[Digikam-users] Getting rid of button bars

[Dotan Cohen]

On 09/04/07, Jakob Oestergaard <joe at evalesco.com> wrote:
> > I may have exaggerated. I do find the right (maybe left on non-Hebrew
> > systems:Albums, Dates, Tags, Searches) sidebar essential, but the left
> > one (Properties, Metadata, Colours, Comments/Tags, Tag Filters) does
> > not need to be in the main UI.
>
> I guess that depends on how you work.
>
> For me the Props/Meta/Color/... tabs are absolutely essential, and my
> wish for improvement would be the ability to cherry-pick information
> from several of the tabs and have it all shown in one; (for example
> linear and log histogram and shutter-speed and aperture).

Then a completely customizable interface would make everybody happy :)
I understand that there has to be a limit, so I'm willing to drop the
subject here. Though I think I've read something that KDE4 (or Qt4, to
be more exact) will in fact enable this type of customization.

> As Gilles wrote, you can make them almost disappear and they will stay
> that way, not cluttering up the interface.

It's still buttons on top, buttons on the left, and buttons on the
right. Not all in one convinient place.

>   Ideally (for us) horizontal screen
> > space could be maximized by having the 9 sidebar buttons as a dropdown
> > menu in the main toolbar, and a None option. That will net 40
> > horizontal pixels width. As all our pictures have white bands above
> > and below them in Digikam, it is obvious that the limiting factor in
> > their display size is the horizontal width. So anything that we could
> > do to increase the horizontal width would be helpful.
>
> While you have a valid point wrt. the horizontal screen space, moving
> the tabs to a menu would make them more difficult (slower) to access
> (unless hotkeys were provided).

For one, a hotkey would be great. I don't like the mouse at all (but
the wife does). For another, I think that it would speed access, as
all the controls would be in one place, the vertical tool bar.

> Also please consider portrait images, where we're short on vertical
> screen space. Most monitors are 4:3 or even wider; portrait images are
> much bigger victims of tool bars and menu bars than landscape images are
> of the side tabs.

There is no reason to shot portrait images with a digital camera for
use on the screen. Unless, of course, one turns his monitor 90 degrees
as well as the camera. Portrait images are an artifact of film
photography that is still used only by those accustomed to film
photography. There is a reason that digital cameras shot a 4:3 aspect
ratio: it is the dimensions of a standard computer monitor.

> I'm just trying to say that there's a lot more to this than saving 40
> pixels.

Those 40 horizontal pixels translate to 40*(40* 4/3) =2120 pixels
total: quite a bit of screen space. As this is a photo app, one goal
should be (in my opinion) providing maximum screen realestate for the
photos. And of course there is more to it than saving the pixels, the
app should be easier and more comfortable to use. Grouping all the
controls in one place (not spreading them out along the top and both
sides of the UI) will in fact make the app easier to use.

Dotan Cohen

http://dotancohen.com/eng/army_pictures.php
http://lyricslist.com/lyrics/artist_albums/542/2_unlimited.html