more flexibility in combining filters...

[dbailey]

I'd like to see more complete operations for working with multiple filters.

The current functionality lets you combine filters in two ways: if you set up two filters you get the intersection of the sets that the filters represent (for example, if you set up two keyword filters, you get the photos that have both keywords); and in many types of filters, you can get the union of the sets the filters represent by selecting multiple entries (for example, if you select two keywords under a keywords filter, you are selecting the set of photos that has either keyword).

What I would like to be able to do is to filter on photos that don't have a keyword -- in set terms, I want the complement operator. For example, I want to be able to view all of the photos taken on a trip, minus the ones I've already selected to go in a photobook.

I think it would be useful to extend the functionality to encompass all set operations: allow intersections of any two filters (already done), allow unions of any two filters (partly done but needs to be generalized), and to allow a complement of a filter (missing completely).

(yes, for the specific purpose I used as an example above I can use a text filter, and indicate keywords "does not contain" -- but this only works correctly if I don't have other keywords containing the same words, and it also isn't the only example for which this functionality would be useful.)

Thanks for considering the idea.

 

[Victoria Bampton]

Hi Doug, welcome to the forum!

Have you investigated the Smart Collections? They offer a lot more flexibility on complex searches, and AND, OR and even IF searches.

 

[johnbeardy]

I'd very much support Victoria's advice here, and wouldn't like to see Adobe spend any further development time on the filter panel - other than on a command which flushes all filters from the catalogue.

I'd also point you to the way you can Alt/Opt click the + plus in the smart collection definition dialog box - this nests additional criteria.

John

 

[dbailey]

Thanks for the replies, folks. I have investigated smart collections, but if there is the ability to complement a filter there, I don't see it.

 

[Victoria Bampton]

When you say 'complement a filter', could you explain a little more about what you'd like it to do?

 

[Denis Pagé]

I'd like to see more complete operations for working with multiple filters....

What I would like to be able to do is to filter on photos that don't have a keyword -- in set terms, I want the complement operator. For example, I want to be able to view all of the photos taken on a trip, minus the ones I've already selected to go in a photobook.

Victoria's suggestion is fine. I myself use the Smart Collections more than filters to find...

That said, I guess you meant "that don't have a given keyword". Suppose your said keyword is "Photobook" then, select all images from that trip and filter for "!photobook". Adding an exclamation point (!) before any word exclude it from the results.

 

[dbailey]

When you say 'complement a filter', could you explain a little more about what you'd like it to do?

Sorry for the confusion... I was using set theory terminology. The complement of a set is all of the elements that *aren't* in the set. So if a filter selects photos A, B and C, the complement of the filter would be everything except those photos.

As Denis pointed out, I can use the "!" character in a text search of the keywords, or I can use the "does not match" rule in a text filter, but that doesn't give complete flexibility -- if I have two keywords such as "Vancouver" and "Vancouver Island", and I want to exclude everything with keyword "Vancouver", I end up excluding all the "Vancouver Island" photos as well.

In terms of set theory, three operations are necessary to give complete flexibility: union, intersection and complement. Or, if you prefer boolean logic, the three equivalent operators are OR, AND and NOT. In either case, the full set of operators will give complete power.

 

[Brad Snyder]

Have your voice heard, cast a vote, official Feature Request time. Link's on the toolbar at the top of the thread.

 

[Denis Pagé]

As Denis pointed out, I can use the "!" character in a text search of the keywords, or I can use the "does not match" rule in a text filter, but that doesn't give complete flexibility -- if I have two keywords such as "Vancouver" and "Vancouver Island", and I want to exclude everything with keyword "Vancouver", I end up excluding all the "Vancouver Island" photos as well.

Add a + sign before a keyword to mean "Begin with" and after a keyword to mean "Ending With". So, in this case, to punch a hole in the Vancouver island,: !+Vancouver+

EDIT: As "Vancouver Island" is beginning with "Vancouver", I hope +Vancouver+ mean Start AND End With.

 

[johnbeardy]

I'd always question for how long users ever remember these !+!+ing prefixes and suffixes. They're nice to have, but not for human consumption.

Set theory has little bearing on how filters are best used. If someone wants to build a more complex query, far better to use a smart collection (despite a few bugs in there). After all, if you have to search using certain criteria today, there's a fair chance that before too long you'll want to search for the same images again. You can target more fields with smart collections, the criteria are in plain if ambiguous English, you can nest extra criteria, and your searches can be saved with dumb collections and help the user add virtual organization structures to the catalogue. Filters are best kept to temporary filtering on commonly-used fields, Adobe really don't need to develop them any further and should instead focus on debugging and extending smart collections.

John

 

[dbailey]

I certainly won't argue that new functionality should ever take precedent over fixing existing bugs. However, the argument that filters shouldn't be developed further and instead Adobe should focus on smart collections has, I think, a bit of a flaw.

As far as I can see, smart collections and filters are based on the same underlying functionality. It looks like both use the same underlying mechanism for selecting photos into the working set. The difference is that smart collections provide a slightly different interface for specifying the filtering rules (this allows nesting criteria and such) and smart collections allow the filter rules to be saved.

I have just realized that I've been talking about filters instead of smart filters only because internally I see them as pretty much the same thing. Really what's important is the functionality -- what it allows you to accomplish.

Maybe I'm wrong on this -- I haven't spent as much time with smart collections as I'd like -- but if I'm correct that smart collections and filters use the same underlying mechanism for selecting photos then any enhancements to filters would automatically be an enhancement to smart collections as well.

John, you say that "Set theory has little bearing on how filters are best used. If someone wants to build a more complex query, far better to use a smart collection". Does this imply that there is sufficient functionality in smart collections to implement full set operations, including the complement operation? If so, I haven't seen it. Have I missed it?

Anyway, at this point its clear that others don't see this as useful functionality.

ps Denis: thanks for the tip on the +operator. I sort of agree with John that these things are somewhat problematic because there's just too many little tricks like this to remember if you don't use them constantly. But it's nice to know they're there, so if I do find myself using them regularly I can dig them out.

 

[Mark Sirota]

As far as I can see, smart collections and filters are based on the same underlying functionality. It looks like both use the same underlying mechanism for selecting photos into the working set. The difference is that smart collections provide a slightly different interface for specifying the filtering rules (this allows nesting criteria and such) and smart collections allow the filter rules to be saved.

You can also save filter rules using the pulldown at the top right of the Library Filter bar.