Member rs3d Posted August 7, 2013 Member Report Share Posted August 7, 2013 I stepped back to an older save file, let's call it test_002 (out of test_001 to test_005), when now Saving Incrementally 3DC overwrites test_003 without any request or backup! This needs to be solved, either request or save test_006 by skipping the existing numbers, otherwise it is very easy to loose a file... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted August 9, 2013 Contributor Report Share Posted August 9, 2013 If you went back from number 5 to number 2 I guess you judged the next 3 iterations weren't worthy enough to be modified/continued. Therefore I see no reason to ask Andrew to add another feature because you didn't have the wit to backup those files... If you thought those were worthy you would have saved them as alternative version not "continuations" of 2++... Problem is not the software here, it's the user lazyness/lack of foresight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor Tony Nemo Posted August 9, 2013 Contributor Report Share Posted August 9, 2013 Oooooo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Pix Jigsaw Posted August 9, 2013 Advanced Member Report Share Posted August 9, 2013 I disagree that it was lazyness or lack of foresight. It is reasonable to expect a program would ask before overwriting an existing file. That's pretty standard interface design. Obviously rs3d didn't judge the next 3 iterations unworthy otherwise he wouldn't be upset to have them overwritten. You, BeatKitano, have no problem asking Andrew for features you think are important. Why can't rs3d do the same? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted August 9, 2013 Contributor Report Share Posted August 9, 2013 Methodology is to blame, and not the logical functiong of the program. You won't ask a developper to add a warning/skip version on an ITERATIVE save process. Or you're doing it wrong and don't know how to manage your project/files. Sorry. The whole point of an iterative save is to keep progressive steps toward completion. If you want different outcome you Save As...or make backups as alternate version (with their own iterative tree if needs be). Besides if I follow your logic I get file006 from file004 because the app detected an already existing file005...what a mess... I think you need to check your organisation before asking for things like that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Pix Jigsaw Posted August 9, 2013 Advanced Member Report Share Posted August 9, 2013 Agree that it wouldn't be ideal to jump to file006. Putting in a warning before overwriting an existing file of the same name, however, is sound practice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted August 10, 2013 Contributor Report Share Posted August 10, 2013 Agree that it wouldn't be ideal to jump to file006. Putting in a warning before overwriting an existing file of the same name, however, is sound practice.For a save/save as function, yes. But for an iterative process it doesn't make sense. If you have a higher number file in your folder it means you went down the chain, and you either didn't like le latest change and want to discard them, Or you didn't think ahead and saved a new "fork". Incremental save is a quick process and shouldn't be interrupted for some stupid warning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member rs3d Posted March 7, 2014 Author Member Report Share Posted March 7, 2014 Maybe an optional warning or backup possibility would be nice... Other applications like 3ds max detect that there is an existing increment and offer an "save as" which you can simply overwrite by hitting enter. This happened to me when 3DC crashed and I used "open recent" which wasn't the last entry. Anyways I think as in option this would be nice so it doesn't bother all the people that are more concentrated than others Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Aleksey Posted March 8, 2014 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 8, 2014 I complained about this, and i we came to the conclusion that there should definitly be a check, and if there is a file, then another number should be appended. for example if you have 006, and you go back to 005 and do a incremental save it will name it 005_001 I have to once again emphasise that the current system is a MASSIVE problem. no program should over write existing save files without warning. unless it is the current file you have open. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.