new field proposal: Place

florin_andrei

Joined: 2004-01-11
Posts: 79

Posted: Sun, 2009-04-05 00:41

(can't look at G3 right now cause I broke my testing instance, but I'm talking from a G2 perspective)

I'm looking at albums and pictures and I noticed there are several fields associated with them:
- Name
- Title
- Summary
- Keywords
- Description

Name is the file name, its designation is a bad choice, I mentioned this elsewhere, hopefully it will be addressed in G3.
Now, Summary and Description. This is confusing. There are three layers of information here: Title (most terse), Summary (more verbose), Description (most verbose). Most users are prepared to deal with only two: Title and Description.

Think about it. You put an image on the website, give it a name (the Title field), then scribble something down quickly about it (the Description). That's how average people operate. Three layers of increasing verbosity is too much for the typical user, it's too analytical.

G3 developers, you have to keep in mind the fact that, just by being able to write computer programs, you are automatically placed in a high percentile in terms of being analytical. The majority of people are more intuitive and less detail-oriented. Looking beyond Gallery, at the software industry in general, I guess this is the reason why most user interfaces suck donkey balls, with the exception of a few things made by Apple and some other companies.

I propose to drop the Summary field, or rather rename it to something else: Place.

This is much more useful and natural. Upload the picture, give it a Title, write something down about it (Description) and, oh by the way, this is the Place where it was taken ("Mom's house", or "San Francisco, CA", etc.). It's more intuitive and it's something people want to remember about their pictures.

Both albums and photos should have a Place field. Photos should inherit the Place from the album. If an album has pictures taken in many places, the users will naturally leave the album Place field blank, then just fill in the right stuff for each photo.

It could be argued that the place could be stored in the Description, but then you lose the automatic inheritance (album --> photo) for that type of information. Place is distinct and shouldn't pollute the Description field.

All this will be rendered obsolete once all cameras will get GPS chips, but until then it's something the users must do manually, and a software like G3 should support them.

--
Florin Andrei
http://florin.myip.org/gallery2/

bharat

Joined: 2002-05-21
Posts: 7994

Posted: Tue, 2009-04-07 06:24

In Gallery3 we ditched the concept of a separate Summary vs. Description. It seemed like a good idea, but most people had no intuition about what to put in each field. But I think it's overly specific to put in a Location field in the core product. There are many uses of Gallery3 for which users won't want a location field. Instead, I think that this is a good test case for a custom-fields module that lets you wire in the fields that you choose and have them seamlessly integrated into the product. We'll do that (eventually), but don't hold your breath for that in 3.0.. we have too many other high priority issues to tackle first.

florin_andrei

Joined: 2004-01-11
Posts: 79

Posted: Tue, 2009-04-07 06:54

bharat wrote:

In Gallery3 we ditched the concept of a separate Summary vs. Description. It seemed like a good idea, but most people had no intuition about what to put in each field.

Exactly my point.

Quote:

But I think it's overly specific to put in a Location field in the core product. There are many uses of Gallery3 for which users won't want a location field. Instead, I think that this is a good test case for a custom-fields module that lets you wire in the fields that you choose and have them seamlessly integrated into the product. We'll do that (eventually), but don't hold your breath for that in 3.0.. we have too many other high priority issues to tackle first.

I understand, makes sense. Thanks!

--
Florin Andrei
http://florin.myip.org/gallery2/

compumatter

Joined: 2009-06-21
Posts: 7

Posted: Sun, 2009-06-21 02:10

If I understood this one correctly, custom fields are not supported in Gallery3. Is that accurate?

It would be nice for me to be able to add numerous fields specific to a photo that I could later search for on my website. I seemed to have found reference material that indicated such a feature existed in past versions so I'm trying to track down the truth.

Thanks.

Jay

bharat

Joined: 2002-05-21
Posts: 7994

Posted: Sun, 2009-06-21 19:47

We don't have a custom field module. If somebody writes one, we'll work with them to make it available to others. We may eventually write one for the core, but it's not on the roadmap for the 3.0 release.
---
Problems? Check gallery3/var/logs
bugs/feature req's | upgrade to the latest code | use git | help! vote!

lmorroni

Joined: 2009-08-06
Posts: 2

Posted: Thu, 2009-08-06 04:21

Along the same lines as this thread...I see that gallery3 is grabbing my IPTC Description field but I would like it to use my IPTC Title for the title of the image. is this something I need to hack into the theme myself?
Thanks,
Larry

floridave

Joined: 2003-12-22
Posts: 27300

Posted: Thu, 2009-08-06 13:12

lmorroni, there is a task/ticket for this

Dave
_____________________________________________
Blog & G2 || floridave - Gallery Team

MtnBiker

Joined: 2008-02-11
Posts: 172

Posted: Fri, 2009-08-07 21:23

I want to see the Caption/Abstract/Description show rather than the file name. Is this what you're talking about changing here? In any case will there be an option of which to show with the individual photos?

In my albums I'm seeing the filename which I take to be the IPTC Object Name (Title), I want to see IPTC Caption/Abstract/Description which seems to be the opposite of what the lmorroni observed.

floridave

Joined: 2003-12-22
Posts: 27300

Posted: Sat, 2009-08-08 00:22

MtnBiker,
Can you provide an image that has the EXIF/IPTC info and describe ( with what text ) what fields you want to be shown where?
Is this your issue:
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/608

Dave
_____________________________________________
Blog & G2 || floridave - Gallery Team

MtnBiker

Joined: 2008-02-11
Posts: 172

Posted: Sat, 2009-08-08 23:04

Edit: I now realize that I just want to be able to hide what Gallery calls "title" on the photo pages. Also I want Description, but not "Title" to show on the album pages. http://knobby.ws/gallery3/index.php/IrToWed/IrToWed-792.jpg. Image attached below

Better would be the ability to select on whether Title and Description show and the styling for each.

floridave wrote:

MtnBiker,
Can you provide an image that has the EXIF/IPTC info and describe ( with what text ) what fields you want to be shown where?
Blog & G2 || floridave - Gallery Team

See IPTC-Apple.png attachment (Screen capture of info for this photo)
Below the photo in the Album View and Photo View I would like to see the "IPTC Caption/Abstract" field which for this photo is "Tom and Iris Hofmann (Caption)"

Quote:

Is this your issue:
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/608

Short answer: I'm not sure. I don't see the link in Aperture between "title" and "Object Name." Aperture has the field "Object Name," but nothing called "title." In Aperture, when you create a web album, "Caption" is put on the pages. The "Object Name" doesn't appear. Some discussion follows:
Quoting the ticket:

Quote:

"The only important field that is missing to be imported from MetaData? in G3 as we had in G2 EXIF/IPTC Module is the ObjectName? which is used on most Photo Programs (i.e. iPhoto, Aperture) as the title for the picture."

My references give a different meaning to Object Name. For example: http://controlledvocabulary.com/imagedatabases/iptc_naa.html#IPTCchart says Object Name is "similar to filename; may include unique identifier."
The IPTC document (IPTC-PhotoMetadata(200907)_1.docx) is less clear to me, but on page 18 appears to talk about this field as "XMP namespace" and "IIM Mapping 2:05 Object Name," but nothing definitive on how it's used in practice.
=====
Thank you for your attention to this. I wish you luck since the IPTC fields are mapped to different fields in various programs.

Slightly OT: I've seen some discussion about GPS fields. I hope these will be imported into Gallerey3 for use by other themes at some point.
_____________________________________________

floridave

Joined: 2003-12-22
Posts: 27300

Posted: Sun, 2009-08-09 05:30

MtnBiker wrote:

Better would be the ability to select on whether Title and Description show and the styling for each.

It would be up to the author of the theme to provide that functionality.
Need help with creating a theme?

Dave
_____________________________________________
Blog & G2 || floridave - Gallery Team

floridave

Joined: 2003-12-22
Posts: 27300

Posted: Sun, 2009-08-09 06:19

You might want to track this thread and the resulting/similar tickets:
http://gallery.menalto.com/node/88668
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/625
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/490
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/499

Dave

_____________________________________________
Blog & G2 || floridave - Gallery Team

MtnBiker

Joined: 2008-02-11
Posts: 172

Posted: Sun, 2009-08-09 17:23

The theme options I want are way too complicated for me to tackle.

And maybe the option doesn't belong in the default theme as the default theme might quickly become bloated or too complicated, but having a quick way to make a better looking site right off might help bring people to Gallery. If I remember correctly, Gallery2 ships with various themes and if Gallery3 eventually does that should take care of the issue. And if I understand the tickets (which is unlikely), this issue is planned to be covered in 3.1. If not theme makers will cover it.

The progress on Gallery3 is fantastic. Thank you for your efforts.

floridave

Joined: 2003-12-22
Posts: 27300

Posted: Sun, 2009-08-09 17:43

Quote:

If I remember correctly, Gallery2 ships with various themes and if Gallery3 eventually does that should take care of the issue.

Yes but it all takes time and people to do it.

Dave
_____________________________________________
Blog & G2 || floridave - Gallery Team

tempg

Joined: 2005-12-17
Posts: 1857

Posted: Mon, 2010-11-22 19:18

Quote:

Along the same lines as this thread...I see that gallery3 is grabbing my IPTC Description field but I would like it to use my IPTC Title for the title of the image. is this something I need to hack into the theme myself?
Thanks,
Larry

Quote:

lmorroni, there is a task/ticket for this

Dave

Did this move any further?

I've been trying to get the "Title" field to prepopulate for uploaded images if it's defined in the exif data.
It looks like this is not a feature supported.
I was going to attempt editing the exif php files, but it looks like that's not effective. Also noted that the uploader file creates the title from the filename.

The end goal is to have Gallery pull in the title from the exif; then, only if there is no title in the exif, it would create the title from the filename.

(Not sure if http://gallery.menalto.com/node/97162 is relevant.)

Is there already something available to do this?

floridave

Joined: 2003-12-22
Posts: 27300

Posted: Tue, 2010-11-23 04:36

Quote:

Did this move any further?

I don't know if a ticket was filed or not.

This item: http://www.langleycom.com/gallery3/var/albums/M06_1027_001.JPG seems to work properly getting the title and caption->description.

Dave

_____________________________________________
Blog & G2 || floridave - Gallery Team

tempg

Joined: 2005-12-17
Posts: 1857

Posted: Tue, 2010-11-23 14:10

Thanks @floridave.
When I upload that image, it pulls in the caption, but not the title; "Ontario Mammals" is nowhere to be found.
Just to make sure we're discussing the same thing: You're saying that in your Gallery, "Ontario Mammals" automatically becomes the title of the image when you upload it?

floridave

Joined: 2003-12-22
Posts: 27300

Posted: Tue, 2010-11-23 15:06

The caption is applied but not the title. So yes there should be a feature request filed to add this ( title ) functionality.
I have not found one so you are welcome to file one.

Dave
_____________________________________________
Blog & G2 || floridave - Gallery Team

floridave

Joined: 2003-12-22
Posts: 27300

Posted: Tue, 2010-11-23 15:14

There is a few related tickets open
http://gallery.menalto.com/node/86937#comment-316945
and some have code fixes as well.

Dave

_____________________________________________
Blog & G2 || floridave - Gallery Team

tempg

Joined: 2005-12-17
Posts: 1857

Posted: Tue, 2010-11-23 15:37

THANKS! http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/608 works perfectly!

florin_andrei Joined: 2004-01-11 Posts: 79	Posted: Sun, 2009-04-05 00:41
	(can't look at G3 right now cause I broke my testing instance, but I'm talking from a G2 perspective) I'm looking at albums and pictures and I noticed there are several fields associated with them: - Name - Title - Summary - Keywords - Description Name is the file name, its designation is a bad choice, I mentioned this elsewhere, hopefully it will be addressed in G3. Now, Summary and Description. This is confusing. There are three layers of information here: Title (most terse), Summary (more verbose), Description (most verbose). Most users are prepared to deal with only two: Title and Description. Think about it. You put an image on the website, give it a name (the Title field), then scribble something down quickly about it (the Description). That's how average people operate. Three layers of increasing verbosity is too much for the typical user, it's too analytical. G3 developers, you have to keep in mind the fact that, just by being able to write computer programs, you are automatically placed in a high percentile in terms of being analytical. The majority of people are more intuitive and less detail-oriented. Looking beyond Gallery, at the software industry in general, I guess this is the reason why most user interfaces suck donkey balls, with the exception of a few things made by Apple and some other companies. I propose to drop the Summary field, or rather rename it to something else: Place. This is much more useful and natural. Upload the picture, give it a Title, write something down about it (Description) and, oh by the way, this is the Place where it was taken ("Mom's house", or "San Francisco, CA", etc.). It's more intuitive and it's something people want to remember about their pictures. Both albums and photos should have a Place field. Photos should inherit the Place from the album. If an album has pictures taken in many places, the users will naturally leave the album Place field blank, then just fill in the right stuff for each photo. It could be argued that the place could be stored in the Description, but then you lose the automatic inheritance (album --> photo) for that type of information. Place is distinct and shouldn't pollute the Description field. All this will be rendered obsolete once all cameras will get GPS chips, but until then it's something the users must do manually, and a software like G3 should support them. -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/gallery2/
	XUser login Username: * Password: * Create new account Request new password
bharat Joined: 2002-05-21 Posts: 7994	Posted: Tue, 2009-04-07 06:24
	In Gallery3 we ditched the concept of a separate Summary vs. Description. It seemed like a good idea, but most people had no intuition about what to put in each field. But I think it's overly specific to put in a Location field in the core product. There are many uses of Gallery3 for which users won't want a location field. Instead, I think that this is a good test case for a custom-fields module that lets you wire in the fields that you choose and have them seamlessly integrated into the product. We'll do that (eventually), but don't hold your breath for that in 3.0.. we have too many other high priority issues to tackle first.

florin_andrei Joined: 2004-01-11 Posts: 79	Posted: Tue, 2009-04-07 06:54
	bharat wrote: In Gallery3 we ditched the concept of a separate Summary vs. Description. It seemed like a good idea, but most people had no intuition about what to put in each field. Exactly my point. Quote: But I think it's overly specific to put in a Location field in the core product. There are many uses of Gallery3 for which users won't want a location field. Instead, I think that this is a good test case for a custom-fields module that lets you wire in the fields that you choose and have them seamlessly integrated into the product. We'll do that (eventually), but don't hold your breath for that in 3.0.. we have too many other high priority issues to tackle first. I understand, makes sense. Thanks! -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/gallery2/

compumatter Joined: 2009-06-21 Posts: 7	Posted: Sun, 2009-06-21 02:10
	If I understood this one correctly, custom fields are not supported in Gallery3. Is that accurate? It would be nice for me to be able to add numerous fields specific to a photo that I could later search for on my website. I seemed to have found reference material that indicated such a feature existed in past versions so I'm trying to track down the truth. Thanks. Jay

bharat Joined: 2002-05-21 Posts: 7994	Posted: Sun, 2009-06-21 19:47
	We don't have a custom field module. If somebody writes one, we'll work with them to make it available to others. We may eventually write one for the core, but it's not on the roadmap for the 3.0 release. --- Problems? Check gallery3/var/logs bugs/feature req's \| upgrade to the latest code \| use git \| help! vote!

lmorroni Joined: 2009-08-06 Posts: 2	Posted: Thu, 2009-08-06 04:21
	Along the same lines as this thread...I see that gallery3 is grabbing my IPTC Description field but I would like it to use my IPTC Title for the title of the image. is this something I need to hack into the theme myself? Thanks, Larry

floridave Joined: 2003-12-22 Posts: 27300	Posted: Thu, 2009-08-06 13:12
	lmorroni, there is a task/ticket for this Dave _____________________________________________ Blog & G2 \|\| floridave - Gallery Team

MtnBiker Joined: 2008-02-11 Posts: 172	Posted: Fri, 2009-08-07 21:23
	I want to see the Caption/Abstract/Description show rather than the file name. Is this what you're talking about changing here? In any case will there be an option of which to show with the individual photos? In my albums I'm seeing the filename which I take to be the IPTC Object Name (Title), I want to see IPTC Caption/Abstract/Description which seems to be the opposite of what the lmorroni observed.

floridave Joined: 2003-12-22 Posts: 27300	Posted: Sat, 2009-08-08 00:22
	MtnBiker, Can you provide an image that has the EXIF/IPTC info and describe ( with what text ) what fields you want to be shown where? Is this your issue: http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/608 Dave _____________________________________________ Blog & G2 \|\| floridave - Gallery Team

MtnBiker Joined: 2008-02-11 Posts: 172	Posted: Sat, 2009-08-08 23:04
	Edit: I now realize that I just want to be able to hide what Gallery calls "title" on the photo pages. Also I want Description, but not "Title" to show on the album pages. http://knobby.ws/gallery3/index.php/IrToWed/IrToWed-792.jpg. Image attached below Better would be the ability to select on whether Title and Description show and the styling for each. floridave wrote: MtnBiker, Can you provide an image that has the EXIF/IPTC info and describe ( with what text ) what fields you want to be shown where? Blog & G2 \|\| floridave - Gallery Team See IPTC-Apple.png attachment (Screen capture of info for this photo) Below the photo in the Album View and Photo View I would like to see the "IPTC Caption/Abstract" field which for this photo is "Tom and Iris Hofmann (Caption)" Quote: Is this your issue: http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/608 Short answer: I'm not sure. I don't see the link in Aperture between "title" and "Object Name." Aperture has the field "Object Name," but nothing called "title." In Aperture, when you create a web album, "Caption" is put on the pages. The "Object Name" doesn't appear. Some discussion follows: Quoting the ticket: Quote: "The only important field that is missing to be imported from MetaData? in G3 as we had in G2 EXIF/IPTC Module is the ObjectName? which is used on most Photo Programs (i.e. iPhoto, Aperture) as the title for the picture." My references give a different meaning to Object Name. For example: http://controlledvocabulary.com/imagedatabases/iptc_naa.html#IPTCchart says Object Name is "similar to filename; may include unique identifier." The IPTC document (IPTC-PhotoMetadata(200907)_1.docx) is less clear to me, but on page 18 appears to talk about this field as "XMP namespace" and "IIM Mapping 2:05 Object Name," but nothing definitive on how it's used in practice. ===== Thank you for your attention to this. I wish you luck since the IPTC fields are mapped to different fields in various programs. Slightly OT: I've seen some discussion about GPS fields. I hope these will be imported into Gallerey3 for use by other themes at some point. _____________________________________________

floridave Joined: 2003-12-22 Posts: 27300	Posted: Sun, 2009-08-09 05:30
	MtnBiker wrote: Better would be the ability to select on whether Title and Description show and the styling for each. It would be up to the author of the theme to provide that functionality. Need help with creating a theme? Dave _____________________________________________ Blog & G2 \|\| floridave - Gallery Team

floridave Joined: 2003-12-22 Posts: 27300	Posted: Sun, 2009-08-09 06:19
	You might want to track this thread and the resulting/similar tickets: http://gallery.menalto.com/node/88668 http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/625 http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/490 http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/499 Dave _____________________________________________ Blog & G2 \|\| floridave - Gallery Team

MtnBiker Joined: 2008-02-11 Posts: 172	Posted: Sun, 2009-08-09 17:23
	The theme options I want are way too complicated for me to tackle. And maybe the option doesn't belong in the default theme as the default theme might quickly become bloated or too complicated, but having a quick way to make a better looking site right off might help bring people to Gallery. If I remember correctly, Gallery2 ships with various themes and if Gallery3 eventually does that should take care of the issue. And if I understand the tickets (which is unlikely), this issue is planned to be covered in 3.1. If not theme makers will cover it. The progress on Gallery3 is fantastic. Thank you for your efforts.

floridave Joined: 2003-12-22 Posts: 27300	Posted: Sun, 2009-08-09 17:43
	Quote: If I remember correctly, Gallery2 ships with various themes and if Gallery3 eventually does that should take care of the issue. Yes but it all takes time and people to do it. Dave _____________________________________________ Blog & G2 \|\| floridave - Gallery Team

tempg Joined: 2005-12-17 Posts: 1857	Posted: Mon, 2010-11-22 19:18
	Quote: Along the same lines as this thread...I see that gallery3 is grabbing my IPTC Description field but I would like it to use my IPTC Title for the title of the image. is this something I need to hack into the theme myself? Thanks, Larry Quote: lmorroni, there is a task/ticket for this Dave Did this move any further? I've been trying to get the "Title" field to prepopulate for uploaded images if it's defined in the exif data. It looks like this is not a feature supported. I was going to attempt editing the exif php files, but it looks like that's not effective. Also noted that the uploader file creates the title from the filename. The end goal is to have Gallery pull in the title from the exif; then, only if there is no title in the exif, it would create the title from the filename. (Not sure if http://gallery.menalto.com/node/97162 is relevant.) Is there already something available to do this?

floridave Joined: 2003-12-22 Posts: 27300	Posted: Tue, 2010-11-23 04:36
	Quote: Did this move any further? I don't know if a ticket was filed or not. This item: http://www.langleycom.com/gallery3/var/albums/M06_1027_001.JPG seems to work properly getting the title and caption->description. Dave _____________________________________________ Blog & G2 \|\| floridave - Gallery Team

tempg Joined: 2005-12-17 Posts: 1857	Posted: Tue, 2010-11-23 14:10
	Thanks @floridave. When I upload that image, it pulls in the caption, but not the title; "Ontario Mammals" is nowhere to be found. Just to make sure we're discussing the same thing: You're saying that in your Gallery, "Ontario Mammals" automatically becomes the title of the image when you upload it?

floridave Joined: 2003-12-22 Posts: 27300	Posted: Tue, 2010-11-23 15:06
	The caption is applied but not the title. So yes there should be a feature request filed to add this ( title ) functionality. I have not found one so you are welcome to file one. Dave _____________________________________________ Blog & G2 \|\| floridave - Gallery Team

floridave Joined: 2003-12-22 Posts: 27300	Posted: Tue, 2010-11-23 15:14
	There is a few related tickets open http://gallery.menalto.com/node/86937#comment-316945 and some have code fixes as well. Dave _____________________________________________ Blog & G2 \|\| floridave - Gallery Team

tempg Joined: 2005-12-17 Posts: 1857	Posted: Tue, 2010-11-23 15:37
	THANKS! http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gallery/ticket/608 works perfectly!

new field proposal: Place

XUser login