Bug 173061 - Better way to sort out pictures
Summary: Better way to sort out pictures
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 221140
Alias: None
Product: digikam
Classification: Applications
Component: LightTable-Canvas (show other bugs)
Version: 0.9.4
Platform: Unlisted Binaries Unspecified
: NOR wishlist
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Digikam Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-10-17 20:41 UTC by Carsten Niehaus
Modified: 2022-02-01 09:01 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments
One nice way to compare pictures (292.24 KB, image/png)
2008-10-17 20:42 UTC, Carsten Niehaus
Details
Second nice way to compare pictures. (324.35 KB, image/png)
2008-10-17 20:42 UTC, Carsten Niehaus
Details
The blue circles show the feature "Display Autofocus Fields". The red shows how ZoomBrowser displays the metainformation (713.87 KB, image/png)
2008-10-18 15:23 UTC, Carsten Niehaus
Details
The red circle highlights a button. If you click on that button you would get a new window which shows the TIFF picuture. (380.47 KB, image/png)
2008-10-18 15:28 UTC, Carsten Niehaus
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Carsten Niehaus 2008-10-17 20:41:17 UTC
Version:            (using KDE 4.1.2)
Installed from:    Unspecified Linux

I attached two pictures. Currently, my workflow looks like this:

(1) Take picuture
(2) Upload them to Windows
(3) Use ZoomBrowser (Canon (tm)) to sort fotos out. That means: Take 100 pictures, throw 85 away
(4) Copy them to Digikam to tag and geotag them

Attached are two pictures which show one reason why I am using ZoomBrowser. This very simple comparison-mode really rocks.
Comment 1 Carsten Niehaus 2008-10-17 20:42:14 UTC
Created attachment 27975 [details]
One nice way to compare pictures
Comment 2 Carsten Niehaus 2008-10-17 20:42:56 UTC
Created attachment 27976 [details]
Second nice way to compare pictures.
Comment 3 caulier.gilles 2008-10-17 21:16:28 UTC
Just a question : are you tried Light Table ?

http://www.digikam.org/drupal/node/329

Gilles Caulier
Comment 4 Mikolaj Machowski 2008-10-18 10:37:15 UTC
What's wrong with LightTable?

The only really different thing I see in your pictures is "quad" mode.
Comment 5 Carsten Niehaus 2008-10-18 11:54:28 UTC
Nothing is wrong with the Light Table, it is a good tool indeed. This wish is probably not clear enough from only looking at the pictures. I will try to make a screencast to show you what ZoomBrowser does better.

Short-version:

(a) You can view 1, 2 (horizontal), 2 (vertical), 3 or 4 pictures at a time

(b) The metadata is "better integrated" in the UI. The feature is already in LightTable, I just think that it could be improved. I am talking about this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/digikam/2606804522/

(c) You can see the autofokus-fields of the camera (well, if you used a dSLR, of course).

Lets see if I can make a small video of the tool or at least show you two more screenshots.
Comment 6 Carsten Niehaus 2008-10-18 15:23:53 UTC
Created attachment 27996 [details]
The blue circles show the feature "Display Autofocus Fields". The red shows how ZoomBrowser displays the metainformation
Comment 7 Carsten Niehaus 2008-10-18 15:28:30 UTC
Created attachment 27998 [details]
The red circle highlights a button. If you click on that button you would get a new window which shows the TIFF picuture. 

The three fotos you see are all RAW-Pictures (cr2) which is why ZoomBrowser offers this feature (wouldn't make sense for JPEGs I guess).
Comment 8 caulier.gilles 2008-10-18 15:40:43 UTC
Andi,

About to display meta info as transpaent widget, Qt4 will simplify life. This feature is require too with Slideshow tool. Some code can be backported from Gwenview or KPhotoAlbum. We need definitivly a common widget here. Of course this can be delayed later 0.10.0

About camera device focus area, it's the hell. This information cannot be extracted from makernotes, and of course each camera maker implement a private structure to host these informations. There is already a file in B.K.O about this feature. Exiv2 and libkexiv2 need to be improved here to extract properlly these informations in a common way.

Gilles
Comment 9 Mikolaj Machowski 2008-10-18 17:00:58 UTC
Not sure about more than 2 images at the same time. Currently LT is tailored for 2 images with panels on both sides giving access to all metadata. Adjusting it to 3 or 4 images would require to rethink *whole* LT interface.

I wholeheartedly agree that showing more data in interface without hovering with mouse is good idea. Some additional status bar to show this info? I am not fan of translucent panel because this will obscure image itself.
Comment 10 Andi Clemens 2008-10-21 00:13:02 UTC
Gilles,

yes, this should be delayed for the next version.
Right now we still have many crashes, especially when importing images (I count 6 reports on that topic at the moment), so those should really be fixed first before the final 0.10 release.
For the next version we also might want to add more animation to fit KDE4 look&feel (for example the thumbbar in imageviewer could scroll a bit smoother)...

Andi
Comment 11 caulier.gilles 2009-07-23 11:37:03 UTC
From Mik, #9

>Not sure about more than 2 images at the same time. Currently LT is tailored
>for 2 images with panels on both sides giving access to all metadata. Adjusting
>it to 3 or 4 images would require to rethink *whole* LT interface.

I'm totally agree. More than 2 images at the same time will break all codes.

Gilles.
Comment 12 caulier.gilles 2009-07-23 11:39:23 UTC
From Mik, #9 :

>I wholeheartedly agree that showing more data in interface without hovering
>with mouse is good idea. Some additional status bar to show this info? I am not
>fan of translucent panel because this will obscure image itself.

Satatus bar can be a solution. there are freespace. Look this entry too :

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=175836

Gilles Caulier
Comment 13 julien.t43+kde 2012-07-08 03:39:14 UTC
Seems related to Bug 221142 and still apply to 2.6
Comment 14 caulier.gilles 2014-08-28 21:38:02 UTC
To respond of comment #5 :

a) ==> see bug #221140
b) ==> see bug #175836
c) ==> see bug #138704

Gilles Caulier

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 221140 ***