View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0000084GeoSetterImage Datapublic2008-01-20 10:36
Reporterbabar Assigned ToFriedemann  
Status feedbackResolutionopen 
Product Version2.2.4 release 
Target VersionFixed in Version 
Summary0000084: add the possibility to use a keyword list from which we could tag all the photo quickly
DescriptionWe often use the same keyword from photo to photo with some variation.
Therefore we often have a list of favorite keywords.
It would nice if when entering the Keyword/categories we could open along side that window another window with all our favorite keyword and by just clicking on them add them to the keyword/category list.
The best would be to be able to use a keyword list hierarcicaly organised.
for example
is hierarcicaly organised. If you clicked Julien, then all the other keywords:
people,family,uncle, would be added at the same time, saving you a lot of clicks.
Suchh a list could come from a txt file.
Where hierarchy (if available) could be shown with tabs or other method.

Best regards
TagsNo tags attached.



2008-01-02 00:28

administrator   ~0000168

I also thought about a hirarchical tree-like keyword list. If you have something like


and you add "Julien", I think there should be 3 possibilities to add it:

1. 1 Keyword "Julien"
2. 1 Keyword ""
3. 4 Keywords "people", "family", "uncle" and "Julien"

I saw it in Adobe Bridge. There it can be specified which divider should used for something like "".

I wanted to do it in my vacation, but unfortunately I have still only a few days... :-/


2008-01-02 10:24

reporter   ~0000171

Last edited: 2008-01-07 00:40

What you propose is really the best way, I especially love the 2nd proposition.
However the 2nd proposition can only be implemented in XMP as xmp keyword have almost no limit on the number of characters, whereas iptc keywords are limited to 64 character, which in the 2nd case can be very quickly reached.
The best would be to give the user the possibility to use all 3 options, or a mix of them. (using check box,...). But in case the user goes for the 2nd option, we could use it for xmp and use the 3rd option instead to fill the iptc keywords as well as xmp (because any tool that synchronise iptc and xmp will any way copy iptc into xmp). This way we would keep the maximum compatibility. (we must also be aware that if such keyword are utf8 then iptc should not be filled - ? -)
On top of that if you let the user choose the delimiter, you have the best possible compatibility, as I have seen a few other software that propose that, but not all of them have the same delimiter or allow you to choose which to use.
Delimiter could then be stored in preference to be recognised automatically later.


2008-01-11 11:53

reporter   ~0000259

As a very new user I would like to add to this, I find the current keyword handling rather unintuitive, and would certainly favour a simple and editable text file to allow tight control over keywords. We have all seen freetype entries in the past which slowly build up many differnet spellings of words to make searching almost impossible.

I will continue to struggle with the current keyword method, but if you could publish a background doc on how it works at present, it would be a great help.e.g where do templates live and can they be edited externally?


2008-01-14 20:34

administrator   ~0000272

> As a very new user I would like to add to this,
> I find the current keyword handling rather unintuitive

Do you have an idea how to improve it???

> where do templates live and can they be edited
> externally?

In your GeoSetter directory (under profiles) there's a subdirectory "templates" in which the template files are stored in XMP format.


2008-01-16 00:51

reporter   ~0000279

Here is a snapshot of an example on how it could be.
-first we would need a list of keyword (that can possibly hierarchical) either as a txt file(external format) or xml (internal format storage ?)
That list should be optional
-then the user would need decide if he wants to use herarchical keywords in the xmp or not, and if yes, then he needs to enter the separator in the settings of geosetter.

the window for tagging keywords should be bigger than the one we have now, because we need to be able to see as many keyword as possible at a glimpse.
It make it simpler to tag, because you can quickly see if keywords are missing or not, and you do not need to slide down or up to find them.

in the snapshot we see
on the left a photo(s - possibly ? several if more than one photo is selected in the list of photo below), and a list of photo below

on the right there are 3 big text box and a small one (one line)
-the left text box shows all the keywords of all the selected photos from the list
(not all the photos of the list need to be selected)
-The top right text box shows the list of keyword that the user as been patiently building over the years :)
-the bottom right text box shows the keywords that are present in the selection of photos but not in the above list
-finally the smallest box is here to add new keywords that do not exist in the selection of photos or the above list

lets assume the most comlexe situation:
We have a hierarchical list of keyword and are tagging xmp with hierarchical structure (ex: people>colleague>Philippe)

first of all geosetter would parse xmp data and build the hierarchical keyword list, it would then compare it with the user's list to classify that list accordingly to the user's list, and detect any extra keyword from the photos that are not in the user's list.
Those extra keyword are added in the 3rd text box for later use.
finally some keywords are Highlighted:
-In the photo selection list all keyword common to all selected photos appear in blue (or ....). This is especially use full when you select photos, it can helps you select photo that are similar (keyword wise) and for which you know you would want to add the same new keyword.
-in the user list, keywords that are all ready used in all the photo selection are greyed out, because there is no need to add them again. Keywords that are not used in the photo selection are bold, so you can spot them quickly.

Keyword from the 3rd text box can be either added to all the photo of the selection(if not already the case), or added to the user list, to update that list.
Keyword from the 4th text box can be added either to the photo selection or used to update the the user's list

Any keyword can be transferred from one of the list to another with drag and drop or with a double click.
When drag and dropping we should be able to select several keyword at once. Therefore in that case only the selected parent keyword will be added. This give us a way to tag at once with the full hierarchy or a partial hierarchy or no hierarchy at all.
If you double click all the parent keyword should be added as well.
Any keyword can be deleted from one of the list by contextual menu or delete key or being dragged in an empty space.

if you select one keyword in the user list, the 2nd text box tries to either center on that keyword if it exist in the phot selection or on the nearer parent if it exist in the photo selection.
for example here if you unfold "people" in the 3rd text box, the same will happen in the second text box.
and inversely, if you select one keyword in the 2nd text box it will center on it if possible in the 3rd text box
-> makes tagging very efficient, you can quickly find if keyword are missing

If you select several photo at once then any tagging action, will tag all the selected photo.
If you want to tag one photo only select that photo only from the list of photos

there could also be a check box to hide all xmp keyword (ex: if utf 8 is not enabled for iptc ) just to check what you have in iptc.

So what happens if the photos have no hierarchycal keyword but the user list is hierarchical.
-> geosetter should still be able to display hierarchichal keyword in both list
So that the tagging is still easy to do .
In this case if the user checked the setting for hierarchical xmp, geosetter will add, to the xmp, the proper hierarchical keywords (for example if we had "people colleague" we will end up with "people colleague people>colleague")
if not,... well even if the keyword are displayed with hierarchy they will be stored without.

What happens if you did choose to use xmp hierarchical keywords in the settings but for any reason do not want to use it for a given set of photos:
we could imagine then that for example, the drag and drop method should be used as explained earlier.
If there is no hierachy in both list it is then the simplest case

Finally we can also imagine the possibility to reorganize hierarchy in the user's list and have it reflected in the photo selection list.

Ok that is quite a long proposition, I do not know if everything is good, or if everything can be done but I suppose it could be proposed step by step through out the versions?


2008-01-18 19:48

administrator   ~0000286

Many thanks for your comment! Your suggestions seem to be very usable. Because of the complexity of your suggested user interface, I'm thinking of adding it perhaps seperately. But I'm asking for your understanding that I won't add it to te next release. Implementing you suggestions may take some time... ;-)


2008-01-20 10:36

reporter   ~0000293

Yes I also thought that a new window might be requiered for that and I believe you when you say it may take time to code :)

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2007-12-31 22:39 babar New Issue
2008-01-01 03:32 Friedemann Status new => assigned
2008-01-01 03:32 Friedemann Assigned To => Friedemann
2008-01-02 00:28 Friedemann Note Added: 0000168
2008-01-02 00:28 Friedemann Status assigned => feedback
2008-01-02 10:24 babar Note Added: 0000171
2008-01-07 00:35 babar Note Edited: 0000171
2008-01-07 00:40 babar Note Edited: 0000171
2008-01-11 11:53 DaMann Note Added: 0000259
2008-01-14 20:34 Friedemann Note Added: 0000272
2008-01-16 00:50 babar File Added: tagging proposition.jpg
2008-01-16 00:51 babar Note Added: 0000279
2008-01-18 19:48 Friedemann Note Added: 0000286
2008-01-20 10:36 babar Note Added: 0000293