FR: Keeping edits under control in projects view

[rpc9943]

hey looks like the variable t2 release date!

LOL

[semiquaver]

what I find wierd is that once I've done a sort I can't see a way to return to the default order (by creation time) without quitting and restarting. Am I missing something?

[Toad]

What I'm confused about, though, Toad, is what usefulness it is to you to know what edit the clip belonged to. Once I know that information, I might better be able to understand your need for an edit-based hierarchal sort.

I suppose the main reason is that I like to keep things tidy and logical when I'm working, especially if it's a big project. I can't cope when hundreds of clips start appearing all over the place and I don't know where they belong. I frequently cull bits I don't need or like and I want to keep tabs on what edits they belong to, in case I delete something I really need.
I think it's called being an old fart.

[Lunch Money]

<grin>

I know what you mean, but I approach it from the other side. It's easier to keep track of 10 edits than 200 clips. So I'll go into an edit before deleting it to make sure there are no 'takes' that I needed, and then I'll shit-can it.

Then if the leftover edits have all the tracks I need, I can just find and delete orphan clips, OR (because I'm usually a paranoid git) archive the entire edit separately.

More often, I don't even bother. When I make a take, I'll pretty much know right away if it's at least 'keepable' and I'll delete it with CTRL+M if not. I mean, let's face it.. sometimes you get takes that you know for sure you're never going to want to hear again.

I rarely look at the project window except to select different edits. I couldn't care less what clips are in there until a project is absolutely finished. Even then, I couldn't usually bother with any sort of maintenance. Better to just archive the whole shebang, as it'll almost always fit on one or two DVD's tops.

Greg

[soundquist]

1 - Click an input device
2 - you'll see a "filename" dialogue strip
3 - change the tags to whatever you'd rather use. For example:

%projectdir%\%date%_%edit%_%track%

This will store each track's filename as something like:

1May2005_Bass Recording_Jazz Bass 1

In the appropriate directory.

OK that is something, but actually I hoped it would be possible to change the naming convention of edits. I often try new versions in new edits and tend to loose track of which is the latest, if I'm not careful with naming.

I guess no project scheme (as it is supplied in the host software, in this case Tracktion) will really help unless the user sets up some sorts of structure to his/her work (and then follows his/hers own intentions!)

But I suppose a function to sort edits or clips by last saved date/time would be useful though.

[rpc9943]

is it better to make each project per song or per album? Do you know what i mean?

RonC

[Lunch Money]

I hoped it would be possible to change the naming convention of edits.

Whoah the bus. Why not just name it with the date? When you press "save edit as..." just pick a name that includes the date? Or just go in numerical order no matter what other name you use.

ex.

1 Initial Edit
2 Mucking around with the Bass
3 Initial again New Bass

and so forth...

In the project window, instead of just renaming the edit in the large pane, go to the property panel at the bottom and press the "..." button next to the filename. You'll get the option to rename it to whatever you want, and also rename the clip to match.

Everything you need is already there.

Ron - Per song, for sure. There's absolutely no benefit to making one project per album.

[semiquaver]

but Greg its just crazy - there's no reason, when creation date is stored natively by the operating system to have to put the date in the name! It's reinventing the wheel. And has less functionality than the file system provides for free since you can't store both creation and modification dates and times in the name.

All this is easy to fix (here's a tiny FR!!) -

1. Offer a sort by creation date and a sort by modification date in addition to the sorts currently available.

2. scrolling is a pain in this context - why not have a next-page and previous page button/key shortcut.

then I think no folders or anything else will be needed.

[Lunch Money]

OK, I know what you're saying, but where does it end? At what point in time is it reasonable to do a whole 3 seconds of work to get something the way you want?

For crying out loud, what's crazy is that this would be an issue for people.

For almost any element of the program, you could say, "this would be a quick fix" or "that would be an easy thing to modify", but a list of 100 'small and easy' things isn't suddenly an easy task anymore, and there's only so much time in the day.

I can live with manually renaming my edits. Honestly, have you ever had a project with more than 25 edits? Be honest, now. Let's say it takes 5 seconds per re-name. That's 125 seconds, or 2 minutes and 5 seconds of your life.

And that's IF you have 25 edits. Many of us get up to about 15 and that's plenty. I have projects with fewer than 10.

Greg

[semiquaver]

Greg don't be defensive: the window could use a few tweaks, why the hell not? When I start T up I don't see my most recent edit - I have to scroll down to it. This is more work than many othe progs which either start with the last edit open or where you just select "open recent" from the File menu. Is T almost always easier than the competition? Yes. Should it be at least as easy wherever it can? yes. Can the project page use some refinement? yes.

[Lunch Money]

I'm not getting defensive. Just giving a reality check. There are tonnes of things that could use a tweak, but this isn't one of the more important ones.