Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
photo duplicate scanner
Curt:
Now having tested Unique Filer 2 Beta, I cannot keep silent:
You people are suffering from retrofixial! :o
1) Unique Filer is not "more intuitive". You have just used it for so long that you have come think this is how it should be, because this is how it always were!
2) Unique Filer is fast, but not "faster scanning". In fact, AntiDubl is twice as fast!
Unique Filer used 10 minutes, AntiDubl used 5 minutes. (5.800 jpg and png photos)
3a) Unique Filer's result is not quite "accurate enough" for me: During the initial scanning, ("Analyze All"), the program stopped twelve times to tell me that a file was missing! (The program didn't go back to work until I had clicked 'okay'! What a bummer!) MAYBE Unique Filer are having problems reading certain modern file types, I don't know, but no other program thinks I am missing 12 photos in my collection. And how can I know anything about these 12 photos? The program gave me no file name, no nothing, just "a file is missing > Okay"!
3b) The Dupe Finder part of Unique Filer is exceptional fast, and makes me agree with sajman99: "I would have loved to see Unique Filer developed further". But maybe it is just too fast. I don't see why these two pictures should be listed as almost identical:
1200x912 pixels:
photo duplicate scanner
1024x805 pixels:
photo duplicate scanner
Do you?
Yes, I would have loved to see Unique Filer developed further,
but Unique Filer is outdated and not good enough for me.
Szero:
Wow, that's indeed a weird "duplicate" :huh:
What i was meaning with "intuitive" is the layout of both images in UF, they're BIG enough to draw a conclusion, there's a right click option "Full Size" which gives us a dragable full sized comparison (most images these days are up and beyond 1024pixels),
the "details" section of the window in AD should not take up 80% imho, maybe we can all ask the author to make the actual decision screen show us more image instead of numbers & way too big and unclear icons. :D
It would be much neater assigning a function key to mark a file for deletion, and leave the screen for showing us what we need to see.
sajman99:
In my experience Curt's Unique Filer accuracy findings were quite typical. Once you begin to increase Unique Filer's tolerance setting much above 15, you start to see images which are clearly visually dissimilar. These "mistakes" will of course happen with all of these tools, but they happen too soon (ie. too low tolerance setting) with Unique Filer. This lack of precision is why I don't use UF as often as I used to.
Regarding speed, it's like asking "Which is the faster file finder- Agent Ransack or Everything?" Obviously the indexer will always win the battle. So when processing large numbers of files Unique Filer will actually be faster (ie. after the initial scan which creates the index). But as many users know, AntiDupl.NET is no slouch in the speed department; it's probably the fastest non-indexer I've ever used.
Though I have to say I've never in 5+ years encountered that missing file issue when running Unique Filer- strange! You might consider keeping it for a bit to see if it's a recurring problem; who knows-- maybe UF will settle down. I mean, there is at least one compelling reason to keep Unique Filer: Smart Dupe Filter. ;)
sajman99:
You people are suffering from retrofixial! :o
-Curt (November 05, 2010, 07:19 PM)
--- End quote ---
btw Curt it seems I need a larger (and I mean much much larger) dictionary. :D Maybe one of those ten pound gigantic dictionaries like I've seen in schools and libraries. ;)
4wd:
You people are suffering from retrofixial! :o
-Curt (November 05, 2010, 07:19 PM)
--- End quote ---
btw Curt it seems I need a larger (and I mean much much larger) dictionary. :D Maybe one of those ten pound gigantic dictionaries like I've seen in schools and libraries. ;)-sajman99 (November 06, 2010, 01:55 PM)
--- End quote ---
It's an Americanism - ie. make up a word when the right one doesn't seem right, (or comes to mind) :P
As such, there can never be a dictionary sufficiently big enough :harhar:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version