Am 20.06.2016 um 17:35 schrieb Tony Arnold:
On Mon, 2016-06-20 at 08:16 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 16:23:41 +0200
Christian Mandel <[email protected]> wrote:
This topic is discussed frequently, one of the last threads was
“Film roll vs folder” starting on 2015-11-16. Film rolls are
related
to file system paths, each film roll will hold a subset of images
of
a folder. Therefore, you would need a copy (or link) of the image
in
several folders, and even then, the edit history would not be the
same. One could argue about other methods for collections, but I
guess at the moment tags is probably the closest you will get.
I did see that and I asked because P. Shanahan said:
A "film roll" is a *collection* of images whereas a folder is a
directory, a storage structure.
but from everything else, they look to be the same.
What I'm trying to do is:
1. Collections
2. Virtual copies but each belonging to different collection
It sounds like you want a similar feature to 'virtual collections' in
LightRoom where you can add images arbitrarily to a user created
collection.
In my experience, DT does not support this functionality. I get round
this by using tags, where the tag is your 'virtual collection'. You can
use the 'collect images' panel on the left hand side to select all
images with a given tag.
Virtual collections would be a really useful feature in DT, but looking
at the database structure I can imagine it's a fair amount of work to
implement, and that's assuming the developers want to do so!
Why? IMHO it is just a UI question and could internally implemented with
tags in dt's internal darktable tag namespace. Of course, it still could
be much work, but no database change.
Disclaimer: I've never used lightroom and therefore may not know what I
am talking about ;-).
Best regards
Chris
Regards,
Tony.
____________________________________________________________________________
darktable user mailing list
to unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]
