[Digikam-users] [KPhotoAlbum] User experience (or bugs, hopes and wishes)

[Robert L Krawitz]

   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
the images:

1) Any time the original image files are modified there's a risk of
   corrupting them.

2) It doesn't work if the images are physically stored on a read-only
   medium.

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."
--Eric Crampton