Virtual copies - viewing four at same time

[LikesToys]

To view 4 images (any type which includes Virtual Copies) you will need to either display the film strip at the bottom (F6) or Grid View (g) then simply hold (command Mac or Control Windows) and click on the outside frame of an image (not the image). Once you have the 4 selected, then hit N for Survey Mode.  This will display the images all at once.  If you no longer want Survey mode, Hit E for Library module or D for Develop. Hope I have not misunderstood the problem. Afterwords, keep in mind that the 4 images are still selected with one being the primary selection - probably best to select the one you wish to work on by clicking the outside frame (otherwise edits may be applied to all 4 images) which may or may not be what you want.  Hope that helps.

[myotis]

The thing is, one can duplicate your specific C1 workflow - but only up to a limit of 2 in LR. VCs are identical to Variants, but what's different is zooming multiple items - an aspect of the interface that in entirely unrelated to VCs. Only because you specify 4 items I can't duplicate the workflow.

Turn it round and imagine I pursue a VC workflow like yours but where my equally-arbitrary requirement is to apply the same adjustment to all items (ie AutoSync). C1's inability to do this is unrelated to its Variant feature.

I still don't understand why the tools that a program offers to manipulate and manage a feature ( virtual copies in this case ) is entirely unrelated to the usefulness/value of that feature. I want to replicate my variant workflow from C1 both in terms of speed and function in LR. So its intrinsically related to the interface of each program and has to be at the core of this discussion.

I chose four items, because 2-4 images is the number I often use in C1, and as you increase the number the more you appreciate how well C1 handles this feature. It wasn't just an arbitrary number.

Some things I prefer the LR way  and for some things I prefer the C1 way, this just happens to be one of the things that C1 does better for me, and it has been a useful exercise. But the importance of this difference depends how it benefits my workflow, but again I know from the last thread that you consider workflow irrelevant, so we just come back to where we started.
 

As an aside, C1 has always had toggle to switch on and off "edit all selected variants" which sounds very like autosync in LR.  But this wasn't part of the workflow I described in the other thread and not relevant to what I was trying to replicate here.

Cheers,

Graham

[myotis]

To view 4 images (any type which includes Virtual Copies) you will need to either display the film strip at the bottom (F6) or Grid View (g) then simply hold (command Mac or Control Windows) and click on the outside frame of an image (not the image).

Thanks, that is useful, and someone did point me towards the survey view in an earlier post.

However, although I didn't mention it as it didn't seem relevant at the time, this was just the first step in trying to replicate the way that Capture one allows you to view and  manipulate virtual copies (variants in C1). And one of the key differences is that C1 allows you to edit multiple images while viewing them and allows for synchronised zooming and panning of multiple images which I use a lot when making multiple comparisons.

In theory I think you can do this with an unlimited number of images, but in practice I tend to work with a maximum of four.

Thanks again,

Graham

[john beardsworth]

AutoSync has nothing to do with switching Variants/VCs off. As I wrote, it is a single drag of a slider that applies that adjustment to all the selected images. Imagine I have 4 VCs and while other adjustments might differ, they all need the same NR or WB. I just drag the slider to 55, or 65 or whatever, and all are updated simultaneously. No need to copy and apply adjustments (LR can do that) or to create a preset first (ditto), it's one drag of the slider. It's a general feature of the application and no more integral to Variants/VCs than zooming more than 2 simultaneously, but adjusting simultaneously is as relevant to handling multiple images as zooming them together. Each of us will weight such things differently, of course.

Maybe there is always a feeling that the grass is greener in the other field?

[Rhossydd]

AutoSync has nothing to do with switching Variants/VCs off. As I wrote, it is a single drag of a slider that applies that adjustment to all the selected images.

I don't think that has any relevance to how Graham want to use variants to work on the same image in different ways.

Maybe you should try this approach in CO and then you'll understand this approach and it's merits better.

[myotis]

AutoSync has nothing to do with switching Variants/VCs off. As I wrote, it is a single drag of a slider that applies that adjustment to all the selected images. Imagine I have 4 VCs and while other adjustments might differ, they all need the same NR or WB. I just drag the slider to 55, or 65 or whatever, and all are updated simultaneously. No need to copy and apply adjustments (LR can do that) or to create a preset first (ditto), it's one drag of the slider. It's a general feature of the application and no more integral to Variants/VCs than zooming more than 2 simultaneously, but adjusting simultaneously is as relevant to handling multiple images as zooming them together. Each of us will weight such things differently, of course.

Maybe there is always a feeling that the grass is greener in the other field?

OK this is different from toggling the edit all variants option, In C1 as you need to anticipate wanting the same edits on multiple variants, rather than doing it retrospectively. 

The nearest in in C1, to what you describe,  would be to select the variants you want to copy an edit to and then use the send to option to send the edits to all the selected variants. Not sure how big a difference this is in practice, as its not something I have ever done in either program.

"Maybe there is always a feeling that the grass is greener in the other field?"

I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Are you admitting that you may be biased because you consciously need to convince yourself that the grass isn't greener in the other field ie that C1 might actually be better than LR.

At a program level, I would find it hard to argue that C1 is better than LR, or vice versa, they are just different. Some things I prefer in LR and some in C1, on balance  I prefer C1, but that doesn't make it better, just better for me - and even then not for everything.  Both are excellent programs and choosing one over the other, will depend on individual circumstances, maybe both are equally green?

But again I repeat myself as I have already made a similar point in several posts.

Cheers,

Graham

[john beardsworth]

I don't think that has any relevance to how Graham want to use variants to work on the same image in different ways.

Maybe you should try this approach in CO and then you'll understand this approach and it's merits better.

I have, which is why I make the point. I feel Graham is not looking beyond his precise workflow and is therefore limiting the comparison to zooming in on more than two images. Fair enough, if that's all you do, but handling multiple versions of an image (the generic workflow rather than Graham's particular one) involves doing things other than zooming, and adjusting is one that is an equally-normal need.

The nearest in in C1, to what you describe,  would be to select the variants you want to copy an edit to and then use the send to option to send the edits to all the selected variants. Not sure how big a difference this is in practice, as its not something I have ever done in either program.

As I noted, LR can do copying and pasting. But it doesn't need to - AutoSync means a single drag of the slider sets a precise value for all the selected items.

"Maybe there is always a feeling that the grass is greener in the other field?"

I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Are you admitting that you may be biased because you consciously need to convince yourself that the grass isn't greener in the other field ie that C1 might actually be better than LR.

No, it is exasperation. Sorry.

John

[myotis]

I have, which is why I make the point. I feel Graham is not looking beyond his precise workflow and is therefore limiting the comparison to zooming in on more than two images.

Strangely, that is exactly what I feel you are doing, I am trying to look at a feature in a broad workflow context and you keep on saying its nothing to do with workflow, and reduce things to a very narrow comparison. This is the part of your argument I find perplexing, and to use your word a little exasperating.   

I have tried to explain how there are "multiple" small things, that make me prefer the way C1 works variants into the workflow that I find more useful and efficient, than the way LR does it. 

But really, it was you that forced me down this narrow road when you insisted, after I had described how I use variants in C1,  that Variants and Virtual copies worked "exactly" the same in LR as they do in C1. Which, I assumed was referring to how I had described using them.

My memory of Virtual Copies in LR was that they did not work exactly the same way, and that replicating this part of my C1 workflow in LR was either not possible or very clunky.  But I took you at your word and went about spending some time revisiting LR, where I have confirmed to my satisfaction that in terms of workflow, in particular the way I use them in my workflow, Virtual copies and Variants are not implemented and managed in exactly the same way in both programs.

There was never any requirement to look beyond this precise aspect of my workflow, as that wasn't what this was about.  A general comparison of  workflows between the two programs is a much bigger task, and I think, it would be impossible to arrive at any conclusion on which might be universally better. I certainly wouldn't attempt it.

Cheers,

Graham