What is the end goal here?
To not have the sort change on a new search.
Do you want Everything to hide duplicated names?
Yes.
Yes, at particular times.
As I'm dealing with sets of files, I do not want to see the dup'd files as they are nothing but clutter.
When I know what I am going to do with the files, at that point, I'll drop the distinct: - so that I can then see the dups, & do whatever it is that I need to do with the sets of files in their entirety. (As in, when I make a change or some other action, I want the same change propagated in the same way to all the dup'd files too [which would otherwise be hidden by the distinct:].)
What type of searches do you use with this filter?
Any & all types, actually.
Depending on what I'm doing at a particular time, it may deal with video: or pic: or audio: ...
But it could be anything - distinct: AND dupe:name, dupe:size, case:, sorts, paths, ...
Only the first name and path will show in your results. -Is this what you want?
First or second or nth doesn't matter, only that 1 is returned.
Usually when you are searching for distinct items by name, you will want to see the results sorted by name.
Au contraire. It was actually a Length sort that was really bringing this to light for me.
And the in the particular case, I was (predominately) only concerned about Length, & so with every new search, I had to click the Length column to get the sort I wanted.
When finding "dups", depending, a name may not be indicative of a dup.
Where some other factor; size or Length or date or ... might be.
I want to find duplicated files that are not named the same, so that I can correct the naming to be, duplicated.
Or I know the names of particular files are not indicative of what a file is, so I can search on size to find possible dups. Or Lengths. Or...
But at the same time, at first, during a search like this, distinct: filters out what I don't need to see - until I'm at a point where I then do need to see (the dup'd items).
)