The batch renaming tool is very ineficient

[Kaetokiha]

Hi.

I just recently discovered XnView MP and i'm really pleased with this program. The tabbed interface is great and i love how i can personalize a lot of things to make it better for my taste. The program is fast and offers a lot of tools to manage my images.

I appreciate the effort the developer put in this program.

With that said, i really dislike how the batch renaming tool works. In the other program i was using i could open the program, open the rename tool (without having to selecting any file) and click (or simply drag and drop them from the windows explorer) to import the individual files or folders in a order then start the renaming process. I could also choose whether the renaming sequential numbering would go through all the folders or restart at each one of them.

This made the process of renaming many folders much easier and faster. If the templates for the new names were the same then i could drag 15 folders or so to rename them all at the same time (and the program showed how much time until the completion), but even if the template was different, not having to select/import anything into the program to start the batch rename tool can speed things up too.

It could even rename files with name collisions on the same folder. I was taking this aspect for granted, but only now i noticed this is not the case even with specialized renaming programs. I wonder how the dev achieved that.

I tried to use the batch convert process on XnView MP to just rename the images (since it's possible to add multiple folders at once there), but even choosing the "as original" in the format option, there was an increase in size of the files which means there was a conversion process involved too which is undesirable in this case.

I have no clue how hard would be to implement something like this or even if the dev has any interest, but i will keep an eye on this thread for any kind of answer.

Here is a pic to show how the other program did things.

[xnview]

Batch convert loads AND saves image file, so output files can have a difference

[Kaetokiha]

Batch convert loads AND saves image file, so output files can have a difference

Thanks for the answer. So that's how it was...by you answer i imagine that there is no conversion if i use "as original" option, but even so there is an extra process that requires extra time.

I just tested making a copy of two folders then putting them on the batch conversion just to rename the images. There was only 91 files in total, but the images were huge in dimension. For some reason, no names were changed (the new images were saved in a new folder), the size of the folders decreased in 24mb (combined), but the whole process took 4 minutes.

Since no names were changed i did the process again and this time the files were renamed, the folders sized decreases by 24 mb again and again it took 4 mins.

I put the same images in one folder and used the batch rename instead and the process took 1/2 secs. The difference in time is too huge because of the extra process.

The batch conversion is not a good option to just rename the files, but the batch rename can only do it one folder at time which is too slow. Why is there a difference between these too modes? I mean, if one can import multiple folders, the other can't? (this is a legitimate question since i don't know anything about programing and have no idea how hard is to program these functions)

Does the XnView Classic have the ability to rename multiple folders at once? I didn't try it cause i can see that the MP version is the focus now so it's kind of pointless to get used with the older version of the program.

[xnview]

Batch convert loads AND saves image file, so output files can have a difference

Thanks for the answer. So that's how it was...by you answer i imagine that there is no conversion if i use "as original" option, but even so there is an extra process that requires extra time.

no even with 'original format', there is a conversion

The batch conversion is not a good option to just rename the files, but the batch rename can only do it one folder at time which is too slow. Why is there a difference between these too modes? I mean, if one can import multiple folders, the other can't? (this is a legitimate question since i don't know anything about programing and have no idea how hard is to program these functions)

so you would like to have multiple folders rename, right?

Does the XnView Classic have the ability to rename multiple folders at once? I didn't try it cause i can see that the MP version is the focus now so it's kind of pointless to get used with the older version of the program.

no

[Kaetokiha]

Batch convert loads AND saves image file, so output files can have a difference

Thanks for the answer. So that's how it was...by you answer i imagine that there is no conversion if i use "as original" option, but even so there is an extra process that requires extra time.

no even with 'original format', there is a conversion

The batch conversion is not a good option to just rename the files, but the batch rename can only do it one folder at time which is too slow. Why is there a difference between these too modes? I mean, if one can import multiple folders, the other can't? (this is a legitimate question since i don't know anything about programing and have no idea how hard is to program these functions)

so you would like to have multiple folders rename, right?

Does the XnView Classic have the ability to rename multiple folders at once? I didn't try it cause i can see that the MP version is the focus now so it's kind of pointless to get used with the older version of the program.

no

Ok i understood, thanks for answering again.

Ideally i think it would be great to be able to use the batch renaming tool in the same way we already can use the batch conversion tool. We can select the images in the program and launch the tool or we can simply launch the tool and then add all the files or folders we want from the program or windows explorer and configure everything accordingly.

Being able to sort the files by name size, etc...(like we also can with the batch conversion tool) would be a plus too.