[Digikam-devel] Marking the persons on pictures with Digikam

[Arnd Baecker]

Hi Adrien,

to keep the context I have cut the message pretty strongly
as somehow the quoting of who wrote what got lost in the exchange ... ;-)

On Sat, 21 Jun 2008, Adrien BUSTANY wrote:

[...]

> > Currently I just use a hierarchy of tags to mark people in images.
> > Apart from the usual effort needed for tagging,
> > this works very well.
> >
> >
> Yes, I'm talking about marking a region of the picture, not face
> detection. IIRC face detection was a summer of code subject for fspot
> some years ago, I don't know if it led to something.
> Why do you use the hierarchy for your people tags ? To classify for
> example family -> uncles ? You could do that with the "people tag"
> system, you'd have a "family" tag (classical one) with people tags
> inside. The advantage is that you can specify the region. I'm also
> planning to do a "smart" selection system : If for example you marked
> three people of your family, then the system will put other members of
> the family group at the top of the "available people" list.

Yes, something like this sounds very good.
The reason why I use a hierarchy is similar: usually
only a subset of all people is present (;-); e.g. one
meets some of them only during one holiday or only a couple of times
a year, while others (closest family) will be present all the time.
By using a (very flat) hierarchy:
- People
  - family
  - friends 1
  - friends 2
etc. with entries in each group, collapsing the not-needed trees
allows for faster tagging.

Ultimately, we might need something even better for faster tagging:
Usually tags will come in clusters: Consider one foto session,
stored in one album/folder. If a tag is associated to one
image, it quite often will also be associated with other images
as well. Overall one will get a bunch of tags which correspond
to this one session.
If one then considers a different session, and associates
one tag, one could automatically try to figure out,
which other tags most likely will be associated as well.
Hmm, this description is not that precise, but hopefully you get the
idea...

> The point here is not only to make Digikam people aware, but also to
> make it Nepomuk aware (I think I didn't mention it).

I am not familiar with nepomuk, but making this information available
seems like a good idea.

About setting up the schema etc., I can't comment much,
and leave that for Marcel and Gilles ... ;-)

Best, Arnd