https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=367700
Tabulo <abo+...@tabulo.net> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |abo+...@tabulo.net
--- Comment #13 from Tabulo <abo+...@tabulo.net> ---
Similar story here...
As Digikam is picking up in popularity, the DAM use case is probably weighing
in more and more.
Nowadays, even a small family album can be seen, in many ways, as a miniature
DAM of some sorts... which boils down to.... Metadata.
Luckily, the basics are already there : Date, Title, Caption, ...
But there is a whole bunch other popular medata fields that are simply a pain
to work with in Digikam at this point.
- Take "source", for example. I am (sort of) able to do data entry on it
(through templates)... But then I can't really meaningfully use it anywhere
(search, table view, filters, ...)
- Similar story with "author" / "creator"... which is luckily included in
SEARCH, but not much of anywhere else..
- ...
Imho, bringing all DC(Dublin Core) and IPTC fields into being "first class
class citizens" would be a good starting point.
However, being able to deal with ANY arbitraty metadata would be a game changer
(though, I do realize that kind of generic support might be more challenging).
Here's a short list of the kinds of things I would love to be able to do with
ANY metadata field :
- search queries
- table views (as a custom column)
- filters
- thumbnail view (as a custom field by selecting it in preferences)
- data entry (single image)
- data entry (multiple images)
- ... anywhere else ?
For me, it starts out with SEARCH, that's why I have chosen to put this as a
comment on this ticket. But obviously, it doesn't stop there. There are a bunch
of other places (Table Views, Filters, ...) where being able to deal with ANY
arbitrary metadata would be extremely useful.
So, let me know if the maintainers prefer to track this (more general) request
through another dedicated ticket, which I would be happy to open.
BTW, when I say ANY arbitrary metadata field, I really mean it.
This even includes the so called "composite tags" generated on the fly by
ExifTool, which may even be user-defined ones. (Don't worry, those already
show up in the Metadata View. So Digikam is already capable of fetching them.)
Let's face it, one doesn't usually have full control over what metadata is
written for an image, or where... This is true even for photos I take myself
(as dictated by the camera) ... And it is more so for pictures that come from
elsewhere... which may include those that were taken by a cousin (in a family
setting)... or pictures sent by a photo agency (in a professional DAM setting).
So, even if we try to settle for a small subset of Metadata fields ourselves,
we still need to be able to deal with the reality of what flows into our
collections... be it in a family setting, or a non-profit organisation, or
professional collections.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
