macros filters to achieve what I want - find a collection of specific versions for a particular purpose.

Yes, adding such an additional filter option just for versions adds complexity, but it adds flexibility and, perhaps more importantly, I believe people would be less confused about which versions are displayed where. The current implementation only allows version to be displayed either as "Always as a set" or "As a set in categories". I don't find that particularly intuitive.
If you are using versions, why would you choose to display them always collapsed (= Always as set)? You then always can only see the main version whereas subversions remain permanently hidden. No idea, really, what that option is for. I would assume that anyone using versions would want to be able to see / access / use them. And for anyone not using versions the setting of that option doesn't really matter.

But if people use versions and choose "As a set in categories", they quite regularly posts comments here that they don't understand why in one view versions are shown as collapsed, elsewhere as expanded. Clearly there is a logic that in Folder view versions are shown side-by-side; there you want to see all the files. And in Portfolios you typically want only to see a specific version, the one used to compile the portfolio. So, I can see, why Hert doesn't necessarily want to abandon this logic.
But an option to filter for versions might actually cause less confusion.
It's just an idea. The way this is implemented now generally works quite well for me and I have adapted my workflow accordingly.

[RobiWan]

I think the problem is to understand what a version is.

For me, and I know this from other programs, it's like this: I have a RAW image. That is my original. Then I have edited the image in different ways (B/W, more contrast, high-key, low-key ....) and also output it in different formats and sizes. These are all versions of my original.
I didn't know why I should change the color/star marking on one version. What can be changed is - extension of the file names (*.jpg, tiff) and keywords that describe my version more precisely so that I can perhaps find it more easily.

Whether the versions or stacks are displayed together as a set or unstacked, it should have absolutely no influence on the number of images counted. I want to be able to rely on seeing the correct number at all times. Since this is not the case with PSU - I just count externally.

More flexibility would do PSU a lot of good. However, you also need to know that more flexibility means more complexity

[Mke]

Is anyone really rating and color labeling different versions differently?

Yes, I do . Just think of the same picture processed in color and B/W. Both not necessarily have to be rated the same stars.

Me too, for the same reason.

I think the problem is to understand what a version is.

I have a RAW image. That is my original. Then I have edited the image in different ways (B/W, more contrast, high-key, low-key ....) and also output it in different formats and sizes. These are all versions of my original.

That's the way I use them too.

If you are using versions, why would you choose to display them always collapsed (= Always as set)? You then always can only see the main version whereas subversions remain permanently hidden. No idea, really, what that option is for. I would assume that anyone using versions would want to be able to see / access / use them. And for anyone not using versions the setting of that option doesn't really matter.

I think the functionality changed here. I'm fairly sure that - in folder view - if you had versions of a file in one or more sub-folders, then changing the folder changed the active tab to the first image found in that folder, rather than the 'main version' (unless in the 'main version' folder. I don't have time to experiment with the settings to see if that's still possible.

[Bongo]

The versioning used many users differently. Therefore, the versioning must be more flexible. But everyone is dissatisfied with the current attitude.

I use the versioning for different processing in the image size. My JPG main version is in a folder. The sub -versions are in a subfolder. RAW is in a parallel folder. So for each placeholder your own folder.

When I am in the folder category, I always see the main version in every folder. When I'm in a folder system, I would like to see exactly what the content is.

hc_2316.png (124.16 KiB) Viewed 13787 times

hc_2317.png (142.23 KiB) Viewed 13787 times

But when I'm in the portfolio I would like to see the main version.

It was good for me before V6. In the past, I was even able to define the placeholder for the main version. If I remember correctly.

Filter settings are a possibility. But then I would have to change the filter with every folder.

It is difficult to make it good for everyone. But more flexibility in versioning would be desirable for everyone.