Michael probably just chose ImageDescription because it looked like a
good field.
The requirement basically was show image's description if possible. So
that's what I ended up with.
I do understand it's not very helpful in your case. But why would a camera
vendor seriously believe it was a
mherger;654558 Wrote:
Michael probably just chose ImageDescription because it looked like a
good field.
The requirement basically was show image's description if possible.
So
that's what I ended up with.
I do understand it's not very helpful in your case. But why would a
camera
Have anyone else tried LMS with their photo library and a UPnP client ?
My first reflection is that when I view it with PlugPlayer the main
title of my photos shown are:
- Photos taken with my old Olympus C700UZ: OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
- Photos taken with my old Minolta DImage A1: Minolta DCS
-
Yeah, I can see this opening up a whole can of worms, Exif seems way worse than
audio tagging when it comes to standards.
___
beta mailing list
beta@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/beta
FYI currently the image title logic is very simple: XPTitle or
ImageDescription, then filename. Would certainly welcome any
suggestions on improving this. I would like to stay away from
camera-specific hacks though, if at all possible.
--
andyg
andyg;654402 Wrote:
Yeah, I can see this opening up a whole can of worms, Exif seems way
worse than audio tagging when it comes to standards.
Does the Media::Scan module have a scanner plugin API in same way as
the old audio scanner have ? So a plugin can get a call when a image is
scanned
On Aug 31, 2011, at 12:53 PM, erland wrote:
andyg;654402 Wrote:
Yeah, I can see this opening up a whole can of worms, Exif seems way
worse than audio tagging when it comes to standards.
Does the Media::Scan module have a scanner plugin API in same way as
the old audio scanner have ? So
andyg;654409 Wrote:
FYI currently the image title logic is very simple: XPTitle or
ImageDescription, then filename. Would certainly welcome any
suggestions on improving this. I would like to stay away from
camera-specific hacks though, if at all possible.
The issue for me is that I don't
Michael probably just chose ImageDescription because it looked like a
good field. But obviously it's not being used as a real image
description.
BTW I just checked in API hooks for new images and videos. They are
slightly different than tracks.
--
andyg
andyg;654402 Wrote:
Exif seems way worse than audio tagging when it comes to standards.
yeah, as i recall they were to blame for a GD server killing bug i
filed, (or to be more precise, GD's handling of them).
i've used several apps for photo viewing, (like WD, tivo, etc) and they
all seem to
MrSinatra;654440 Wrote:
i've used several apps for photo viewing, (like WD, tivo, etc) and they
all seem to basically use filenames and folder location. so for photos,
its seems that the BMF method, if you will, is what they expect or
try to get users to do. the better ones allow you to
11 matches
Mail list logo
