Select multiple folders

[tilltheendofeternity (Stephen - Win 10, Canon R7 & 80D - PL7, FP6, VP3, NIK4 & Affinity 7)]

I cannot get FRV to show TIFFs and researching it suggest that is in the Beta version of 2.15, while the stable current release is 2.14.

[Chris29]

Thanks. I already own FRW which, obviously , I use to review and cull Raw files. It cannot sélect multiple files, though…

[Chris29]

you should do your image management and housekeeping in a different application and just bring DxO PhotoLab out for what it does best - making photos look really good.

Totally agree and this is what I do. I am just trying to get away from Lightroom as my old standalone version 6.12 will one day stop working.

[Chris29]

Are you using ACDSee on a Mac or on Windows? I’m guessing on Windows as the Mac version interface is clunky and the RAW conversions are garish.

I have downloaded a trial version of ACDSee (they’ve got a huge discount at the moment, but it is still 114€…)

[uncoy (Alec Kinnear)]

Thanks. I already own FRW which, obviously , I use to review and cull Raw files. It cannot sélect multiple files, though…

FRW can handle non-RAW files too (I use it on Fuji jpegs as well as my Canon RAW files). FRV can definitely handle multiple files to move them around but you’re right - it’s one folder at a time. FRV is one of the few viewers who handles 4K/hi dpi display properly if you disable in “Zoom” preferences: “Use logical pixels for zoom calculation.”

I’ve just done some digging in the manual. To my surprise, there is no option for displaying even nested folders. It’s one folder at a time. There is a cool option to limit the Folder Tree to start from one folder up shift-command-T. I’ll be using that shortcut in the future.

I have downloaded a trial version of ACDSee (they’ve got a huge discount at the moment, but it is still 114€…)

Okay, Windows version, then. Windows version is apparently very powerful for image management and some even like the RAW tools. Since you have DxO you might be able to get by with the ACDSee Standard version which is image management only and is just €40. I’d probably get the whole program myself while I’m at it. The Mac version is of negative value unfortunately. Slow, clunky, incompatible with other applications, mediocre conversions. It competes with AfterShot Pro 1 back in 2012.

Just saw your remark about standalone Lightroom v6. That’s why there’s no more Adobe on my computers either. Don’t agree with software rental and would go FOSS/Linux before I go subscription.

Looks like ACDSee might be the right combo tool (more focused on asset management) to bridge your photo processing tools and manage your pipeline. Have you tried iMatch? Many forum members seem to really enjoy using iMatch for DAM. I’m not a Windows user so it’s not an option for me. PhotoMechanic is all culling/keywording on ingest and not really a production pipeline tool.

[Chris29]

I’m not a Windows user so it’s not an option for me.

Neither am I. It’s all Mac for me (since 1986…Some of us are still alive )
By the way, this is the DXO PhotoLab for Mac users, so no cheap ACDSee version for me either.

I just posted a question about multiple folders selection on the Fast Raw Viewer forum and got a fast reply from the developer (I think)
“this feature was asked by many our users and now it is in our TODO list”

[Chris29]

Are you using ACDSee on a Mac or on Windows? I’m guessing on Windows as the Mac version interface is clunky and the RAW conversions are garish.

I have just downloaded the Mac trial version. Not impressed.

[Chris29]

I also had a look at Photo Mechanic, but no luck with multiple folders selection. So, it is Lightroom ,ACDSee or a future version of Fast Raw Viewer.

I forgot to illustrate what I do for a living and why I need a robust workflow…examples here

[John-M (Melbourne, Australia - Win10)]

I forgot to illustrate what I do for a living and why I need a robust workflow…examples here and there and another one…

Nice work, Chris … What lens do you use for this sort of work ?

Regards, John M

[Chris29]

Thanks. Sony FE 16-35 F4 (Sony Alpha 7Rii camera).

[uncoy (Alec Kinnear)]

It’s a fascinating workflow, Chris. I find it very interesting you prefer bracketed jpegs to RAW. There’s room here for a huge scripted sort of application. I can see you are already doing everything you can to automate/semi-automate the process.

Command line tools might serve you best in the long run, as they are often allow automated input and can then pass it on to the next tool.

[Chris29]

I find it very interesting you prefer bracketed jpegs to RAW.

You’re right, I have been working hard to find an efficient workflow with a pleasing result for clients (and myself!) I am not pleased at all with what Photomatix Pro does to RAW files (No “Natural” setting available, and the result shouts “HDR”) ; the result of bracketed jpegs is well balanced and does not need much editing in DXO.
I bracket -4, -2, 0, +2, +4 with some exposure compensation when needed.

[uncoy (Alec Kinnear)]

I am not pleased at all with what Photomatix Pro does to RAW files (No “Natural” setting available, and the result shouts “HDR”)

EasyHDR creates much more natural HDR images than for instance Aurora 2019. PhotoMatix Pro and Aurora are apparently quite similar in their output style. I’ll probably return Aurora 2019 as I so much prefer what I get out of EasyHDR.

EasyHDR also does a much better job auto-masking moving objects (branches, windmills) to eliminate ghosting than either Aurora 2019 or Photoshop CS6.

EasyHDR is much less expensive than Photomatix Pro - it’s just some bright guy in Poland named Bartłomiej Okonek who is a programmer and an astro-photographer who originally created it for his own use. He’s running a 20% off sale now. Theoretically you should buy the commercial license at €47 and not the home license at €28 but you could probably start with the home license until you successfully deploy EasyHDR in your commercial workflow.

Here’s a couple of examples of EasyHDR processed images - note I’m processing to attempt to make the image look natural.

I sometimes use jpegs pre-processed with DxO PhotoLab when creating HDR images with EasyHDR to make sure the results have the correct colours up front. Sometimes I work directly with RAW images which does allow a bit more flexibility within EasyHDR.

[Chris29]

Of course I have downloaded EasyHDR (Thanks to you )
It seems to preserve the highlights a lot better than Photomatix but the result is somehow darker…but, a lot of details lost.

And I started to compare with Affinity Photo, well…you’d be surprised! No artefact, very sharp, not as good to recover highlights but all in all very pleasing.
I suppose this conversation about HDR apps could carry on indefinitely.

[Pieloe (Pascal)]

Short answer : that’s how I work.

Well, I do my best.
Thanks for providing an answer and pieces of advice.

Salut Chris

Short answer for me too
For this, you can use the projects.
In this case a “stupid” project to collect all the images.

Très beau travail sur ton site.

Pascal

[Chris29]

Très beau travail sur ton site.

Merci mais comment l’as-tu trouvé ?

[Pieloe (Pascal)]

Merci mais comment l’as-tu trouvé ?

Je suis parti de ce post

Select multiple folders

I also had a look at Photo Mechanic, but no luck with multiple folders selection. So, it is Lightroom ,ACDSee or a future version of Fast Raw Viewer. I forgot to illustrate what I do for a living and why I need a robust workflow…examples here

Je ne google pas les gens ici
Pascal

[Chris29]

ça n’est pas mon site, juste un exemple de travail.
Site, Facebook et instagram en MP si ça t’intéresse.

[Pieloe (Pascal)]

YES

[uncoy (Alec Kinnear)]

And I started to compare with Affinity Photo, well…you’d be surprised! No artefact, very sharp, not as good to recover highlights but all in all very pleasing.

Merci pour l’information. Avec EasyHDR on peut créer très facilement des Presets qui convient aux besoins de projet. Je croire que l’integration semi-automatique avec une application externe (ACDSee par example) soit plus facile avec EasyHDR que avec Affinity Photo.