[KPhotoAlbum] a working photo interface

[Shawn Willden]

On Tuesday 20 February 2007 11:00, you wrote:
> I'll try to find a mac with Photoshop.
> I don't know, what you would need as testing material, but I myself would
> not work on test material not proofed to show the error.

Yes, I'd want an example that is known to have the problem.  Even better would 
be to have a sequence of steps that reliably create an image that has the 
problem.

> At the moment it's also too expensive in KPA to set even an inexact date
> manually.
> I wouldn't have said a word, when it would take only 3-times the necessary
> time to make the entries for on picure than necessary - that's, why ever,
> the usual factoring compared against professional programs.
> I'm sad, but I must say, that it its taking so much time at the moment,
> that I can't hold my concentratation (making screen ready for next
> It seems, that just the most essential part of most programs, the man
> machine interface, is least appealing, after the even less appealing
> documentation writing.

I *strongly* suspect that you're using the software incorrectly, because 
setting dates with KPA is pretty easy.  Select a pile of images, right-click 
and select "Set properties for individual images", then enter the date info 
on the first image, hit page down (or click the "next" arrow), enter the date 
info for the next image, etc.

While you're entering the date info you can also type in other stuff like scan 
batch number, etc.

If you need to set the same information on multiple images, you can do that, 
too.  If they're contiguous, just select them.  If they're not, use the token 
tagging mechanism to identify them and then select the whole pile that way. 

> (scan batch numbers)
> KPA 2.2 will make up a category.
> Every seek for a category will open the category window.
> A category window taking some thousand entries isn't handy.

Sure it is.  Because the category window also has a search bar.  Type a couple 
digits of the batch number you're looking for and you'll get a short, easy 
list to pick from.

Or, even quicker, use the "find" button on the toolbar (looks like a 
magnifying glass with footprints by it on my system, though that may be 
theme-dependent).

> To edit the descriptions of one photo, all categories have to be opened.
> For every category one window.
> All these windows were stacked on address (0,0) of the screen - left upper
> edge  - despite another presetting.
> No, it didn't work out to be favorable to set first all entries for one
> category.

I've never, ever seen that.  I didnt even know you *could* "un dock" the 
separate category windows.  They're docked by default.

Use the little arrow near the upper-left corner of each category window to 
dock them all inside the "Image Configuration" Window, and drag them around 
to an order that is convenient for your workflow, so you can quickly tab 
between them.

> Think about an older man, who has just done some 500000 clicks in Gimp,
> roughly 300000 avoidable with work scheduling.

Here's another example of time wasted via misuse of the tool -- How many of 
those clicks can be avoided with shortcut keys?  I use the GIMP quite a bit, 
and I find it requires less mouse usage than Photoshop just because I can 
dynamically reassign shortcuts to avoid having to use menus.  The only times 
I use the menus in the GIMP are (a) actions I know I'm only going to take 
once or (b) to pick an item to assign a shortcut key for it.

> > Answer me a question, Heinz:  In the case of your batches of scanned
> > historical photographs, what *useful* information do you derive from
> > seeing a numerical ordering of the batches?
>
> Files 'in the near' are having a better chance to have to do with the other
> (same film sheet, rest of a former ordering)

Okay, but those film sheets are *within* batches, right?  You don't scan one 
part of a sheet today, call that batch 245 and come back and scan the rest of 
the sheet tomorrow and call that batch 246.

I can absolutely see the utility in being able to view images from a single 
scan batch together, and that's quite easy to accomplish with KPA.

> So I'm seeking hints for relationships.
> On a classical desktop one is laying down photos and then moving them.
> I think, later on I will implement this in the prototype, which I'm writing
> in the meanwhile.

Honestly, I'm not sure you'll ever approach the efficiency of prints and a 
large desk space for this sort of sorting and relationship identification.  
Perhaps when computer screens are much larger than they are today... but for 
now a big desk (or even better a big *floor*) and a bunch of prints are more 
efficient.

> As I said (20.2.), I'm writing a prototype (as a firefox add on), which
> follow up might be usable to 'export' some KPA functionality.
> I hope, that some of my relatives (about 70 years old) will make
> contributions, and for that I will need an easy working environment, I
> don't expect anybody of them is using linux.
>
> The tool has to work, and I can't help them installing.

Yes, a web-based tool is probably your best choice here.  Even when KPA is 
ported to Windows, it's still easier to give them a URL rather than tell them 
to install software.

> > Sure, so he should create KPA categories for "Classification" and "Scan
> > Batch" (assuming the 23 refers to that).  Then, for that photo, he should
> > enter "pyrrhosoma nymphula" in the Classification field and "0023" in the
> > Scan Batch field.
> >
> > If he wants to, he can also create sub/super categories
>
> Are there indeed true subcategories?

There are subcategories, yes.  However, what I suggested in the previous 
e-mail wouldn't work.  I didn't think about the fact that within a top-level 
category, every name in the category tree has to be unique, because all nodes 
in the tree are treated as a flat list for some purposes (mainly for 
assigning them to photos).  That's a good thing for most ways that 
categorization is used in KPA, but a disadvantage for this specific case.

	Shawn.