Saving Searches

[dkorman]

iMatch has numerous ways to search its database, with many parameters, which gives it great search flexibility.  Thank you, Mario.

However, I find myself at times wanting to undertake a previous search, and I'm not certain which parameters I set.  I know that I could save search results in a category, but that would make the search "static," not allowing for recently added files.  I could create a dynamic category, but iMatch would want to update the searches all the time, and I'm not certain that the category would mirror the search flexibility in other parts of iMatch. 

So, I propose a capability for Saving Searches (after a search has been performed), perhaps with a single button which would pop up a naming box.  Being able to add, delete, modify, rename and organize (category-type hierarchies) would be truly convenient.  The Saved Searches would not (necessarily) save previous search results, but would, when selected, allow a current search of the database to be performed using the saved settings. Viewing Saved Searches either hierarchically and/or by saved/modified date would also be nice.

Any thoughts?

[Mario]

Which kind of "search" do you mean? The File Window Search Bar?
It remembers the last 20 or so performed searches. Unless you change the options where you have searched you will get the same results.

You can perform all the searches also via the Filter Panel, which already has features to save and quickly re-apply filters to re-run them.
This is what you should use, because it was designed to do what you want.

[dkorman]

Mario,

As always, thank you for the quick reply.

I was imagining something that would be flexible in the manner that Categories are, but with previous searches.  The Filter Panel saved searches are useful, but exist as a flat list, alphabetically arranged, which works (well) for me for a limited number of saves, but a hierarchy (like Categories) would be more flexible.  For example, it would be nice to separate process-related searches from content-related searches.  Further, I imagine having the Saved Searches in their own panel, like Categories/Timeline/Media&Folders/Collections.

[Mario]

You can do a lot of this with Category Formulas
There are many formulas which work with file names, folder names, collections, other categories, metadata...

[dkorman]

I understand that iMatch has facilities that make this "doable," but what you suggest is not as simple as "single click," and anything that requires layers or levels of prior setup becomes an obstacle to usage.  I have been "spoiled" by the beautiful simplicity that you created in Categories, and imagine this extended to saved searches.  And while often Categories are pre-planned, the desire to save a search, for me, arrives "after-the-fact," post-search.  I like the Filter ability to save a search, I would just imagine it extended to the functionality that exists in Categories.

[Mario]

We had saved searches (sort of) in IMatch 3 - because searching was so slow.
Since IMatch 2019 can search so fast, this is no longer needed. From what telemetry tells me, most users (95%) search for simple things like file names, titles or keywords. Not much in the way to setup a complex system of previously ran searches. With hierarchies and whatnot (already have this in categories). Just look at the "IMatch Workflow Categories" and consider them as stored searches in hierarchies...

We'll let this sit here for a while and see what other users think about this.

[dkorman]

What does your telemetry tell you about the use of Attributes, because this is where I feel a particular desire for saved searches?  Does much of the user base use Attributes?

[Mario]

From a quick check, less than 3% of the file window searches include Attributes.

I mean, the file window search bar only allows for "search in attributes" or not. Not much to configure there anyway.
The Attributes filter offers way more options, and can be saved.

[Mario]

Your feature request reminded me of another item on my (looooooong) to-do list: The @Attribute category formula.
We currently have a @MetadataTag formula which is very useful to automatically categorize and organize files based on metadata values, or their absence. The IMatch Workflow Categories utilize this category formula to show the user files with specific properties, e.g. missing keywords or titles, files with GPS data etc.

For users who store data in Attributes there was no similar function - until now. I just have finished implementing the @Attribute formula using the same model as @MetadataTag.

You may find this helpful, because it (in a sense) allows you to store Attribute searches in form of categories, even with hierarchies.
Of course all users who work with Attributes have now another easy way to organize and classify their files into categories based on Attributes. Before this could only be done with data-driven categories based on Attribute variables.

[jch2103]

I just have finished implementing the @Attribute formula using the same model as @MetadataTag.

Nice! This will be a good addition to the logical consistency of IMatch.

[dkorman]

This should be a nice addition.  I'm always amazed at iMatch's structural flexibility in finding "alternative paths" to accomplish solutions.

I was thinking that I could save filtered searches by naming them with some predefined numerical system, e.g. "1", "1.1" etc. which effectively turns an alpha list into a hierarchy, but I think that this could become unmanageable after a while.  Your solution, while not quite "single click," should be useful to Attribute users.

Mario, as always, thank you.