[Digikam-users] [KPhotoAlbum] User experience (or bugs, hopes and wishes)
Robert L Krawitz
rlk at alum.mit.edu
Mon Oct 2 12:58:15 BST 2006
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:58:22 +0900
From: "Birkir A. Barkarson" <birkirb at stoicviking.net>
This is my first posting to the mailing list. It is mainly intended
for the Digikam mailing list as that is what I am currently using
but I cross post this to the KPhotoAlbum list as well since I like
their interface and it is my hope that they will adopt similar way
to store metadata in-tag like digikam does. My apologies if this
is offends or is not welcomed.
Just to be fair, there are also disadvantages to storing metadata in
1) Any time the original image files are modified there's a risk of
2) It doesn't work if the images are physically stored on a read-only
3) Updating many images is likely to be very slow (the image file will
likely have to be resized to add or remove metadata, which will
result in the entire file having to be rewritten). For example, I
tagged 3500 images totaling 25 GB from a recent vacation.
4) Some cameras can sign images to later verify that they have not
been modified (e. g. for use as evidence in court). Depending upon
exactly what the signature covers, modifying the image file may
destroy the signature.
5) It's much harder to implement undo across sessions or versioning if
the metadata is stored in the images.
I actually rather like the database and "do not modify the original
image file" myself, and it's a big reason why I use KPhotoAlbum.
Robert Krawitz <rlk at alum.mit.edu>
Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lpf at uunet.uu.net
Project lead for Gutenprint -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net
"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
More information about the Digikam-users