Load selection ... inconsistent behavior

[hjb00]

Load selections only seems to find photos that have had their thumbnail displayed on screen.

I tried the following:
1. Organizer>Filter>New in order to load everything (13.000 images)
2. Select 1st, last, and one in the middle
3. Save selection
4. Quit/restart PM+
5. Organizer>Filer>New in order to load everything again
6. Load selection. Result: 3 items in select, 1 match found.
7. Press End key to get last image onto the display
8. Load selection. Result: 2 matches
9. Scrolling to top, so that the middle image briefly scrolls across the display.
10. Load selection. Result: 3 matches

best regards,
Hans-Jørgen Bergmann

Photo Mechanic Plus Version 6.0, build 5376 (14f9534)
macOS 11.0.1 (20B29)

[Kirk Baker]

Hans-Jørgen,

Load selections only seems to find photos that have had their thumbnail displayed on screen.

I tried the following:
1. Organizer>Filter>New in order to load everything (13.000 images)
2. Select 1st, last, and one in the middle
3. Save selection
4. Quit/restart PM+
5. Organizer>Filer>New in order to load everything again
6. Load selection. Result: 3 items in select, 1 match found.
7. Press End key to get last image onto the display
8. Load selection. Result: 2 matches
9. Scrolling to top, so that the middle image briefly scrolls across the display.
10. Load selection. Result: 3 matches

Thanks.  I'll look into fixing this for the next build of Photo Mechanic Plus.

-Kirk

[Kirk Baker]

This build addresses this problem: http://forums.camerabits.com/index.php?topic=13781.0

Please give it a try.

-Kirk

[hjb00]

On my iMac with everything on SSD it works fine. Gathering metadata for 14000 images takes a bit of time, but it works for me. However, if I were using ordinary HDDs or had 100000 images, it would be painful.

I'm also running from my laptop with all images accessed via an smb share over wlan (database on local SSD). In that configuration, performance is extremely slow. It took several minutes gathering the metadata for just the first 2000 images.

And I discovered another issue: Even when i clicked on the Abort button during the gathering of metadata, the gathering of metadata seemed to continue in the background. The dialog box disappeared, but network traffic was still high, and the general performance while continuing my work was poor. So I decided to quit PM+ completely (Cmd-Q), and even that took much longer than normal. Network traffic then went back to normal.

So I have 2 questions/requests:

1) Do you have to access the actual images, rather than just searching the database?
2) Selecting Abort should stop the gathering process, not only dismiss the dialog.

Hans-Jørgen

[hjb00]

Oh, by the way, this is not something you need to put high on your priority list. I would like to use the selection lists, but they are in no way critical to my workflow, so there is no rush.

Hans-Jørgen

[Kirk Baker]

On my iMac with everything on SSD it works fine. Gathering metadata for 14000 images takes a bit of time, but it works for me. However, if I were using ordinary HDDs or had 100000 images, it would be painful.

I'm also running from my laptop with all images accessed via an smb share over wlan (database on local SSD). In that configuration, performance is extremely slow. It took several minutes gathering the metadata for just the first 2000 images.

And I discovered another issue: Even when i clicked on the Abort button during the gathering of metadata, the gathering of metadata seemed to continue in the background. The dialog box disappeared, but network traffic was still high, and the general performance while continuing my work was poor. So I decided to quit PM+ completely (Cmd-Q), and even that took much longer than normal. Network traffic then went back to normal.

So I have 2 questions/requests:

1) Do you have to access the actual images, rather than just searching the database?

Sometimes yes, it depends on whether your images are online or not.

2) Selecting Abort should stop the gathering process, not only dismiss the dialog.

It works in batches of 2000.  It stopped when the batch that was in progress completed.

-Kirk

[hjb00]

Thanks for the info, Keith.
Once I know how it works, I can also easily find the most efficient way to work with it.

Hans-Jørgen