111–120 of 136 posts
Sadly, even at version 7.0, it (Digikam) still doesn't support virtual albums/collections, and it insists on direct album-file_system_directory correlation. Unfortunently, it is useless to me as an image/photo organizer. (I don't really see tags as a substitute).
Sadly, even at version 7.0, it (Digikam) still doesn't support virtual albums/collections, and it insists on direct album-file_system_directory correlation. Unfortunently, it is useless to me as an image/photo organizer. (I don't really see tags as a substitute).
Can you help me understand what you’re looking for in a “virtual album” feature that isn’t achieved by tags?
Are the people tags saved to the photo's file metadata somehow? I've thrown about 130,000 photos up to google photos for safe-keeping but want a second set of redundancy.
No. I'd love to be wrong, btw: please correct me if I'm wrong. (I've looked at the sidecars from takeout, and the API). You might be able to scrape the metadata via puppeteer, but that's brittle and janktastic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. I'd love to be wrong, btw: please correct me if I'm wrong. (I've looked at the sidecars from takeout, and the API). You might be able to scrape the metadata via puppeteer, but that's brittle and janktastic.
If you use the Album>Write Metadata to Files command, it will do so. (I just tested adding a Face Tag to a photo. In Settings>Configure>Metadata, I also checked the box next to Face Tags under Write This Information to the Metadata. This latter action didn't seem to be enough by itself.)
I wish there was photo management software which catered to non-enterprise multi-user environments. ie families, or small organizations where the photos (and database) would reside on a computer, but other users on their computers could access it via the local network. At the moment, this middle ground doesn't seem to exist. It's either single-user only photo management software or full-blown multi-user digital asset…
(Disclaimer: I'm the author, and wished the same thing you did, so I quit my job to build it).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you use the Album>Write Metadata to Files command, it will do so. (I just tested adding a Face Tag to a photo. In Settings>Configure>Metadata, I also checked the box next to Face Tags under Write This Information to the Metadata. This latter action didn't seem to be enough by itself.)
Ah, sorry: I was talking about Google Photos, not Digikam. I haven't played with Digikam's metadata handling much, so thanks for that tip.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which would you use to replace Picasa (on a Mac) ?
Darktable's targets digital photography enthusiasts or professionals. The learning curve is steep. Picasa's target demographic was "everyone". So probably Digikam.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Darktable's targets digital photography enthusiasts or professionals. The learning curve is steep. Picasa's target demographic was "everyone". So probably Digikam.
I can confirm. Every now and then I want to edit some of my photos and run Darktable, only then to remember it has zero automation and a hundred of sliders for individual adjustments. It definitely requires dedication to use, more of that than I have to give for holiday photo editing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you say I replaces iPhoto/Photos on Mac?
I'm not sure how seamless the experience is on macOS, but I'm happily using digiKam on Linux as an iPhoto/Photos replacement. It's nowhere near as polished as Photos, but it's capable, open source, and multi-platform. I hope to maintain my photo library for decades, so avoiding proprietary software / service lock-in was my most important consideration. This decision was reinforced earlier this year when we had to do…
KDE software is so great (digiKam, Kdenlive, Kate, Krita) unfortunately the KDE environment compared to Gnome is just so bug-ridden, especially when it comes to multi-monitoring, wayland-support and scaling. Gnome shines in these respecst. I wish thebest of both worlds!