Group JPG and RAW
blumenschein at dokom.net
blumenschein at dokom.net
Thu Jan 12 12:32:12 GMT 2017
What's about "group by picture" or "group by shot" (with different
types)? Or "merge types"?
For the german translation:
"Gruppieren nach Bild" oder "Gruppieren nach Aufnahme" (bei
unterschiedlichem Format)?
Oder "Zusammenfassen von (Datei)-Formaten"
Best regards
Jürgen Blumenschein
Zitat von Simon Frei <freisim93 at gmail.com>:
> @Andrey: I completely misinterpreted your earlier statements, sorry. I
> just associated group by type with what it does in digikam, without
> actually thinking about it.
>
> I completely agree that semantically it is wrong to say group by type.
> I wonder whether group by name (while correct) is clear. Does a user,
> who doesn't already know what it is meant to do, understand what is
> meant by name (namely the filename without the extension)?
>
> On 10/01/17 18:36, Andrey Goreev wrote:
>
>> For me *.DNG is one type and *.JPG is another type.
>> If you go to menubar - view - group images - group by format this is
>> grouping by type for me.
>> just saying...
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Andrey Goreev
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Gilles Caulier
>> <caulier.gilles at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> At least "Group by Type" must be "Group by Type-Mime". Type Mime is
>>> already used in setup dialog.
>>> Take a care. Wikipedia said that media type must be used
>>> instead type mime tp prevent confusion. I'm not agree. Media is a
>>> support of data, as network stream, removable device, etc... Not only
>>> a file.
>>>
>>> Gilles Caulier
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2017-01-10 17:54 GMT+01:00 Christoph Huckle <chrihuc at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Hi Simon,
>>>>
>>>> In the past I would have agreed with your explanation about
>>>> grouping by type, but after thinking about it, the group's don't hold
>>>> images of the same type and that's what grouping by type means.
>>>> So, I apologize for picking that expression and am the opinion that
>>>> correct would be grouping by name.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Christoph
>>>>
>>>> Simon Frei <freisim93 at gmail.com> schrieb am
>>>> Di., 10. Jan. 2017, 17:30:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Andrey,
>>>>>
>>>>> I completely agree that the naming of grouping is confusing. Do you
>>>>> have a suggestion how the two functionalities could be named instead?
>>>>> One is grouping icons by album/format/not at all in the main view
>>>>> (that's why it is in the "View" menu) and the other groups actual
>>>>> image files together (->context menu).
>>>>> Maybe the view grouping could be called structure instead of group
>>>>> and keeping group terminology for images. I am not a native English
>>>>> speaker, so I am very unsure on the subject.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regarding "Group selected by type": This says exactly what it does:
>>>>> It groups any file ("name.extension") that shares name but has a
>>>>> different extension. So 00001.arw is grouped together with
>>>>> 00001.jpg, but also with 00001.tif or any other extension.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Simon
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/01/17 17:04, Andrey Goreev wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Christoph,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you a ton for your contribution!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have been actually looking for that group RAW / JPG option in
>>>>>> "(Menubar) - View - Group Images".
>>>>>> The fact that that menu menu does match the "Right click (on
>>>>>> images) - Group" menu is pretty confusing. Plus, again, the option
>>>>>> is called "Group selected by type" instead of "Group RAW and JPG"
>>>>>> so I bet there are many users out there that have no idea the
>>>>>> option actually exists.
>>>>>> Just some thoughts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> Andrey Goreev
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Simon Frei
>>>>>> <freisim93 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Christoph,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First: 5.4.0 is out: https://www.digikam.org/node/764
>>>>>>> It isn't anything big, nevertheless important (at least for my
>>>>>>> workflow).
>>>>>>> Citing from the release text:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Grouped items are now processed together. Previously
operations
>>>>>>> would only apply to the top image in the group (i.e. the
image
>>>>>>> displayed when grouped images are hidden). In other words,
>>>>>>> applying,
>>>>>>> for example, a tag to a top image in a group will assign the
>>>>>>> tag to
>>>>>>> all images in this group.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/01/17 10:33, Christoph Huckle wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello Both,
>>>>>>>> Sorry you are correct, I picked the wrong
>>>>>>>> expression...
>>>>>>>> @Simon, I'm not fully in the loop, as I'm
>>>>>>>> not a team member, just programmed that feature for myself and
>>>>>>>> then in made it's way upstream :) but what are the cases you are
>>>>>>>> talking about, which will be fixed in 5.4.0?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>> Christoph
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Andrey Goreev
>>>>>>>> <aegoreev at gmail.com> schrieb am Mo., 9. Jan. 2017 um 19:34 Uhr:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hello Simon,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It actually worked! Thank you!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To be honestly I thought "group by type" means group by
>>>>>>>>> extension. RAW and JPG files are different type but same file
>>>>>>>>> name for me.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>> Andrey Goreev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon
>>>>>>>>> Frei <freisim93 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I haven't read those conversations, but grouping by extension
>>>>>>>>>> is implemented. I use it frequently. The behaviour was somewhat
>>>>>>>>>> strange (grouped images were not in all appropriate cases
>>>>>>>>>> processed together), but that will be corrected in 5.4.0.
>>>>>>>>>> To group raw and jpg, select all to be grouped images (so all
>>>>>>>>>> jpg and raw files) and in the context menu select group ->
>>>>>>>>>> group selected by type.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 03/01/17 23:56, Andrey Goreev
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have read the following threads but could not understand
>>>>>>>>>>> what the actual status is.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/2015-August/021374.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/2010-September/011117.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That feature is very useful for the culling process.
>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if I could be of any help in getting this
>>>>>>>>>>> feature released.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey Goreev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Christoph Huckle
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Unterm Aspalter 22
>>>>>>>> 5106 Veltheim
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 076 419 62 61
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Christoph Huckle
>>>> Unterm Aspalter 22
>>>> 5106 Veltheim
>>>>
>>>> 076 419 62 61
--
Jürgen Blumenschein, eMail: blumenschein at dokom.net
Homepage: http://members.dokom.net/blumenschein
Am Quartus 17
D-44149 Dortmund
Tel.: +49 231 7217321, Handy: +49 176 5591 4562
public key:
http://members.dokom.net/blumenscheinJuergen_Blumenschein_(0xC9358EBB)_public_key.asc
More information about the Digikam-users
mailing list