How to include flag in Custom Thumbnail Template for Pending Writeback

[Jingo]

Hi All - I used to have a template that showed the Index Number in the top left of the thumbnail along with a "*" if the file was marked as "pending writeback".  It was a nice visual reminder for me to review the file and perform a metadata writeback.  I am trying to recreate this template and I cannot figure out how to determine if the file has pending writebacks.... the file shows in the "pending writeback" collection... but I could not find an easy tag/attribute that would enable me to access this.

Thoughts?  Possible?  Thx!

[Mario]

Variable {File.MetadataModified} See List of File Variables

[Jingo]

Variable {File.MetadataModified} See List of File Variables

Thx Mario!!    Can't believe I missed that one... That help page has been my best friend the last few days!!!   

So.. how would I combine this with the Index of the image then?  Under Custom - I do not see a {File.Index} that I can use and if I just use the attribute for "Index" - then I can't use any code in the Prefix field to the {File.MetadataModified}.... I wonder if this was something that occurred automatically in a previous version when using the Index attribute (a "*" would appear before the index number when pending metadata was in place)?  If this is not possible.. no big deal - I can just add another icon to identify this.. in fact, that might just be a better approach for me anyway but I am curious if this feature was removed or I'm just remembering incorrectly.

Also, minor misspelling - but in the hint text at the bottom of the editor box, for Prefix it says: Enter text of HTML-Kode.... that should be HTML-Code.

[Mario]

I've fixed the typo for the next release thanks.

IMatch does not show * anywhere. That was your doing.
There is a default Attribute ("Index") that you can use. Maybe you used that in the left column and then your custom template in the right column?

[Jingo]

I've fixed the typo for the next release thanks.

IMatch does not show * anywhere. That was your doing.
There is a default Attribute ("Index") that you can use. Maybe you used that in the left column and then your custom template in the right column?

The * was right before the index number.. I'm just not sure how I did it.  I am using the default "index" but that doesn't seem to be available as a variable so I can't add code to it. 

No worries... I created a new icon to show for this with my other icons... pretty slick what can be done here Mario.... can only imagine what the next iteration of the views using JS will enable us to do if we wish.... looking forward to it!!

In case anyone is interested - here is the end result:



Icons represent if the Image has:
  Pending Metadata Writeback
  Location data
  Description
  Flag Set
  Title
  Keywords (# of keywords)
  Rating (Rating #)

[Mario]

Looks great.

retty slick what can be done here Mario.... can only imagine what the next iteration of the views using JS will enable us to do if we wish.... looking forward to it!!

From my experience (and telemetry) all this is way over the head of the majority of users. Strictly "Don't need that".
As I just wrote the other day in another thread, most users never switch from the Default layout or open the Layout editor. Even less since I've introduced the simple layout dialog - to make it easier for users to do at least a minimum of customization. A direct result of telemetry findings.

By the very, very reduced amount of flexibility the popular Lightroom application offers in this area (and, apparently, even less so in more modern CC versions) my guess is that customization at this level is something maybe 5% of the user base needs. Or less. And that's based on the already more 'demanding' IMatch user base.

IMatch Anywhere WebViewer offers also very little in ways of "file window" customization. A few standard layouts to select from. Advanced users can setup two "rows" based on a custom variable string. That's it.
Result: No complains. No feature requests. People are (apparently) happy to work with that.
I know that IMA WebViewer is for a different audience, but nevertheless...people hate complicated, and the new user generation even more so.

For study, I've recently looked at some of the popular cloud-based DAM systems. These are products for mass markets and one can learn a thing of two from them. Regarding dumbing down things for large audiences. Simple is good, for both entry-level and expect users. The tricky part is to find a balance. Reducing complexity. Making decisions of how something should work/look and removing options.

Of course they don't give a shite for things like proper metadata management, allowing the users to see more than 15 or 20 metadata fields, dealing with EXIF, legacy IPTC, non-standard color spaces, image orientation or other unpleasant things. When you ask, they just tell you "We don't do that. Our customers don't know about that  or need that"...

[sinus]

Very nice, Andy! 

I have some layouts (with a lot of icons), what are quite similar.
And it is interesting, that the speed of IMatch is quick, despite this lot of variables.

[Jingo]

I agree Mario... to be perfectly honest - I too would learn to be happy with the default layout if that is all that was offered... the info I show on the thumb can be seen easily in customized metadata panels and a myriad of other places in IMatch.  Given my 34" widescreen monitor, I can pretty much have all major panels open and visible as well to see this stuff....

I tend to customize it just because .... it's fun!  And I love to program, learn and play what can be done in the software... if it all went away and I couldn't, then I too would be ok with that.


Markus - Yes... I used to have a ton of icons and other items on my thumbs back in Imatch 5.x... but it would slow things down so I removed them.  This latest build handles hundreds of thumbs on the screen at once with ease.... Mario - you really have done an amazing job with the speed... iterations faster!!

[Mario]

I'm always keeping an eye on performance and try to think of ways to improve things (not always easy, because IMatch really has to crunch through a lot of data...)