Kinook Software Forums

Go Back   Kinook Software Forums > Ultra Recall > [UR] General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 6 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #16  
Old 01-13-2008, 11:34 AM
ashwken ashwken is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: 10-16-2005
Location: Blairsville, GA USA
Posts: 431
Quote:
Originally posted by StephenUK

The particular problem I have is that:

- the directory structure where I hold the photos changes quite frequently and is several layers deep. If I import the parent directory, and represent it as a directory in UR, the files in that parent directory display nicely as thumbnails and do, as you say, load very quickly. But if I want to drill down to a sub directory I am just taken to Windows Explorer.

I can, of course, laboriously recreate my Windows Explorer directory structure I use for my photos in UR one directory at a time. But with perhaps 100 directories, and no way to synchronise the directory structure, it is a tedious process both to create and to maintain.

So I would suggest the value of internal thumbnails, or, if that is difficult to achieve, some way of quickly reproducing part of the Windows explorer tree in the UR tree with a means of synching the two. (I can't think that would be so difficult in programming terms).
Yes, the lack of "linkage" between the *folder display and the actual child is a pitfall.

Although you can File | Import | a Folder (and recurse) to any point in the Data Explorer, you can't "push" changes outward from UR - file rename, move folder (or maybe I'm missing something). If you make changes (file rename) thru the Windows Explorer Folder Display, then re-sync you end up with "orphaned" Items.

This method of folder import and re-sync is more of a reflection, a passive response. In many cases my Data Explorer ends up looking like a file system anyway, even if I don't fully import folders.

The absence of a File Manager mode in UR is puzzling - I have no idea how best to implement it.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-13-2008, 01:08 PM
StephenUK StephenUK is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 07-31-2006
Location: UK
Posts: 143
Tree, thumbnails

Armsys, thank you very much for that. My first impression on trying out your suggestion was mild elation. There were all the thumbnails. It worked a treat.

But then synchronisation. Within UR Ctrl-shift-del deleted in Windows Explorer too. Great. Also, if I create a note in UR and synchronize, it appears in Windows Explorer. Great too.

But, as Ashwken just said, other things don't work so well. If I delete a sub-directory and its files in Windows Explorer and then sync in UR, the effect is for that sub-directory and its files re-appear in Windows Explorer. And if I delete the sub-directory in UR using Ctrl-Shift-del, it doesn't work as it does on a file. The directory remain in place in Explorer.

Also, after a bit of playing around my machine began to freeze up. Too much synching perhaps.

I think actually, it is not worth the effort. I am better just to go over to Explorer for my photos.

Essentially, anything that relies on synching, even if the synching were to be flawless, is difficult. One needs to remember the synching rules for a start.

It really would be much better to have all the photos actually IN UR itself and nonetheless to have thumbnails! If the only way to obtain thumbnails is by holding externally, linking and then synching, thing become inherently awkward and inelegant.

So I won't be using this procedure and will give up on storing more than odd photos in UR until it can be done internally. Maybe in UR4?

But thanks for all the help!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-14-2008, 12:58 AM
armsys armsys is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 12-19-2007
Posts: 647
Hi StephenUK & ashwken
Alas, it's always my problem to see things a half cup full. I should have warned StephenUK to read the manual before venturing aggressive experiment with folder sychronization, especially the deletion part, which sometimes induces jaw dropping and/or cardiac anomaly. Neither did I expect all the worst scenarios occurring simultaneously. I was aware of all these discontents.
On the other hand, what if you were in Kinook's shoes, how would you implement the folder things? That's the area you can help Kinook and UR users.
For the photo database, I highly recommend ThumbsPlus (see http://www.cerious.com/).
For the PaperPort, I've been an intensive user since 1995 on a daily basis. If you switch the image format from .max to .pdf, then you'll find a twilight zone between UR and PaperPort.
Just my 2 cents.
Armstrong

Last edited by armsys; 01-14-2008 at 01:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-14-2008, 04:09 AM
StephenUK StephenUK is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 07-31-2006
Location: UK
Posts: 143
Paperport

Armstrong. Yes, I think "twilight zone" is a good description. I too have been using Paperport using the pdf option. I would just like to reach a point where I could use UR for everything, but probably I ask too much. But there is, presumably, Version 4, or 5, or 6 to come?..... It's just that I am getting older..... Many thanks for your suggestions. Stephen
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-14-2008, 07:21 AM
janrif janrif is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: 07-08-2005
Location: Ridgefield CT USA
Posts: 852
Quote:
Originally posted by armsys
[snip] For the photo database, I highly recommend ThumbsPlus (see http://www.cerious.com/).[/snip]
Armstrong, I'm OT here, but having used pretty much all photo dam software (including cerious), if you are a photographer, then my opinion is that there is nothing is more competent than IDimager for PC's -- see http://www.idimager.com/?page=home

That's my .02US which is now worth about .01US
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-14-2008, 07:51 AM
ashwken ashwken is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: 10-16-2005
Location: Blairsville, GA USA
Posts: 431
Quote:
Originally posted by janrif
...then my opinion is that there is nothing is more competent than IDimager for PC's.
Jan,

Are you using the current paid version or the older freeware:

http://www.idimager.com/?page=freeware

Also, there 's some interesting utilities on this page.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-14-2008, 08:33 AM
janrif janrif is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: 07-08-2005
Location: Ridgefield CT USA
Posts: 852
I'm a licensed user v4.003 (latest as of a few days ago). I'll look @ the link. Thanks, Armstrong
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-14-2008, 09:17 AM
armsys armsys is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 12-19-2007
Posts: 647
ashwken & janrif,
Thanks a lot for shedding light onto IDImager. It looks promising.
My recent primary use of ThumbsPlus is to review all ashwken's screenshots daily. It's extremely fast for such purpose.
Yes, definitely I'll look into IDImager.
I just don't see how UR could become a photo database given my experience with ThumbsPlus.

Armstrong

Last edited by armsys; 01-14-2008 at 09:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-14-2008, 10:34 AM
janrif janrif is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: 07-08-2005
Location: Ridgefield CT USA
Posts: 852
for faster viewing look @ irfanview @ URL http://www.irfanview.com/
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-14-2008, 10:43 AM
ashwken ashwken is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: 10-16-2005
Location: Blairsville, GA USA
Posts: 431
Quote:
Originally posted by StephenUK

... Paperport. It produces excellent thumbnails of Word and Excel documents and of photos and other media. UR is pretty useless at storing photos. Why? After all, it aims to store EVERYTHING, so why not get to grips with photos?
I think store is the operative word - this is the reflective or passive response I was referring to above.

Any manipulation of images (an Active Response - deletions, alterations, renaming, folder structuring) needs to take place outside of UR in Windows Explorer, then brought into UR via File | Import | a Folder and used in conjunction with the *folder display.

So long as you're ready to Store the images.
Quote:
Originally posted by armsys
I just don't see how UR could become a photo database given my experience with [insert favorite software title]
Except for image (and tag) manipulation, the database functions provided by these programs and UR are not that dissimilar.

It will be interesting to see what lies ahead in the next release of UR.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-14-2008, 07:52 PM
Ivan Ivan is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 12-19-2007
Posts: 19
photo tracking

For those interested in tracking photos I would suggest a dedicated image catalog program like ACDSee
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-14-2008, 09:38 PM
armsys armsys is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: 12-19-2007
Posts: 647
Quote:
Originally posted by ashwken Except for image (and tag) manipulation, the database functions provided by these programs and UR are not that dissimilar.

It will be interesting to see what lies ahead in the next release of UR. [/B]
If UR comes this far, perpetual exclusion of photo database functionality in the future releases willl be, understandably, a great misfortune and disappointment to the UR users.
On the other hand, no products can prevail in the long run without the users' monetary support.
Just my 2 cents.
Armstrong
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:07 AM.


Copyright 1999-2019 Kinook Software, Inc.