Shipping fspot instead of gthumb

[Sebastien Bacher]

On dim, 2006-07-16 at 16:59 +0200, Lionel Dricot wrote:
> My thought : from a picture viewer, I expect :

picture viewer = eog


> Last time I tried f-spot, it was really a pain because there was no
> way to simply do that

f-spot is a photos manager (browse your photos, class them by
categories, fix orientation, etc)


>  ! I had first to import a picture folder. then
> all pictures were displayed (I only wanted a given folder) then most
> of my pictures were set with in year 1970 (because they are not

Right, photos with exif tags are a (small) issue. Maybe they could be
placed to a non-dated category? Note that f-spot allow you to set a date
on a photo if you want

> specially from a digital camera) and so on. I also never fully
> understanded a lot of things so I cannot imagine how it would be for

What is complicated to you about the f-spot UI? It's pretty clean. You
have a grid with photos organized by date, a toolbar with rotations and
the view mode to use, a sidebar with categories and information about
the selected photo. Suggestions on how to make it easier to understand
are probably welcome upstream if you have some :)

> regular joe user who only put pictures from his camera to his desktop
> and want to display them.

Normal user plugs the camera, he gets a dialog asking if he wants to
import the photos to his collection, he clicks on ok and he gets the
photos imported and added to the f-spot catalog with f-spot open on them


> Gthumb is not the best but is still the less worst for me. F-spot is
> not, IMHO, in the gnome spirit. I don't want to "import" things.

You already do "import" photos, have you tried to plug a camera on
Ubuntu? It does use gthumb for that since warty ... 


> I'dont say that f-spot is bad. I can say that it doesn't meet my needs
> at all and I believe (but I may be wrong) that it's not intended as
> part of a default installation for a regular user.
> 
> "flickr integration and tags" sounds like geeky features to me.

right, but those are probably not the reason why it would be nice to
ship anyway. It would be nice to ship because it allow to manage your
photos in an efficient way and that's something a part of the user base
would be happy to use


> "timelining" might be nice but I really believe that most people have
> one folder by event and that there's too much mistagged pictures in
> the current ecosystem.

You can set a tag by event and set a tag on photos from a directory when
importing it. Anyway that's not the point, if a photo manager is shipped
with the default installation nobody forces you to run it so it should
not be an issue, right? :)


For my part I think that having eog as default associations for images
and shipping f-spot available from the menu for people who want to use
it would be good for edgy


Cheers,

Sebastien Bacher