View Single Post
Originally Posted by Brunosc View Post
Hello everyone!
Secondly, let me say I chose OmniFocus over the rest because of its high degree of customizability. Unfortunately, despite that fact, OF still is way too GTD oriented and I find myself struggling with it every once in a while. Even the font customization is based on GTD, so I end up deactivating features like coloring "next actions" and sobbing because of my inability to color flagged items instead. I find absolutely no use in having OF tell me what my next actions are supposed to be but do rely very heavily on the flag system and would like to be able to pick up my flagged items with one quick look at the screen. Would it really be too much to ask to add more options to the font changing feature in OF?
This is good suggestion. Maybe the default could be a background color that stands out. Anyway, seconded.

Originally Posted by Brunosc View Post
On the other hand, I believe that the thing most non-GTD OF users have trouble with is the use of folders and projects. I know this has been discussed over and over again, but I think that the problem could be very easily solved by adding a second category of folders, sub-folders, that could be customized independently. Let me try to explain.

As most people do, the only two folders that I use are called "Work" and "Home". Inside those folders, are projects that are actually "titles" instead of projects. Unfortunately, I find myself forced to use action groups as projects, something that OF does not like at all. I have tried everything to use OF correctly but it just doesn't fit my working method. As a filmmaker, I usually have many projects (literally) in preproduction or postproduction at the same time (spots, music videos, films, etc) that need to be treated separately. I obviously need to have different "folders" for each thing going on at the same time, otherwise having everything under a single "Work" folder would be insane. Inside each folder, I also need sub-folders for the different departments involved (screenplay if I am still writing, cast, production design, cinematography, etc) who also have their own needs and have to be treated separately, and only inside those folders would be the projects and then the actions and/or the action groups. The issue I am constantly having with OF is that it is absolutely impossible to customize the folders and the folders inside other folders separately, meaning that they are treated as if they were hierarchically the same. If I actually did all of this, I would end up with tons of folders that would look exactly the same, one on top of the other, when all I am really asking for is a big "title folder" on top and many other smaller folders piled up underneath it until the next big "title folder" announcing the beginning of a new list of things to do related to another project in the works. Phew, I hope I am not being too incoherent.
I would suggest using Contexts to identify the department a particular task is involved with. That would remove the hierarchical problem you seem to have. I would use the top level folders as broad areas like you are, Work and Personal. Under Work, you could use folders to indicate broad status for preproduction, production, and postproduction. Then it's a question of whether you want to use another folder for each film which has multiple projects in it or one project with many action steps. So the tree might look something like this:

Folder: Work
- Folder: Preproduction
- - Project: Gone With The Wind 2
- - - Action Group: Complete Screenplay
- - - - Action: Edit dialogue in Scene 12 (@Writers)

In the absence of what you want with flags, I would get really agressive with using Perspectives. Build a very detailed Flagged perspective so you can pull out your flagged tasks and projects but with enough context that you understand them better. That's where the "status" folders help by allowing you to further focus on just your pre- or postproduction tasks.

I would also take a look at the Omnifocus 1.8 sneaky peeks (if you aren't already) where action groups are more powerful, especially if you go the route of having one project per film. If you go the multiple project route I would read these two articles about how you can link one project to the completion of another.

Finally, I would think about embracing next actions a little more and thinking about parallel vs. sequential projects. Maybe what the next action is isn't as important for you, but what actions are available certainly is. With as many active projects as you have, being able to remove the clutter of tasks you cannot do yet is necessary. But coloring the next action could be helpful to avoid projects getting lost in the shuffle or falling behind.

Hope that helps.