[Digikam-devel] Why I like Kimbada better than Digikam

[Carsten Niehaus]

Hi

First of all: Digikam is great. But for my very specific use of a 
photo-application kimbada is better. I only know Digikam 0.7.1 (and older 
releases) and did not test 0.8-beta-versions.

I will describe my workflow to make it clear why I like kimbada better:

As a teacher of biology and as a nature-freak I like to go out and take pics 
of plants and insects (birds are just to fast ;-). Ok, back home I put the 
pictures into a temporary directory and start kimbada. I go through all pics 
and sort them: a press on "d" adds the token "d" to the picture, the "i" 
stands for improve.
Now I go to the "d"-tokenized pictures and delete them all. As insects tend to 
move and plants move in the wind I make quite a lot pics to be sure at least 
one is really good. So I remove about half of my pictures.
Then I go to the "i"-tokenized pictures and improve them. Either with a 
kipi-plugin or in the GIMP. Here is where I would *really* like to have a 
whitebalance improvement-pluging.

Ok, now I have only "good" pictures left, but still completly unsorted. The 
result of my work is that I need to be able to, for example, search 
Caryophylacea-plants (carnation-plants). Or all "real plants" (viri plantae) 
or all plants with semen (Spermatophytae). Therefore I am using quite a lot 
categories. For example, if I shoot a carnation I will give it the categorie 
Caryophylacea. That cat is again in the cat Spermatophytae which is in 
viri-plantae which is in plant. I am doing the same for animals.

In the end I have the possiblity to look at all mamels, all ferns and so on 
with only one click. Furthermore, I add categories for places and for 
persons. This is far more advanced as everything what is possible in Digicam. 
But of course, that is exactly what Kimbada is made for :)

I hope you can use this mail to get some inspiration or even to teach me wrong 
(eg. that all this is now also possible in Digikam 0.8).

OTOH my girlfried is using Digicam for private fotos and finds it perfect for 
that purposes. And I think she is right, for the "regular use case" digikam 
is probably better suited.

Please CC me for answers.

Carsten
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-devel/attachments/20050727/13d25c66/attachment.sig>