[KPhotoAlbum] order criteria for a family photo collection

[Jesper K. Pedersen]

Sorry, I dont really have any time to participate in the discussion (but my 
compiler was working hard :-)

Lot of the things in this thread boils down to, how would the datebar work at 
all, if you did not sort by time stamp.

It seems like ppl forget that you actually can chose to not sort by timestamp, 
and just drag your images around as you see fit.

Cheers
Jesper.

On Wednesday 07 February 2007 11:05, Heinz Kohl wrote:
| Am Dienstag 06 Februar 2007 22:55 schrieb jedd:
| > On Wednesday 07 February 2007 4:06 am, Michael J Gruber wrote:
| >  ] I don't want to be nitpicking, but
| >  ] The sorting, otoh, appears to be very limited: sort by date (ascending
| >  ] or descending) and manual sort.
| >
| >  You're quite right.
|
| Yes, KPhotoalbum has nothing which might be called 'sorting' beside the
| wish to find unique time stamps to make up a primary time key.
| Sorry, but exactly to set up this mechanism is called 'sorting' in
| KPhotoalbum, beginning with the initialisation ("Images are not sorted"
| because of "incomplete (time) dates"), and I used this elsewhere unusual
| naming just to be understood.
| To have no (unique) primary key is resulting in "will only work suboptimal"
| - and that's the case not only when "navigating using the date bar".
|
| >  I think a lot of us have similar, and possibly equally 'non-standard'
| >  sets of photographs .. so I'll be curious to see how others react
| >  to this problem description.
|
| That can be expected to be the case for most image collections.
| It's well known, that less than 5% of all photo imaging worldwide is done
| in family imaging.
| Look at photo collections of buildings (including details), coins, plants,
| stamps, drawings, ships, watches, autographs, soccer players and so on.
| O.k., time stamps are often necessary, but most times not of main interest.
| Most collections are having own inherent primary keys - to sort plants with
| main respect to photo date instead of Linne's ordering system would be as
| crazy as sorting family pictures in respect to an ordering scheme for
| animals.
|
| Is there any necessity to pack aunt Nelly between page 135 and 136 of a
| bible's page collection because of the image date?
| Is there really any necessity to manage the picture of your ancestors in
| tight connection e.g. with an historical car archive, or to get the
| connection between the old testating aunt and e.g. vultures or old
| furniture?
|
| If you would have a program flexible enough to store your different hobby
| collections in an adequate manner - would you really use another program
| only able to store family pictures?
|
| I think, a program like KPhotoalbum is by far too complicated to be
| restricted to such a small spectrum, there's nothing, what's unnecessary
| for other purposes, and with a relatively small amount of work it's
| possible to make the necessary enhancements to make it generally usable.
| And nearly all thinkable enhancements would also enhance the usability as
| family picture album.
|
| E.g. I could use such a program to make a better chronological ordering of
| my pictures, and without the repetitive need to explain, why I've abused
| time for a plain numbering while setting up some very imperfect
| replacement.
|
| Heinz
| _______________________________________________
| KPhotoAlbum mailing list
| KPhotoAlbum at kdab.net
| http://mail.kdab.net/mailman/listinfo/kphotoalbum

-- 
Having trouble finding a given image in your collection containing
thousands of images?

http://www.kphotoalbum.org might be the answer.