I have four watermark presets which are two styles, each in black and white. I cannot remember what order I created these in, as the needs have arisen organically, but whatever order they appear in the selection list in the Watermark panel is completely not what I want. Or expect.
I’d really love these to be in alphabetical order…
Yes, I can reproduce this annoying behaviour.
I edited the watermarks according to numbering. Changed watermarks a few times, quit and reopened DPL a few times - and got the mix after a few trials.
While I can understand that the lack of alphabetical order could be frustrating to those who have a lot of watermarks, I suspect that most people will only have a few, at most. I only have the need for three. They are basically the same watermark with slight variations. Which of the three I use depends on the color and content of the lower right corner of my images. For me alphabetical order is unimportant. I do want the order to remain consistent from session to session.
I have only four and it annoys me every time I go to use one because it is interleaved between the two types and in the opposite order within each.
ZKARJ Standard (dark)
ZKARJ Standard (dark)
The latter list is way simpler for my brain to process to get to the one I want, which is 9 times out of 10 the third one in both lists.
If 9 times out of 10 ii is the 3rd one regardless of whether or not it is in alphabetical order I struggle to understand why this is such an issue for you. I would think that after a while you would have memorized the order and be able to pick the one you want instinctively,
that would be great…but if things change, it’s not so great, whatever the order might be, alphabetical or not…
A friend of mine discovered an interesting thing. People approach problems in different ways. Some people are spatially oriented and others are detail oriented. Some people see the whole thing easily, and some people see all the details first.
Because I see the menu as a whole I then have to read through them to find the option I want. Reading through an unordered list is unnatural, and more difficult when the lines are different lengths and mixes of upper and lower case. Ordered lists are throughout our days when we use computers, or going old school, telephone books, book indexes, libraries, and more.
So yes, I have trouble, and I would expect there are others who do, too. I didn’t make this post after a couple of goes at it. I’ve applied literally thousands of watermarks and it is a constant battle. What I’m asking for is:
a) quite normal in computer software, and
b) useful to some people, and
c) from what I’ve read so far on this thread, not counter to people who don’t need or want this.
I guess it is fair enough to ask for an organized list. I also like tidy things.
What does @StevenL think about that ?
I couldn’t agree more. There is a difference between UI (user interface) and UX (user experience)
A UI can be either poorly thought out or well thought out. Get it right and the UX makes people happy to use your product rather than on edge because things don’t feel right.
Sorting is fundamental to good UX and it only takes the addition of one word of code - at least in Swift that’s all it takes. Something like…
watermarkView.items = watermarks.sorted()
I appreciate that. However, when it comes to UI/UX issues, I wonder why I was the only one to post several times that the tools in the Light, Color, Detail, Geometry, Local Adjustment, and fX buttons in the Smart WorkSpace are in alphabetical order, which differs depending on language, and are not in the same order as in their like named standard palettes and don’t retain the collapse status over editing sessions. For those who use both the Smart Workspace buttons and standard palettes it means having to learn to use the tools in two completely different orders. For my purposes I resolved this inconsistency by using the Smart Workspace buttons instead of the like named standard palettes, not because I prefer their alphabetical order but because it results in a cleaner and easier to use interface.
While I do understand @zkarj’s personal issue which may be important to other users as well, my point is that there are a number of UI/UX issues which are much more significant than the Watermarks not being in alphabetical order,
A list like this one should be sorted alphabetically. Unfortunately, as pointed out by @zkarj and others here, this is not the case.
Another little entry on my ‘special list’.
I rarely disagree with you, however, when it comes to sorting lists, especially those I have created myself like watermarks, I prefer to view them in the order in which they were created with the most recent entry at the top. This is common practice in other software like file managers which, in general, usually default to the most recently created files listed at the top. If you really want to meet everyone’s needs, then you should provide the ability to choose the most common sort orders including newest entries first, oldest entries first, alphabetical, and reverse alphabetical.
You are allowed to disagree with me
Jokes aside, something like ‘recent places’ automatically implies to sort the most recent first, but for a generic list, it’s more appropriate to have an alphabetical order.
An even better option could be to have an alphabetical order indeed, with a special section at the top with the last or last 3-5 presets which has been used.
Implementing all sorting options, at the moment, seems a bit overkill. If a user has many (and uses many) WM presets, I guess a best option would be to offer ‘categories’ (e.g. ‘Commercial work’, ‘Personal work’, ‘Exhibition’…) instead of advanced sorting methods…In this case a user can organize his presets into different categories (and each sub-category will display all items alphabetically)…
I agree that including various sort orders for a short list such as watermarks is overkill and I wasn’t seriously suggesting that they should ever be implemented. I was just trying to make the point that each of us has our own preferences. If you want to make the watermark list alphabetical at some point, I’m not against it, but I would prefer leaving it as it is
The problem I see with the “order created” approach is that it implies you create them in a deliberate order and never wish to rename any of them. Because while you can update an existing preset, you cannot change the name. You have to create it as a new preset, and that means it was the last one you created.
No-one commented on my list above where one style has “dark” and the other “black”. If I wish to rename one of them so they match then the order changes. Again.
Everyone has a different use. The best software in town should give more options to help everyone… it is in those kind of details one gets more popular and loved (some only get popular and hated).