Group JPG and RAW

[AndriusWild]

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.

[Simon Frei]

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.

[AndriusWild]

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.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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.

[Christoph Huckle]

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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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.

--

[Simon Frei]

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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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.

--

[AndriusWild]

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.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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.

--

Christoph Huckle

Unterm Aspalter 22

5106 Veltheim

076 419 62 61

[Simon Frei]

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.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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.

--

Christoph Huckle

Unterm Aspalter 22

5106 Veltheim

076 419 62 61

[Christoph Huckle]

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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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.

--

Christoph Huckle

Unterm Aspalter 22

5106 Veltheim

076 419 62 61

--

[Gilles Caulier-4]

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 <[hidden email]>:

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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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.

--

Christoph Huckle

Unterm Aspalter 22

5106 Veltheim

076 419 62 61

--

[AndriusWild]

Please see the attached screenshot. This is what I have seen in another software. I am not saying we should copy it but when I just started using the soft I found that option right away without reading manuals or asking the community.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:

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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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.

--

Christoph Huckle

Unterm Aspalter 22

5106 Veltheim

076 419 62 61

--

[AndriusWild]

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...

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:

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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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.

--

Christoph Huckle

Unterm Aspalter 22

5106 Veltheim

076 419 62 61

--

[Simon Frei]

@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...

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:

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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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.

--

Christoph Huckle

Unterm Aspalter 22

5106 Veltheim

076 419 62 61

--

Le 10/01/2017 à 18:57, Simon Frei a écrit :

> 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)?

alphabetical order?

jdd

[AndriusWild]

Simon,

I think "group files with similar file name" would sound better. I bet "Similar" can include filename_v2, filename_v3 and other versions  if we want to.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------

From: Simon Frei <[hidden email]>

Date: 2017-01-10 10:57 AM (GMT-07:00)

To: digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with the power of open source <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: Group JPG and RAW

@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...

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:

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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Simon Frei <[hidden email]> 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.

--

Christoph Huckle

Unterm Aspalter 22

5106 Veltheim

076 419 62 61

--

[Jürgen Blumenschein]

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 <[hidden email]>:

> @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
>> <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>> 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 <[hidden email]> 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
>>>>>> <[hidden email]> 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
>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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: [hidden email]
Homepage: http://members.dokom.net/blumenschein
Am Quartus 17
D-44149 Dortmund
Tel.: [phone], Handy: [phone]
public key:  
http://members.dokom.net/blumenscheinJuergen_Blumenschein_(0xC9358EBB)_public_key.asc