[Digikam-devel] What do we want to store in the database?

[Gilles Caulier]

2007/8/30, Julien Narboux <Julien.Narboux at inria.fr>:
>
> Hi,
>
> Maybe it would be easier to write this list on a wiki ?
> Here are some other field which may be useful:
>
> Gilles Caulier a écrit :
> >
> >
> > 2007/8/29, Marcel Wiesweg <marcel.wiesweg at gmx.de
> > <mailto:marcel.wiesweg at gmx.de>>:
> >
> >     Hi,
> >
> >     It is a long-planned task for the next release to store more
> >     information than
> >     currently in the database.
> >
> >
> > And certainly the most important...
> >
> >
> >     We are currently collecting which fields exactly we want to add.
> >
> >     To qualify for inclusion, IMO a field should fulfill one of these
> two
> >     criteria:
> >     - the field can be of interest in connection with the image it
> >     belongs to
> >     - searching for the field is a considerable feature
> >     AND this criterion:
> >     - the information is usually available for images in a common
> >     usage pattern of
> >     digikam
> >
> >     Currently I have these fields on my list:
> >
> >     - comment
> >     - rating
> >
> >
> > (And Tags of course)
> >
> >     - creation date
> >
> + numerisation date : for digital cameras creation date = numerisation
> date, but not if one scans film.
> >
> >     - modification date
> >     - size ( dimensions in pixels)
> >     - color depth (8, 16)
> >     - color model (RGB, CMYK, ...)
> >
> >     - make of the camera
> >     - model of the camera
> >     - aperture
> >     - focal length
> >     - focalLength as for 35mm film
> >
> - the type of lens when it is available.
> >
> >     - exposure time
> >     - exposureMode
> >     - exposureProgram
> >     - sensitivity
> >     - flash
> >     - whiteBalance
> >
>
> - macro


=> Makernote information. Complex to extract.

- focus mode


=> Makernote information. Complex to extract.

- stabilization


=> Makernote information. Complex to extract.

- pixel binding or not


???

- measure mode


==> std. Exif. easy to do.

- color or bw


==> redondant with color mode information.

>
> > => WB bool Manual/Auto flag from std. Exif
> > => WB value (double) in °K from Makernote (method in likexiv2 to
> > extract this value not yet implemented. I'm waiting than Exiv2 API
> > provide a new method for that)
> >
> - picture taken in panorama mode or not (can be extracted from exif at
> least for canon cameras)


=> Makernote information. Complex to extract.

- picture is hidden or not : maybe this fonctionnality could be added to
> digikam in the future.


Agree with this one


- quantity of blur : maybe this fonctionnality could be added in the
> future, there exists some algorithm to measure blur. It would be nice to
> have it to compare a bunch a picture and eliminate those which are out
> of focused


=> Makernote information. Complex to extract.

In general, storing Standard Exif informations is easy to do because all
values are properly defined in Exif spec. It's easy to make an interface to
seach these values in DB.

With Makernotes, it's the hell. Each constructor use a private spec to
define values. It's complex to make a search interface. I propose to include
all Makernotes informations in a second time.

>
> >     - orientation
> >
> >
> > ==> as the same value  than Exif orientation flag
> >
> > B.K.O about to find image by photo info is :
> > http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=146337
> >
> >     - GPS:
> >     - latitude
> >     - longitude
> >     - altitude
> >
> >
> - tilt (nb of degrees with regard to horizontal)
> - orientation (compass)


Why not ? But currently, GPSSync plugin do not extract these informations
from GPX files.

Gilles
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-devel/attachments/20070830/729ff51d/attachment.html>