Feature #1798
keep full-resolution version of each edited image
| Status: | Open | Start date: | 04/16/2010 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | High | Due date: | ||
| Assignee: | - | % Done: | 0% |
|
| Category: | library-mode | |||
| Target version: | - | |||
| Keywords: |
Description
At some point I think that Shotwell should keep a full-resolution version of each image the user has edited. This would have a number of benefits. It would allow dragging/dropping to other applications (#1563) and make it easier for us to open photos in an external editor (#1479). It would also improve performance when browsing through photos and quite possibly when zooming as well.
I asked on the mailing list where Shotwell should store modified copies of photos. People didn't want Shotwell to overwrite the originals in place. It seemed that people leaned toward keeping the modified copies in the same directories as the originals, though this is still up for discussion.
I think we should consider this for 0.6.
(iPhoto does this, by the way.)
Related issues
History
Updated by Adam Dingle about 3 years ago
- Status changed from Open to Review
- Assignee changed from Anonymous to Jim Nelson
Updated by Adam Dingle about 3 years ago
- Assignee changed from Jim Nelson to Anonymous
- Priority deleted (
High)
Jim and I discussed this at length. This is now off the table for 0.5. Dropping to medium.
Updated by Jim Nelson about 3 years ago
0.6.
Updated by Adam Dingle about 3 years ago
After more feedback from the community, it turns out that some people would like Shotwell to overwrite originals in place so they always appear up to date in the filesystem. If we did that, Shotwell could move/rename the original master photo files (perhaps into a subdirectory) before overwriting so that they would still be available in case the user wants to adjust transformation parameters or revert to original.
Users seem to be in different camps as to how this should work, and this could conceivably be a user option.
Updated by Adam Dingle about 3 years ago
- Priority set to High
Updated by Adam Dingle almost 3 years ago
- Priority deleted (
High)
Updated by Adam Dingle over 2 years ago
- Priority set to High
Updated by Anonymous over 2 years ago
I'd like to see this as well. I'm using a script to backup/upload the pictures in my library, and currently it's not getting the post-edited versions.
Whether you do write-to-copy or overwrite-original is fine with me, as long as there is a simple/deterministic convention so that my script can tell which are: originals with no edits (process those), originals that were edited (skip to avoid duplicates), the edited version of originals (process those).
Keeping the files in the same directory with a simple naming convention like foo.jpg/foo_mod.jpg (or foo.jpg/foo_orig.jpg) would let me do it this just a simple file name/existence check.
Updated by Adam Dingle over 1 year ago
- Description updated (diff)
- Target version set to 0.12
Upping for consideration for 0.12.
Updated by Adam Dingle over 1 year ago
- Target version deleted (
0.12)
Updated by Adam Dingle about 1 year ago
- Target version set to 0.13
This would not be a small change, but would have many benefits. Upping for consideration for 0.13.
Updated by Adam Dingle 11 months ago
- Target version deleted (
0.13)
Updated by Jim Nelson 7 months ago
- Target version set to 0.14.0
Updated by Jim Nelson 6 months ago
- Category set to library-mode
Updated by Jim Nelson 5 months ago
- Target version changed from 0.14.0 to 0.15.0
We'll take a look at this for 0.15.
Updated by Jim Nelson 3 months ago
Updated by Jim Nelson about 1 month ago
- Target version deleted (
0.15.0)