When you create a virtual copy the settings of the master are copied to virtual copy. After playing aroud I would like to return to these initial settings. However, if Iclick reset I get the original master file without any corrections. It would be nice if you could return to the initial state of the virtual copy.
as a workaround maybe you can make a new copy from the master to got a clean virtual copy and then delete the 1st virtual copy ?
If you think you are going to need multiple versions, it’s always a good idea to leave the master untouched and start work on a virtual copy. If you have already changed the master, as @Guenterm says, just make a new copy from it and reset the master.
I see Hugo is after the same as I’m.
It could be solved with a question if the dop file should be updated on a certain event. I was so used to that with CaptureNx
Option one: Apply initial preset (found in your preferences) by hand on that VC it will be set back to original point as the first take in in the filmstrip of the original.
(that’s what i do if needed.)
Option two: Use a VC as a “safepoint or a tree branch/fork” in which case it’s great if it’s reset to the same level as it’s created. ( workaround now is delete make a new one IF the master isn’t developed further)
This you can use as create a base development with the master/original and copy from there your strings /paths/ different tryouts by using VC’s.
When found the right way
Option 1: Copy paste all to the master.
Delete all leftovers.
Option 2 delete master and all other not needed. VC’s.
If your found a certain great original development style use “create preset from present settings” and edit those to a partial preset and store it under a suitable name for later instant use.
One thing i find if i change the file name of a VC the original changed with that too.
I would like that if i change file name VC it creates a suffix kind of filename.
12345.raw and i would name the VC1 12345_ b&w.raw VC2 12345_ no car.raw
I like the idea of being able to suffix VCs. Maybe we should make this a formal request?
If I understand correctly, this is already in the backlog to be implemented at some point:
As @Egregius wrote i think it’s allready mentioned earlier, but reminding can’t be bad.
That is a good workaround, thanks
Hugo, what you need is a history panel