Mask actions should be consolidated

[arikorn]

Right now if you want to set a mask, you have to add five actions. It would be much simpler to have a single action with five fields:

• Enable
• X Min, X Max, Y Min, Y Max (or whatever they're called).

Then a second action (which already exists) for Enable/Disable.

(For compatibility leave the other four actions as deprecated?)

For a SuperSource setup, as the most extreme example, this would reduce the number of actions one has to add and arrange from 10 down to 2!

[fa1k3n]

not convinced about this . There is high value in keeping the actions separated and chain them in companion . This "one action to rule all" tends to be an action mess.

[arikorn]

@fa1k3n, perhaps in general I'd agree, but in this case they're really a single unit. I don't really see a use case for changing only one of these parameters without knowing what the other sides are doing... (OK, there is one, but it's much less common than the need to just set the masks.)
In my current experience setting up masking in Companion my conclusion is the exact opposite: trying to organize 10 actions and keep track of which is what was a real action mess!

[fa1k3n]

I do not agree, if you add all mask options into the same action you need to have toggles for each and every option to say if that option should be changed or not. You might want to set the mask but leave the enable state as is, or just change one side. It will be a messy action. No, better to have this as a preset with all the actions collected in a group, then you can disable or delete unwanted actions from the group.

[fa1k3n]

yes, YOU always want to set all four sides at once. Not everyone! And thats why its a preset, then all the mask# are pre filled .
I replaced the image because I found the collapse button, I was about to write the companion development suggesting that and then I found it was there. Of course I strive for clear and concise actions too, but not at too high cost of flexibility, so there is absolutely nothing ironically about that.

and now you removed your previous comment on this making my answer really weird ......