[Digikam-users] Folders, albums and collections

[Sveinn í Felli]

See inline:

Þann mið 17.jún 2015 06:32, skrifaði Agustin Lobo:
> If I have a directory named FOTOS with a subdirectory named 20130523,
> do I get one Album and one
> sub-album or just 2 albums at the same level?

You'll have the album FOTOS with a sub-album 20130523.

>> On 16/06/15 16:04, Agustin Lobo wrote:
>>> I'm a bit confused by the relationships between the concepts
>>> of folder, album and collection in Digikam.  For example,
>>> if I have my pictures in folders in an external drive,
>>> would each folder become an Album in Digikam? Would sub-folders
>>> become sub-albums?
>>> Are the pictures actually copied to the albums? Or do the pictures
>>> remain in their original folders and just meta-data and thumbnails
>>> are integrated in the db?
>>> And what's a collection? Just a set of folders?

As for your original question: Digikam respects the directory structure 
of your filesystems - this is important to know, because some other 
software do not, but create relationships via database 'tags' and 
softlinks. I think many Digikam users are so grateful for this 
transparency, and would be really annoyed if there was some esoteric 
layer between the file structure and their representation.

The words 'album', 'folder' and 'directory' can be regarded as meaning 
the same thing, they just come from different naming conventions or 
vocabulary of different trades. Some other applications use terms like 
'film-roll' in addition to those.
Your translated Digikam interface may or may not respect the local 
conventions in your language.

'Album' comes from the Latin word 'albus' [1], meaning 'white' or 
'blank', which became used in the 1650's for a kind of a scrapbook where 
scolars used to collect souvenirs or references and even for collection 
of "autographs of celebrated people". Albums for collection of 
photographic prints/films became known in the mid-1800's.

Most of the Digikam vocabulary stems from terms in photography and/or 
printing, this is quite normal and even desirable. But of course, with 
new techniques in handling of digital images, there will be new terms 
without any links to the past - and the language metaphors will evolve.

Best regards,

Sveinn í Felli

[1]: <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=album>