<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Thanks for the explanation Maik.<br>
<br>
Since the current behavior is desirable for some users, another
option might be to add a setting to allow folks like Luca and I (and
presumably other folks who use a similar culling workflow) to have
items disappear when they don't match the filter. Would that make
sense Maik? Luca would that work for you? If so we can file a
feature request.<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2022-10-23 23:49, Luca Casone
csnluca-at-gmail.com |digikam-users| wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAF86iJCTNmPAmUyYyUJchf6V7F8g8fN3UUSOe=_ZbVQ0_Toh8w@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">Thank you Maik. So If I understood well, the fact
that the the filtered view doesn't auto-update itself is the
intended behavior, that answers my original question. Maybe a
compromise could be having a fast method (a button, a menu item
& shortcut, ...) to re-run the filter and update the view
(unless it's already implemented and I missed it :-/ ). Guess I
should post a feature request.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Bye</div>
<div>Luca</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 8:23
AM Maik Qualmann <<a href="mailto:metzpinguin@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">metzpinguin@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">In
theory, the item should disappear when the filter no longer
matches. But <br>
I've left it that way so far, because it also has advantages
for many users, <br>
depending on the workflow. An example is filtering for a pick
label, as soon as <br>
you change it it would disappear. But you still wanted to add
a captions or <br>
change the rating. You would have to search the article again
to make further <br>
changes.<br>
<br>
Maik<br>
<br>
Am Montag, 24. Oktober 2022, 07:48:51 CEST schrieb Luca
Casone:<br>
> Thank you.<br>
> It’s unfortunate that no one replied to you back then.
Let me tried here<br>
> once again, it would be great to hear some feedback from
developers.<br>
> <br>
> Luca<br>
> <br>
> > On 22 Oct 2022, at 02:42, <a
href="mailto:2895qgvg6v@liamekaens.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">2895qgvg6v@liamekaens.com</a>
wrote:<br>
> > <br>
> > I asked a similar question in<br>
> > <a
href="https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/2020-August/031169.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/2020-August/031169.html</a>
but<br>
> > never got a definitive answer from the developers
about whether it is a<br>
> > bug or not (IMHO it is).<br>
> > <br>
> > In September 2021 I tried to investigate how to
change the code so that<br>
> > flags (and maybe colors too) work like stars in this
regard, but I had a<br>
> > difficult time tracking the flow of QT events to
figure out how setting<br>
> > stars ends up causing photos to disappears from view
when they don't<br>
> > match the stars filter. Unfortunately I got busy
with other things and<br>
> > wasn't able to work on the investigation for a while
and there have been<br>
> > significant changes to digikam since then including
switching to a newer<br>
> > version of QT, so I would need to start my
investigation from scratch.> <br>
> > On 2022-10-21 06:40, Luca Casone <a
href="http://csnluca-at-gmail.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">csnluca-at-gmail.com</a>
|digikam-users| <br>
wrote:<br>
> >> Hi.<br>
> >> <br>
> >> I need help to understand the behaviour of the
right-side Filters pane.<br>
> >> <br>
> >> Here it is my use case. I need to cull some
images, using flags. So I<br>
> >> examine one picture at a time and flag it either
rejected, pending or<br>
> >> accepted. In order to reduce the mess, I open
the Filters pane and<br>
> >> select the Labels Filters to “None”, so that
only unflagged images are<br>
> >> shown. However if I flag another picture it
stays visible, while I<br>
> >> expect that it goes away because of the active
filter. Also, I cannot<br>
> >> find any way to force the filter to re-run. The
only way I have to make<br>
> >> the new flagged picture disappear is to turn
back to the Filters<br>
> >> pane—>Labels Filter and deselect+select the
“None” filter.<br>
> >> <br>
> >> This is quite cumbersome and greatly impacts the
Filters pane usage to do<br>
> >> culling. Is it the intended behaviour, or am I
missing something?<br>
> >> There’re alternative ways to cull images the way
I described?<br>
> >> <br>
> >> Thank you. Regards<br>
> >> Luca<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>