After having upgraded to v2 (Pro) two years ago (go figure), I finally needed Retrobatch last night and have some feedback (though not all of it may be specific to v2). But first of all, thank you for a tool that, when I need it, really makes a huge difference!
- Like several other users, I find the new user interface somewhat of a regression. Always having node properties visible made building and editing workflows simpler and faster, with less clicking around. That seems far more important to me than having a huge preview image.
- I’m not sure when you introduced the Multi-Scale node but I love it. It replaced what used to be about 10-15 nodes in my typical workflow. Having said that, all settings for the node, in my use case, differ solely in image width (for responsive images). So the UI for the settings is too general in my use case. It would be nice to have a more concise presentation in case all settings are the same modulo image width or height etc.
- Retrobatch appears to use an alias for folders, so even if I move the folder, it will use the folder. That’s generally great. Alas, when I trash a folder, that doesn’t seem so great anymore. Worse, if I now empty the trash, Retrobatch will recreate the folder inside the trash. That seems like the wrong place.
- If you want to go the extra mile, Retrobatch should probably warn users when saving the workflow file to the same folder as generated images. The latter are trivially recreated with a workflow, well, as long as I didn’t delete the workflow with the images… (Thankfully, I realized my mistake before emptying the trash.)
Finally, one question: Is there a way to turn a sequence of nodes into a library building block? I keep recreating the same Read Files/Delete Metadata/Change Color Profile/Change Bits Per Channel/Remove Color Profile sequence and, just maybe, it’s time to standardize that part…
Cheers,
Robert