Image rating

When an image is opened for the first time it has no rating and none of the numbers appear in red. If you set a rating, say 4, 123&4 turn red. No problem so far. Change you mind and remove the rating and 0 turns red. You now have 2 states of no rating, one with no red at all and one with a red 0. It would be better if this inconsistency was removed. Clicking 0 should return everything (including the 0) to black.
The labels work fine in this respect.

That is the way Adobe Bridge works:

 - Initial state: no XMP sidecar

 - if you set rating to, say, 4, than xmp:Rating="4" stored in (created) XMP sidecar file

- If you press 'No rating' (Ctrl-0), than xmp:Rating="0" recorded in XMP

The difference between FRV and Adobe Bridge is in indication: FRV shows the difference between 'no rating' and 'zero rating' by coloring [0] square.

I am not doubting the way the XMP sidecar is being written to. It is the way you are displaying the information. A file with no sidecar and a file with a sidecar with "0" recorded are both not rated and to my mind should appear the same in your GUI.  At present one has red and the other does not. Either both should be red or both be black, the latter being more after the style of Lightroom and to my mind the ideal. Purely cosmetic I know, but if you are skipping through and some red suddenly flashes by it attracts the eye and makes you look properly when it is actually no different from the black.

OK, it looks like we need to rename [0] button to [X] (or [N]) button (with tooltip Remove Rating or No Rating).

Funny enough, that Lightroom have no normal way to create smart collection with non-rated/zero rated image. Only 'less than 1', what is not very intuitive (unless you study logic in colledge)

I must admit I am quite happy with logical expressions so that is not a problem to me. However, I can't  actually think of an occasion that I would want to create a smart collection of pictures that are so bad they rate a zero. I suppose I might want to just select them to delete them, though in that case I would probably have already flagged them to reject. The zero button would, in my case, be used simply to do what the mouseover text already says, and that is to clear the rating, so it need not change colour itself, and could be an 'X' if you like. What is not immediately obvious is that it also clears the reject flag (though it is easy to work out when you find the reject button does not toggle) as it appears to belong to the numbers, and an 'X' might make that more obvious.
Talking about the 'Reject' flag, not that I use Lightroom's third flag function, but if you are wanting to match Lightroom, there are actualy 3 states for the flag. Flagged, Unflagged and Rejected. You only have Unflagged and Rejected.

Because other programs (Bridge, Lightroom) do not distinguish between 'No rating set' and 'Rating is 0', and FRV do not support FRV filtering (yet), it is better to adopt other programs behavior:  rename [0] button to [X] and do not highlight it.

To be changed in next FRV version.

Ligtroom flag: unfortunately, Lightroom do not export this flag to (XMP) Metadata.  This is by design: (Flag states are not saved to XMP. They are not visible or available outside of the Lightroom catalog)

So, I do not know what to write to XMP to set this flag in Lightroom.

Lightroom also do not support -1 Rating (Bridge uses it for 'Rejected').

So, to mark file(s) as rejected in FRV one need to use some rating (1, for example), or Label, then select all files with this rating/label via smart collection or so, then flag these files (Select All - flag)

I don't think this is practically a problem, for me at any rate, as I can't see me wanting to use the option other than in Lightroom (and rarely there!). 
I see FRV as a relatively crude (but exceedingly useful) means to sort pictures on site on a slow computer. The main need is to be able to view and assess the pictures, which it already does better than anything else on a slow computer (the underwater profile you mentioned would make this even better). The rating ability is helpful to a degree to sort the best from the worst, though I don't see me using it that much. The reject button will be the main one used. I do use colours simply to group pictures from each dive together. The colours have no significance, I just use a different colour from the last dive so I can see the division between them easily. I keep each trip in a separate folder and a weekend usually has 4 dives so I have 4 colours. When I get them into Lightroom I select a colour in the folder and add a GPS possition to them all in the map module. On longer trips with more dives than colours, I can quickly use 'lft click' then 'space + lft click' to select one section of colour, without having to look at EXIF time to split them. 
I will often pick other peoples brains, on site, as to what some of the creatures are, and to be able to keyword the image with the name, rather than write the image number and ID on  a piece of paper so I can keyword it when I get back to Lightroom, would be great (and I can also do keywording of things I know if I have spare time, speeding things up when I get home). The only other thing that I can think of that could be useful would be the ability to export an image to email or to post it in one of the closed user groups for ID on facebook. However, this would not be done very often so on those occasions it would not be too much of a hardship to use a program such as FastStone (even though that is not as good as FVR for most of my other needs) should it be adding too much complexity to FVR (somrthing to avoid at all costs).

Could you please describe what kind of keywording do you like most

 1) Like Bridge does (editable keywords lists and checkboxes)

 2) Like Lightroom (keyword sets, recently used in separate box, plus editable keywords)

 3) Or 'tagging' (with input line suggestions, like in Google search query input)

Lightroom way is most flexible (although it is too complex for me), but will require large amount of work.

Personally (and I realise the software is not just for me), I would like to keyword for Lightroom. However, I don't need the full Lightroom facilities, and reading around it would seem that the system used in Bridge would be enough.
I would like to be able to import my Lightroom keywords (which are hierarchical) into FRV and be able to tick the one(s) to attach to the image. It would be nice to be able to un-tick them as well, but only those added at that point. Once I have imported the sorted images into Lightroom with their keywords (I understand Bridge type keywords will be added to the Lightroom catalogue with the image during importation) I do not want to be able to do anything more outside of Lightroom, so there is no need for FRV to be able to read keywords attached to images within Lightroom.  

Import of keyword hierarchy from Lightroom/Bridge is a very good idea, thanks (Export files are simple text files, so this is very easy).

We'll start with something like in Bridge (hierarchical keyword list with checkboxes and ability to add/edit/remove keywords).  Complete Lightroom emulation (with suggestions box, keyword set box, keyword list box on the same screen) looks to complex in development and in use.


It seems that your check for updates function is not working as, having gone to look at the forum, I find we are now up to 0.9.4 and I was on 0.9.3 with an updates check frequency of 'On program start'. Even check for updates in Help did not reveal there was an update :-( However, it seems that the only change you have made is the colour management, and this is of little interest to me as I want to use the program for sorting (and eventualy keywording) before importing into Lightroom, where colour management will be dealt with. Not that I have any problem with you including it as I can always turn it off if I find it impacts on performance. 
However, to go back to the image rating, which is where this thread started. Having used it for a little while now, I think it would be good to have a couple (at least) of interface presets. One to suit Lightroom where the Reject button would become  a "move file to rejected subfolder" and the '0' button a clear ratings button, and another to suit Bridge. The main purpose of the software is to sort pictures before importing them into the main processing/editing software, and having buttons that are not used in the selected next stage can (in my case at least) lead to confusion.
While I can quite see why you are getting requests for other functions such as printing and emailing images (the last one from me!) I am backing away from this as it is the start of bloatware that could rapidly result in the loss of FRV's main advantage, that of speed. As for my own request to be able to email images, I find it is satisfied by selecting the area and zoom level I want to email and copying it using 'Snipping tool', which is already a part of Win7, and allows the use of a highlighter and pen before direct export to your email client, so why repeat all those options when they are there already :-)

1) We use updates site to upload updates for our (closed) beta team. 0.9.4 is not 'secret', anyone allowed to download and use it, but this is not production-grade software and intended to our beta team. When 0.9.4 becomes 'public' verision (2-3 weeks, I hope), it will be announced on site and added to updates notification system.

2) Our color management solution is GPU based, so it should work fast. It eats less GPU resources than focus peaking mode. It is not finished yet, we just found a bug related to selected NVidia GPUs in some very specific mode.

3) Interface presets.  It is contr-intuitive to change XMP-window buttons to do anything else than assigning rating/label to image.

For keyboard/mouse shortcuts you may re-assign keys as you wish, save key assignments in text file (Save button in keyboard shortcut editor), than load and re-use.

4) E-mailing, Facebook publishing, JPEG rendering and so.

Definitely not in 0.9-1.0-version. We're focused on unique features present only in FRV (such as over/under exposure detection based on raw data, not jpeg rendering) and do not want to lose focus before FRV-1.0 release


Because you have already found our site with not-public updates, you may want to play with our new not-so-public 0.9.4-418.

There are two changes related to your requests:

 1) New High Contrast and Ultra Contrast curves. I've tried these curves with underwater shot you send me with great success.

 2) Customizable bottom bar: you can place the cuve selector on it and switch between contrast presets very fast (click to gear icon on right of bottom bar, select 'Customize bottom bar' and tune bottom bar items at your taste)

Feedback is always welcome!

Full marks for both 1 and 2 :-)

I find the high contract is fine for the majority of the shots I have tried it on so far but it is great to have the ultra high contract available. However, I do find that there is now a greater need to reduce the exposure and that setting the 'saturate up to' to zero is not enough any more and most shots need a -0.25 or -0.5 EV . While I am not after perfect results from a program used just for sorting shots before final processing, it would be nice to have the majority of pictures needing no manual adjustment before they can be assessed. Being able to set the default EV would be ideal, though simply ticking the 'Keep manual Exposure Correction for next file' is a close second best that I can live with if that is complicating matters too much. The difference being that with that ticked, as well as adjusting the occasional shot, the following one would need adjusting back to default, rather than being there already.

Finally, with no list of changes (at least, not in English), I am not sure whether you mean that two of the several changes are related to my requests, or that there are only two changes, both of which are related to my requests. Should I be looking at anything else in this release.

I have just realised that the curve is global and not specific to each image like the exposure corrections and white balance. This is a little counter intuitive as it is next to the others and so I at first assumed it would behave the same. It would be useful if it did apply to each shot separately. However, I expect the problem is that there is nowhere convenient to store this value, and if that is the case, I can live with it as it is.

Yes, curves are global (and predictable).

Generally, curves are changed by purpose:

  • Standard curves (gamma, sRGB, Adobe Linear) for technical analysis. So, flat image. Very useful
  • Contrast curves to quick show 'final' image to client/model (e.g. in studio)
  • (new) very contrast curves to examine very low contrast underwater images (many landscape shots looks fine too).

Several beta-testers asked interface to quick change contrast curves. We did it (several days ago). I agree, if we provide interface to change curve, we need to store it to XMP (for later re-use in FRV) and translate this settings to Adobe programs. It looks useful: if I change something in FRV, I definitely do not like to re-do it in Lightroom. We'll do it too, but definitely not in this development cycle, please wait.

The two requests are:

  1. High-contrast curve(s)
  2. Adobe - FRV exposure difference. It is automatic now for many cameras. If you use Adobe Linear contrast curve, the image will match Lightroom/CameraRaw with all controls (but exposure) at default values.

The curves are set to increase contrast in midtones (and compress in shadows/highlights), not in ETTR-style 'shift image to the right' (of histogram). Also, midtones in FRV are translated to midtones in Adobe programs (with new 'Use builtin Adobe/FRV exposure difference data when possible' checkbox on, this is default).


I'm afraid I don't understand this reply, or what 'requests' it is a reply to.

1) High contrast curves are now there and I have congratulated you on them.

2) I am at a loss to know what this means. I had commented that it would be good to be able to set a default to the EV adjustment on the bottom bar to default to something other than zero, as in most cases, even having set the 'saturate up to' to zero, my pictures look better with an EV of -0.25 or even -0.5. This is purely a practical thing for me, and nothing to do with how the curves work! I find I frequently need to click the '-' button for my picture to look good. If I could set the default to 0.25 and I had only to occasionally click the '+' button to return it to zero there would be less button clicks and more efficiency. Using the 'Keep manual Exposure Correction for next file' does go so far to automating this but 2 clicks rather than one are then needed to alter it. Once to change it for a picture and a second to return it to 'my' default after moving on to the next picture.

While I totaly agree with another of your comments, that "if I change something in FRV, I definitely do not like to re-do it in Lightroom" for me this is secondary to being able to quickly make adjustments in FRV that are sufficient to show the potential of pictures when compared to others from a shoot. The fewer clicks to get the pictures into this state (and stay there when moving backwards and forwards through them) the faster I can decide which are then best and worth keeping and then move them over to Lightroom for detailed optimisation.

If you need to adjust exposure shift for every picture, it is time to re-calibrate your in-camera (or external) lightmeter.

Anyway, put copy of 'Keep correction for the next file' checkbox on bottom bar is good idea (we'll need to add separate show/hide setting in status bar settings too).

All things became very like to PhotoMechanic with zillions checkboxes and radiobuttons on preferences pages.

Never mind recalibrating, I would ideally like a new camera :-) but when added to a new underwater housing, with suitable lenses and and ports, it would cost around £5K and so is out of the question and I am not sure that would be the answer anyway. In common with many underwater photographers, I still take my pictures with manual settings. Though in my case I don't have the option of TTL as my strobes can't cope with the number of pre-flashes used by my camera anyway. However, I think my problem is actually that the auto exposure is calculated by FRV to push the image as far to the right as possible without saturating highlights. This is fine for most shots where the background is usually the bright area (the sky) and the main subject, where you want to easily see details, is slightly less bright. Underwater, particularly with macro, the subject is the brightest part, and without the 'sky' to act as the target for the brightest values, a -0.25 EV drops the subject down into the area of brightness more usual for the main subject and most easily viewed. I realise this is not the case for most photographers, and in any case you have added the facilities for me to get round the problem so I am fine, and happy to accept that yet another checkbox to suit me when 99% of users have no need for it will just add to the clutter.

With that same aim in mind, I was not suggesting putting 'Keep correction for the next file' checkbox on bottom bar. I agree zillions checkboxes and radiobuttons on preferences page can be a problem, but putting them on the bottom bar can be even worse. Items that only need setting once have no need to be there. Only adjustments that are made to individual pictures, or information specific to the picture. I would think you have it about right as you are. I will just tick the box in the preferences and leave it that way.

FRV started as a tool for quick sorting of large set of frames shot in series (dozens of frames in single location, usually same exposure settings). So, all checkboxes are for my own style of shooting. I use 'Keep exposure for next file', 'Keep custom WB for next file' and 'Rotation lock' (the last one because one of my cameras, the Olympus E-PL2, do not have orientation sensor, so I do not want to rotate every vertical frame, but keep orientation from previous one).

For  series 'Keep exposure for next' works fine. When I need another quick guess (first shot in new series displayed), I just press Shift-A (automatic exposure) to get initial exposure value.

Negative exposure correction is mostly useless for digital cameras, because it does not add details to (already) highlights. Very low contrast shots (like underwater) and very contrast tone curves (added yesterday) is completely new story for us. May be, we need another auto-exposure method, not shift-to-right, but 'balance histogram around middle point'. Will try later.

I agree with all of that and I am still VERY enthusiastic about this tool :-) My only comment is that unfortunately everything takes time and we can't make a list of ideals and have them there tomorrow. The problem this causes is that it is very easy to get sidetracked! The idea of another auto-exposure method sounds great and a 'balanced histogram around middle point' sounds just what I would do (with manual adjustment moving the mid point). HOWEVER what you already have is quite workable and my own preference would be to add a, possibly crude, method of keywording before spending too much time on the auto exposure, after all Lightroom has a very good Auto button once they are there! Get all the abilities you envisage FRV having working in basic form first, then spend time improving them.

Keywording is on TODO list for next beta-cycle. Hope, we'll deliver 0.9.5 in middle of November.


I assume from your comment that you have enough beta testers, if not I would be happy to join the team if you think my comments, such as the  Import of keyword hierarchy from Lightroom/Bridge, have been helpful.
It is a fine line between setting a reject flag and moving a file to the reject folder, but I accept your view on that. However, it is also counter- intuitive to have buttons that do nothing (when combined with your chosen target). As you have already pointed out, the reject button and '0' rating are not carried over to Lightroom so would be better not there for Lightroom users. I would have though that providing an option to hide them (or change the '0' to reset) would not be too complicated, though I could well be wrong. 

Any comments, bug reports and suggestions are always welcome.

BTW, early betas are poor documented (and these docs are usually in russian, we translate before release). Our beta-team is russian-speaking too.

Also, I agree with second statement.

Reject button should be removed if XMP Label style is not 'Adobe Bridge'. And [0] button should become [X] button with tooltip 'remove rating'. This is already on TODO list, but not done yet, we're very busy with color management.

New not-so-public-beta (0.9.4-430) is available at usual place.

There are lot of changes (hope, we'll translate changelog in 2-3 days). XMP section is reworked according to your requests:

  • XMP Reject button is not visible by default. To see it, it should be turned on (Prefs-XMP)
  • No rating and zero rating are the same, so no [0] button, but [x] button.
  • Same for labels. There is no 'No Label' label.
  • Read-only XMP
  • XMP files are not written for alone JPEGs (without RAW+JPEG), but labels and ratings are read, it XMP-for-JPEG exists.

We're always interested in feedback.

First impressions are good, but still some improvements possible.

1) The bottom bar is not as I would expect. Firstly if I hide the channel selector only the buttons go and a space is left at the expense of other buttons, However this is when the white balance manual tune button is hidden. If I always show the manual tune the channel selector space disappears and the manual tune is there, however if I set manual tune to show if fits, it is not shown, even though I have just seen it can fit, and the empty space has come back. I have not tried all the combinations (there are too many!) but there seems a lack of logic altogether to what you see at the moment. 'If fits' don't always show when there is space, gaps are left where buttons are hidden but with other combinations the space goes.

2) The white balance pre-sets are a bit strange as well. I would expect what you select in the drop down to be what is selected, for example Dayl...600K becomes Daylight FL, when selected, and that is different from Daylight! Others have different descriptions as well.

3) The Curve is still global, not specific to the image as the other settings are.

4)The XMP settings are better, and I like the review status for Lightroom. Having them change depending on the settings is also good, however, if you set Adobe Bridge the use XMP reject rating is automatically ticked but if you go back to a Lightroom option it does not clear automatically, which confused me at first. I also wonder if both clear buttons should be a X rather than one X and one grey. Possibly a box round the selected colour as well as the different shade would make it even more clear which is selected.

5)The drop down labels don't match the Lightroom review status, eg red is to delete if hovered over but the drop down label is Select

I hope that helps. I may find more given a bit more time, but development is certainly going the right way :-)

PS. Any chance of having the rating and label to be one of the options that can be seen on the bottom bar so that they can be used without the information window visible.

Do you need indication only (so, 5 small stars plus one mark for label) or clickable buttons (so, larger stars and 5 label buttons)?

I personally would be happy with 5 small stars plus one mark for the label, or to save space on the bar select each separately so only one need be there if that is all you use. The values could be set with hot keys. However, users who want to do everything with the mouse may prefer clickable buttons. The advantage may become less as wide screen monitors are used more as the information space would be unused in that case(if the image hight was kept to the screen hight) However with a standard monitor I can see a bigger picture without it.

1) The bottom bar 'space' is more likely 'EXIF data' space (not filled with data yet, because we switched to new EXIF code and have not updated bottom bar EXIF code).

Also, fitting code is pessimistic about space, because some users use 'large fonts' in windows and very long file names. So, some space may remain unused. If you do not use long names, or large fonts, switch to 'always show' for bottom bar items you really need.

2) WB presets are split in two groups:

 a) upper four (As shot, daylight, tungsteen, auto), that present for most cameras.

 b) other presets, different for different cameras. These presets are extracted from file EXIF (for most cameras, except Nikon). The preset names may be very long, so not fit to control.  Daylight FL 6000K - is preset, extracted from exit data and describes 6000K fluorescent lamp.

Again, It is possible to reserve more space for this dropdown,  but users with small screens become unhappy.

3) Yes, curves are still global. I'll notify you when we do something new with curves. Definitely not in nearest week or two.

4) I agree, 'clear label' should be [X] too.

The box round is reserved for read-only state:  if you select readonly XMP, the box border is bright or not if the label is set (or not), while interior is not bright.

5) This is a bug: menu labels is not updated when XMP label style changes. To be fixed. Thanks. (I do not use FRV menu at al, so missed at testing).

1) This may well sort itself out once you have finished the EXIF code. It just seemed very strange the way it came and went. However, setting the EXIF summary to hidden does seem to make it all behave better.

2) I can see the problems you have with long names, but my criticism was that you use different abbreviations in the drop down to what actually appears on the bottom bar (both being abbreviated) Neut...500K should appear as Neut...500K on the bottom bar not Neutral Whit (or vise versa)

3) I'll be patient

4) Good

You don't mention the automatic setting but not clearing of the 'use XMP reject rating' box

I did not realise you had a box round for anything, not having tried any read only files. I think a box draws your attention to the active box more effectively, perhaps you could use a black box R/W and coloured as you already have for R/only, though it is quite workable as it is if that is getting too complicated. As always the "keep it simple to keep it speedy" rule applies :-)

5) Glad to be useful! I don't use the menu either but I just thought I would have a quick look.

4) I don't think, that automatic clearing is a good idea.

Reject button may be turned on by

a) Label style changed to Bridge

b) or checking Reject button on.

There is no way to know what causes 'Use Reject' to be turned on (unless we save long history of user's changes). So, there is no good solution to 'use reject' behaviour when label style has changed back to something 'Not Bridge'. In a) case it is good to uncheck this box. In b) case it is not. 50-50.

But it is definitely good, 100-0, to check this box if label style set to Bridge.


2) This is the way this control works if not enough room. I cannot change this until I change entire GUI toolkit.

4) Again your argument is very logical, however not totally intuitive. Once you know how it works it is fine, but the chances are you only set it once at the initial setup. I clicked Bridge to see what it did. Having seen that I set it back to Lightroom, as that was what I wanted, but was confused for a while that nothing changed as I had not noticed the 'Use Reject' become ticked and I thought I had set it back to how it was.

2)From that, I assume you set one and the other depends on the individual camera's EXIF which can vary, in which case I can see why you can't always make them identical. A nuisance but acceptable in those circumstances.

2) I'll try to add 10 pixels to the box width. It will help for some values.... but, yes, WB presets names are defferent for each camera and, in most cases, are collected from EXIF data.

I think we might be at cross purposed over this. It is not the abbreviations that seem wrong, so that adding 10 pixels will make no difference. The problem is that the names used in the drop down are not the same as the names that appear on the bottom bar. As I am understanding the problem at the moment, you hard code the text at one instance (probably the dropdown) but the camera provides the text for the other, which varies from camera to camera, so they are unlikely to be the same. More space will make no difference, the only way to get round the problem would be to either use the camera provided names in both instances or convert the cameras names to your names and use those in both instances.

In actual fact, I am unlikely to use this facility much anyway, as underwater there is no concept of sunny, cloudy, tungsten, and so on. I will be using the custom temperature and tint sliders which are great!

The names ARE THE SAME.

The difference is in display:

 - only first characters appears in selected values (box title)

  - first characters .... last characters appears in selection drop-down

So, Daylight 5200K appears as

  - Dayli...5200K in drop-down

  - Daylight 520 when selected.

Extra space will solve some of these problems because long(er) strings will fit.


Very confusing, it is the way they are shortened that differs. I now see how Daylight FL 6000K can appear as Dayl 600 and Daylight FL, I never suspected one took part of the middle section out. Once you know what the entire string is, it becomes obvious, I just could not see how the 2 shortened strings related to each other. Presumably it is impractical to shorten them both in the same way, or have the full string in the drop down and abbreviation on the bottom bar.

Not a problem for me anyway, like I say, I will use the sliders :-)

Unfortunately, drop-down control in GUI toolkit we use (Qt) works this way.  We'll try to shorten WB preset names before feeding to this control by some simple rules (Daylight -> Dayl. and so on)

New 0.9.4-431 is out:

 1) EXIF summary in bottom bar works now

 2) XMP Rating (view/edit), XMP Label view (single box), XMP Label Edit (6 boxes) added to bottom bar settings (off by default)

 3) 'if fits' improved

 4) Menu labels for XMP labels bugfixed


Great that we are in agreement :-)
A shame that my Russian is no better than Google translate! However, if you want any specific testing, particularly with underwater shots, just let me know :-)

Life is never easy, but that does sound a good compromise :-)

In passing, while experimenting with this I find that on my notebook only the area under the drop down menu changes to the new setting until something else is done to the image (such as zoom). Further experimentation shows this applies to all changes made via drop down menus, for example View>Boost Shadows. Also, if the image size is greater than the screen and I drag it around in this situation, only the area where the menu was moves.

This is not a problem on my desktop and no doubt relates to the graphics card used by the notebook (AMD Radion HD 6310). I have the most up to date drivers and DX9 so there is not much more I can do, and it is not too much of a problem as I rarely make adjustments this way. I don't know how many other computers might behave like this but it may be worth adding an extra screen refresh after clearing drop down menus, if that is simple to do.

A further suggestion, now the rating system is sorted out is, having been through and applied ratings (going backwards and forwards a few times), is it practical to carry out batch processes based on those ratings. In particular I am thinking of moving the pictures into different folders. I appreciate this would be a fairly slow process of looking at each XMP, checking the value of the rating and moving the image or not, then proceeding to the next, but this would be much faster than going through and moving them manually, or importing them all into Lightroom and applying filters there. I envisage this being used either at the bottom end to remove, say, all the two star or less images before importing them, in effect discarding them, or moving all the 5 star pictures to be imported preferentially to enable the fastest processing of the very best, again by reducing the time taken to import them to Lightroom.

For 'not updating screen' use Preferences-GPU Processing - Force window refresh by slight resize

Some kind of batch processing and filtering based on rating/label (and, may be, exif data) is on TODO list, but not at top.

I feel a bit of a fool, now you remind me I remember seeing the "Force window refresh by slight resize" in the settings when I first looked at the software :-( 

Add new comment