Re: Photo management
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Hamish Moffatt <email@example.com> wrote:
Thank you for your comments. I like the way you trigger my neurons...
> It just wouldn't be fast enough. Do you want to wait seconds for an
> image to zoom in?
I don't need to zoom in on a picture to appreciate it. But it
depends.... I like how the Flickr found the " ideal" combination of
"zoom factors" in the all sizes button. It is a feature I miss in
Picassa though. This is also why I think RAW is very overestimated. I
shoot only JPG.
> Flickr is a good place to publish after editing. I have 14Gb of JPG+RAW
> from a recent holiday (3 weeks) though and it's not practical to upload
> all of that to a web site to start editing it.
I agree on Flickr. I am an addict of this place .../bvdkamp, but I
think 14GB ia a lot of data for one holiday. Or did you go for a long
time? I think 14 GB is far too much for one holiday. I tend to try to
keep the data of one holiday into 1GB (1 SD stick). But this has also
to do with the fact that I shoot JPG. Futhermore I think you
underestimate your camera. I think you can select the pictures you
really want to look at in the future on your camera just after you
shot them. The zooming of cameras is in my opinion fast enough.
>> Picasa does it for me
> I found the UI to be reasonably bugging with the Wine layer. Perhaps the
> 2.7 release is better (I tried a beta). It's nice on Windows I agree,
> although it does like to store data in a database making it difficult to
> move data between computers.
I partly agree. The bugginess has to do a lot with the different file
system features (like Unix missing a drive letter :) I use Picassa in
a "shared" Linux environment and I am quite happy with it. Concerning
the database issues: I'd vote for an open photo database format. But I
think this will be something that won't happen as long there are so
many camera and software brands. What I like about Picasa though is
the way it amazingly fast can index and thumbnail photos. To transfer
data I just copy the underlying directories. It is is far more
difficult to transfer tagged sets though. It is on my "nice to know"
> I'm use digikam within GNOME and quite liking it. I would prefer a
> native app though and I'm developing a decent wishlist.
The thing is with native apps is they tend to "die" on maintenance.
> There's a lot of active development going on in digikam. However a fair
> bit of that development is going into their photo editor. I think it
> could just use Gimp instead, or eog or gthumb or some other existing
> tool. I wonder how difficult it would be to write just the photo
> management portion for GNOME in PyGTK etc?
I agree. Maybe first this open photo database format?
> Rather than starting a new project I should catch up on editing my
> existing photos first :-|
:o) Another nice reason to select on your camera and take more time
per picture to shoot it.
Thanks again Hamish,