Re: Album Support

["Dotan Cohen" <dotancohen gmail com>]

On 17/09/06, Marcus Hast <marcushast gmail com> wrote:
> On 9/15/06, Dotan Cohen <dotancohen gmail com> wrote:
>
> > I think that the term "album" should be defined much as the term is
> > used for physical (paper) photo albums: a collection of photographs
> > kept together. Just like in real paper photo albums, a photo could
> > belong to only one album. Additionally, when viewing an album, photos
> > in any other album should NOT be seen.
>
> > Now, when viewing a specific album, only the tags present in the
> > photos of that album should be shown. There should be no evidence that
> > any other photos exist in the entire universe, other than a dropdown
> > box to select which album to display. Therefore, I think that each
> > album warrents its own photos.db file.
>
> I think the functionality you describe here should exist. However I
> don't think "album" is the correct term to use for it. At least
> personally I see "album" to be a much less restrictive way to devide
> photos. I also don't think that a photo should be restricted to only
> one album.
>
> Most significantly I don't think each album should have it's own
> database. But I *do* very much agree that there should be a way to
> separate photos in different databases.
>
> Personally I think of "albums" more like a collection of photos. But
> slightly different than a tag in that order and possibly extra
> information is available. Personally I think it would be a good idea
> to tie in different export options to an album. Such as export to web
> server (Picasa web, Gallery, Flicker etc), "print" (possibly using
> photo printing service) or to create a CD/DVD.
>
> I think "collection" is a better term to describe a set of photos with
> separate database file. OTOH I don't think "collection" is a perfect
> word to describe it.
>
> /Marcus


You might take interest in another thread named "terminology" where
this very thing is being discussed.

Dotan Cohen
http://what-is-what.com