On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 6:08 AM, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> Lainaus Alex Launi :
>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 9:01 AM, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
>>
>>> Well, for advanced uses like you and me F-Spot is fine, but for normal home
>>> users it is too complicated.
>>
>>
>> Could you provide some evidence for this? F-spot's UI needs some serious
>
>
> We'll, I've migrated hundreds of Windows users into Ubuntu (I work for
> a Linux support company) and nine out of then users run into trouble
> when using Nautilus they try to open and/or manipulate images.
>
> On a fresh Ubuntu install I always install Gthumb and make it the
> default image viewer in Nautilus file associations. That fixes all the
> usability problems I've witnessed.
>
> I also work as a usability export in software development projects,
> and it's my professional opinion that Gthumb would be better than EOG.
>
>
> If you want to do usability testing yourself, try out this scenario:
> 1. prepare a folder with a lot of photos
> 2. ask the user to open that folder and do some tasks. for example:
> remove duplicate photos, rotate some image, crop/resize another etc.
> 3. copy that folder to a CD or USB and give it to you
>
> Step 2 is where users run into problems. At first when they
> doubleclick the image, the only function they can do is to rotate.
> After this users do various things, but most commonly they click the
> image with the secondary mouse button and select "open with". First
> they try F-spot which also only allows rotating (in single image
> viewing mode). Secondly they open Gimp and then they scream, that
> Linux is too complicated.
>
I think you touch on the real issue here. It's not so much a problem
with viewing photos, as we all have noted there are already two
options, EOG when you are in a folder and F-Spot for collections. The
real problem is that those programs aren't image editors and the GIMP
is a tool for advanced users. GThumb doesn't solve this problem
either.
I don't think there is a real solution for Karmic, but I am excited to
see where a new project called Nathive goes. It's an image editor for
GNOME "focused on usability, logic and providing a smooth learning
curve for everyone." It's definitely a niche that the GNOME desktop
needs filled
http://www.nathive.org/
> If Gthumb is installed, steps 2 and 3 generate only minor problems and
> most users succeed with the task (based on what I've seen in real life
> situations).
>
>
> Or try this: as a user to import a file from their camera/phone to the
> computer, then resize it to fit under on megabyte and then mail it to
> you. With Gthumb's ability to manipulate images in place this is easy
> but with EOG or F-Spot users will not make it at all. Asking somebody
> to use Gimp for this simple task is overkill.
>
>> love, but the developers are working hard. Rather than have TWO photo
>> managers, one of which isn't such a great photo manager, it makes more sense
>
> Yep, we really don't need to photo _managers_. Howerver we need one
> proper photo viewer and at the moment, Gthumb is the only one with all
> the most commonly needed features.
>
>> to file bugs on f-spot, and *make it *less complicated. Maybe you could
>> point out some specific areas where you feel it's lacking for users. I
>> wouldn't call myself an advanced photo user at all, I just use it for minor
>> tagging, slide shows, and exporting to facebook/flickr.
>
> If I'd file a bug, that the file hierarchy should be changed so, that
> imported folder remain and single folders, do you think they would do
> the change? Touching the filesystem is a major change in architecture
> and that is not something they'll do (I presume).
>
> However it could be worth to file a bug that the single image viewer
> mode should have more features, like cropping and resizing.
>
>
>> Also it has one huge drawback: it saves all the pictures in a folder
>>> structure based on months and dates. This makes it really hard to browse a
>>> F-Spot archive from the filesystem or from any other image viewer.
>>
>>
>> I agree. This is really annoying.
>
> Jep, this is the biggest drawback and I don't think they'll change
> this, because the whole idea with F-Spot is to forget the old file
> hierarchy and move on to tagging based work model.
>
>
>>> I know tagging is the superior way to file and sort your images, but the
>>> case for normal home (and business) users is that they still like to think
>>> about their image collections as folders.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure this isn't true. Folders confuse the hell out of everyone.
>> They only think about them this way because it's all they've ever had. This
>> is bigger than f-spot however and needs dealt with at the file system/file
>> browser level.
>
> Sure folders confuse, but since users anyway browse their files in
> Nautilus in the first place, jumping to F-Spot to manipulate an image
> in a folder really messes up the users head.
>
>
>>> F-Spot sucks at browsing images in folders and to