Bulk selection help

[Betty LaRue]

I was trying to make a bulk selection to do something in the Optional area. There is a place that says select the first 500 images, and I did that. Yet I see no place to choose the next 500!  Am I doomed to only be able change 500? Or do them one upload at a time?  I know this has been addressed before. I did a search, and couldn’t find the appropriate thread. 

I’ve spent all evening working on it to no avail.

Throw out a lifeline, please, if you have been there and worked it out. I would imagine it’s something simple that I’ve overlooked. Or is it that my iPad doesn’t allow it?

Betty

[Betty LaRue]

Never mind, my 3rd search found the answer.

[ReeRay]

Care to share ?

 

thxs 

[spacecadet]

You can only do 500 at a time. Unless Betty's leprechauns have found a crock.

[Allan Bell]

7 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

Never mind, my 3rd search found the answer.

 

I tried that before and never found the answer Betty so gave up on it.

 

Allan

 

 

[Betty LaRue]

Have to do it on your desktop.  I broke mine up into pseudos. Then held shift key down and run the mouse down the page to select a hundred images or so. Let go of the mouse.  Check marks then appear on those. Make your correction/addition/whatever and save. Deselect paying attention to where you need to start again and repeat. 

I found if I tried to select too many at once the computer ground on forever. 

I worked through them but it took awhile.

Betty

[spacecadet]

While trying out your method- as you say it gets tired after selecting a couple of hundred- I thought of this.

Select multiple subs in the sub pane by clicking on the first, scrolling down and shift-clicking the last. If you want to miss any out, do it in sections.

Then do the shift-drag as far down as you like. I  managed to select 1120 at once. This only works with complete subs of course.

Unfortunately I can rarely do this more than a year  back because of over-50-tag legacy images. A single one contaminates the whole batch and you can't even combine tags to reduce the number.

[Betty LaRue]

2 hours ago, spacecadet said:

While trying out your method- as you say it gets tired after selecting a couple of hundred- I thought of this.

Select multiple subs in the sub pane by clicking on the first, scrolling down and shift-clicking the last. If you want to miss any out, do it in sections.

Then do the shift-drag as far down as you like. I  managed to select 1120 at once. This only works with complete subs of course.

Unfortunately I can rarely do this more than a year  back because of over-50-tag legacy images. A single one contaminates the whole batch and you can't even combine tags to reduce the number.

It was your answer to a previous post some time back that I finally found that showed me the way!

Thank you. As usual, helpful. 

I did nothing with tags, thank heavens. I just wanted to tick the “only at Alamy” box, which worked fine. I didn’t have to deal with 50 plus tags. Ugh.

It would be nice if there was a search function that identified images with 50 or more tags. Or a search function that selected images with less than 50 that would allow the editing of only those. If we could star those with over 50, then later we could, at our leisure, easily find them (stars) and reduce the tags bit by bit on rainy/snowy bitter days.

Betty

[Allan Bell]

 

Thank you for the information Betty and Mark. 

 

Two smileys, one each.

 

Better than arrows I think.

 

Allan

 

 

[spacecadet]

6 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

 

Thank you for the information Betty and Mark. 

 

Two smileys, one each.

 

Better than arrows I think.

 

Allan

 

 

I'm a huge fan of the Red Arrows.

[Stokie]

49 minutes ago, Betty LaRue said:

It was your answer to a previous post some time back that I finally found that showed me the way!

Thank you. As usual, helpful. 

I did nothing with tags, thank heavens. I just wanted to tick the “only at Alamy” box, which worked fine. I didn’t have to deal with 50 plus tags. Ugh.

It would be nice if there was a search function that identified images with 50 or more tags. Or a search function that selected images with less than 50 that would allow the editing of only those. If we could star those with over 50, then later we could, at our leisure, easily find them (stars) and reduce the tags bit by bit on rainy/snowy bitter days.

Betty

 

Abso-bluddy-lutly!

[Betty LaRue]

4 minutes ago, Stokie said:

 

Abso-bluddy-lutly!

[Betty LaRue]

39 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

 

Thank you for the information Betty and Mark. 

 

Two smileys, one each.

 

Better than arrows I think.

 

Allan

 

 

I’ll take the smiley. But I want my greenie! 

[NYCat]

Betty, on the dashboard they do show the number of images that have "poor discoverability" and you can click on the number and they will be in the image manager. I guess you can also use a filter in the manager to find them.

 

Paulette

[Betty LaRue]

1 minute ago, NYCat said:

Betty, on the dashboard they do show the number of images that have "poor discoverability" and you can click on the number and they will be in the image manager. I guess you can also use a filter in the manager to find them.

 

Paulette

Yes, I have used that just for my information. But what I’m suggesting would be a way to actually sort those with over 50 tags, and a way to mark them to find easily.

I have a lot of images with good discoverability, and quite a few of those with only 40-42 tags. Those images still have room for the addition of more tags. But those in the green with 50 or more, can’t be distinguished from those in the green with 40.

So if I search by poor discoverability, I’d get all of the images with less than 40 tags, but I wouldn’t get those with 40 or a bit over, that are still editable. And I think more of mine fall in that category than those in orange.

Betty

[NYCat]

Don't know how to that, alas.

 

Paulette

[Betty LaRue]

6 minutes ago, NYCat said:

Don't know how to that, alas.

 

Paulette

Actually, you hit on something, Paulette. Using discoverability, and say I want to add one tag. Sorting by Poor, I could do all of those. Sorting by Good, I could add one tag, but run into trouble with those that have 49 tags if I wanted to add two.

I could add 1 + to all with Poor.

I could add 1 to those with good. Wait for an update, and re-sort “Good”. I would then know I could add a second tag to those. The ones that originally had 49 tags and after adding one would then be in the Optimized with 50.

 

But sorting those with over 50 from those with 50 would still be impossible.

Ouch!  My brain has a cramp.  

Betty

[spacecadet]

51 minutes ago, Betty LaRue said:

Actually, you hit on something, Paulette. Using discoverability, and say I want to add one tag. Sorting by Poor, I could do all of those. Sorting by Good, I could add one tag, but run into trouble with those that have 49 tags if I wanted to add two.

I could add 1 + to all with Poor.

I could add 1 to those with good. Wait for an update, and re-sort “Good”. I would then know I could add a second tag to those. The ones that originally had 49 tags and after adding one would then be in the Optimized with 50.

 

But sorting those with over 50 from those with 50 would still be impossible.

Ouch!  My brain has a cramp.  

Betty

There's your greenie.

Dissolve it in a glass of gin.

It's medicine. Your brain ache will vanish. Your mileage may vary. Snapping fingers may not make gin appear.

I've given up on the overtags as well. But they still sell, and don't pollute my measures too much, so hey ho.

[Betty LaRue]

35 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

There's your greenie.

Dissolve it in a glass of gin.

It's medicine. Your brain ache will vanish. Your mileage may vary. Snapping fingers may not make gin appear.

I've given up on the overtags as well. But they still sell, and don't pollute my measures too much, so hey ho.

Thanks! I will dissolve it in a Margarita. I won’t even notice the color with the lime in there. Yum. You made me crave a Margarita. 

[spacecadet]

Just finishing my bottle of Costières de Nîmes here.

I note that you are considering alcohol at 3.15 pm local time. I'm proud of you.

[Betty LaRue]

I could potentially crawl out of bed and have a Margarita instead coffee. Alas, my bed head and morning breath would cause me to be turned away from the door of any establishment, more’s the pity.

[Allan Bell]

17 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

I’ll take the smiley. But I want my greenie! 

 

Ahh! O.K. then greenies given to you both.

 

Allan

 

 

[Betty LaRue]

4 hours ago, Allan Bell said:

 

Ahh! O.K. then greenies given to you both.

 

Allan

 

 

What a gentleman!