Bug 309638

Summary:	Searching on technical images properties
Product:	[Applications] digikam	Reporter:	Jean-François Rabasse <jean-francois.rabasse>
Component:	Searches-Engine	Assignee:	Digikam Developers <digikam-bugs-null>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED
Severity:	wishlist	CC:	caulier.gilles, jean-francois.rabasse
Priority:	NOR
Version:	unspecified
Target Milestone:	---
Platform:	openSUSE
OS:	Linux
Latest Commit:		Version Fixed In:	4.11.0

Description Jean-François Rabasse 2012-11-06 10:29:03 UTC

When using the Advanced search dialog box, users may specify values intervals for seevral technical properties, lens aperture, ISO settings, exposure time.

Seems that the editing logic rejects typing the same value in min and max fields.
E.g. one cannot search for images with aperture strictly f/16.0 (written in min and max fields)

Seems that the editing logic restricts users typed values into fixed bounding limits. 
E.g. the ISO sensitivity fields reject values greater than 6400, the exposure time fields rejects values longer than 120s.

The wish is to remove these restrictions whenever they have no software related technical reasons.

Thanks

Reproducible: Always

Comment 1 Marcel Wiesweg 2013-03-21 20:13:14 UTC

I do not feel motivated to work on the code which controls the twin spin boxes for min/max searches (I had no fun writing it and dont really like it). I agree there is room for improvement. At the moment, to make you example work, you can search f16,0 - f16,1.

I will adjust boundaries of several fields so as to not impose artificial limitations.

Comment 2 Marcel Wiesweg 2013-03-21 21:13:52 UTC

Git commit 844423ea9e1fd4b69c54f2cdc86ea27ebf5e0f88 by Marcel Wiesweg.
Committed on 21/03/2013 at 21:21.
Pushed by mwiesweg into branch 'master'.

Extend limits on searchfields so that we do not introduce artificial limits

M  +10   -10   utilities/searchwindow/searchfields.cpp

http://commits.kde.org/digikam/844423ea9e1fd4b69c54f2cdc86ea27ebf5e0f88

Comment 3 caulier.gilles 2013-04-21 16:19:46 UTC

Jean François,

What's new since last Marcel commit from comment #2 ? This entry still valid ?

Gilles Caulier

Comment 4 caulier.gilles 2015-05-15 22:23:49 UTC

Following comment from Marcel on comment #1 and #2, file can be considerate as implemented.

Gilles Caulier