Topic: Important Bug: Tagging (Read 5661 times)

nila · « **on:** July 12, 2003, 07:10:56 am »

Hey

Right now with MC, it only shows the fields values for the selected files.

When going into tagging mode so that I can tag my files this results in say 'people' for instance only showing the people that are for the currently displaying group of people.

As such I basically have to either just choose to:
1. show every single image I have if I want the full people list to show
or
2.I have to 'create new' and add the person again even though they're already added.

2 isn't really a viable option and makes it useless, as I'd have to remember if I called people by their proper names or nick names.
1. right now this is the only option to tag with and it makes it VERY hard as you have such a big selection of images and you only want to tag a selection.

When we go into tagging mode, can it PLEASE show all possible values for the field, not just for the files currently showing.

This is a really big bug as it's completely stopping me from sorting tagging my pictures properly.

Could it please be put as a priority on the list of bugs to fix so I can use MC to sort my images? Right now it's just tooo much effort, it's not worth it.

THANKS!!!!

Pink Waters · « **Reply #1 on:** July 12, 2003, 08:46:11 pm »

yeah, iam with you nila

sdgrizdan · « **Reply #2 on:** July 12, 2003, 10:22:29 pm »

Same here! This bug is driving me crazy. Hopefully it'll be fixed in the next build!

Doof · « **Reply #3 on:** July 13, 2003, 06:55:22 pm »

I wouldn't call it a bug, exactly. A bug is when something isn't working as intended. This is working as intended. You just disagree with how it works.

But I agree. So much so that I brought this up two builds ago.

sraymond · « **Reply #4 on:** July 13, 2003, 07:58:18 pm »

Quote

I wouldn't call it a bug, exactly. A bug is when something isn't working as intended. This is working as intended.

Well, I won't disagree too stronly with this, as it was my first thought, too. But I think it's a fair statement to say that if it is a "feature", it breaks its own paradigm.

To expalin further, I think there's a problem with the way MC tries to do both searches and tags with the current interface. The whole point behind tagging images with the GUI is that you can see all the tags available. This is clearly not possible. The problem starts with restrictions based on hierarchies.

Arguably, restrictions (filters) make sense when searching hierarchies. If you're using Series/Season/Episode columns, it's clear that there's no need to see extraneous tags (well, with searching, perhaps we should consider them fields). But this breaks down with non-hierarchical columns such as People/Places/Events.

And I don't think tags should ever filter.

But I'm not all critical without some suggestions for a solution. Here's what I recommend... even if some of it has been said before:

In mixed tag/search mode (which doesn't exist except in my own mind) why not separate the "tag" graphic and the name? Clicking on the name would perform a search... this would be especially useful if you present the <all> tag like in the original version of view schemes. In this way, the current default of showing only applicable tags could be shortcircuited with a simple click on the <all> tag.

In search mode, implement an AND and OR search much like APA does. MC already does OR by holding CLTR or SHIFT when clicking on additional fields. Here's a screenshot of APA to explain better:

When clicking on the tags, the results are grouped in "Matching" (AND), "Closely Matching" (OR), and "Not Matching" (not OR). If there are no matches in AND, there is no "Matching" group.

Remember that APA doesn't do a "tag" GUI in the sense that MC does... instead, the tags are dragged to the photo thumbnail.

In tag mode don't allow any further search restrictions (like mentioned above in mixed mode) and don't filter any of the tags. As Nila has pointed out, it is very difficult (verging on impossible) to use MC to refine tags.

In conclusion, I think MC still has room for improvement with photo management - but it's getting close to being an acceptable replacement for something like APA. Nonetheless, it should really do the most common stuff (searching and tagging) as well as others. After all, isn't media file organization MC's claim to fame?

Scott-

Cmagic · « **Reply #5 on:** July 14, 2003, 09:26:35 pm »

Hi,

I'm with you guys.
I really think all tags (already entered) should be visible while in tagging mode. Otherwise, as Nila said, you have to re-enter the same tags over and over again.

Now if all tags should be visible, I personaly think that the need for tag grouping (family, friends, etc..) already mentioned in another thread, will be a requirement if you don't want to end up with long lists of people, places and other tags.

Have a nice day,

C.

sdgrizdan · « **Reply #6 on:** July 22, 2003, 04:57:25 pm »

Im just wondering what the progress is on this important bug. I cant use MC for photo tagging/organization until this gets fixed. Thanks!

Doof · « **Reply #7 on:** July 22, 2003, 08:31:23 pm »

Can't or won't?

sdgrizdan · « **Reply #8 on:** July 22, 2003, 08:48:01 pm »

both. i cant organize the pix because i refuse to tag 3000 pics manually and enter the places/events to each separately. The quick tag feature was soo helpful when it worked in earlier builds. So until this gets resolved i cant/wont use MC as an effective photo organizer

sraymond · « **Reply #9 on:** July 22, 2003, 09:42:29 pm »

Quote

both. i cant organize the pix because i refuse to tag 3000 pics manually and enter the places/events to each separately.

Same here! Somehow I lost my tags (I'm sure it was operator error) to 1000+ photos and I'm not going to retag them the hard way. As they say "work smarter, not harder". I'll wait until this problem gets fixed - if it gets fixed. Otherwise, MC is unsuitable for tagging in large quantities (unless I'm missing something fundamental).

Scott-

nila · « **Reply #10 on:** July 23, 2003, 12:18:54 am »

sraymond - my thoughts exactly.

My image tagging is at a stand still and is going to remain there until it's fixed.

I'm enough of a geek already and spend too much time on the computer without all the extra time this would require me to spend. If the tagging isn't fast and easy it's just not worth it to me.

Shame really cause I'm itching to tag my images as I'm making a php page to automatically create dynamic photo albums from our library. Its nearly done but without the images tagged theres no point to it.

Veazer · « **Reply #11 on:** July 23, 2003, 02:16:17 am »

I'm not sure if this is possible, but could MC use the metadata of .jpg files in a manner similar to ID3 tags? Can you add your own fields? If so, a crashed library would NOT mean that the tags were lost, the user would just have to re-scan the files.

Anyone know if it would be possible to add this feature?

JimH · « **Reply #12 on:** July 23, 2003, 04:13:04 am »

We do tag the jpg files now.

Veazer · « **Reply #13 on:** July 24, 2003, 06:30:26 am »

Quote

We do tag the jpg files now.

Excellent! Well done guys, I don't know of anything else that does that.

What image formats can be tagged other than JPG? I know PSD files have some fields, but nothing else jumps to mind (Hmm, maybe .tiff files?)

a2hoo · « **Reply #14 on:** July 25, 2003, 05:09:38 am »

Is there a way MC can "import Adobe Photoshop Album" tags or suppor them? I have APA and am intrigued by the idea of using MC for everything. However, it would be too tedious to retag everything (over 1000 photos).

Also, you may want to consider having a thumbnail for each "person tag" so for a2hoo, I could see a thumbnail of myself. I obviously know who everybody is, but it is nice to have the visual tag as well as the text

nila · « **Reply #15 on:** July 25, 2003, 05:18:52 am »

I personally dont like the thumbs - thats one of the things that I dont like about APA - the thumbs mean that each persons name takes up sooo much space - I just want a small little thing to drag - not some big clunky tag.

sdgrizdan · « **Reply #16 on:** July 25, 2003, 09:15:40 pm »

Quote

I have APA and am intrigued by the idea of using MC for everything. However, it would be too tedious to retag everything (over 1000 photos).

dont think about using MC as an image organizer until they get this pane issue (hirearchy) fixed. The tags are way too tedius to implement because you have to add the tags manually to each image. Dont get fooled by the name; the quick tag feature is not quick at all at this point.

nila · « **Reply #17 on:** July 26, 2003, 04:23:11 am »

Is this bug going to be fixed? It's a BIG showstopper yet it hasn't been mentioned in ANY of the build threads and there is no mention in here that it is going to be?

sdgrizdan · « **Reply #18 on:** July 26, 2003, 09:35:18 am »

Quote

It's a BIG showstopper yet it hasn't been mentioned in ANY of the build threads and there is no mention in here that it is going to be?

Until it is, I'm not even going to consider using MC to tagg my photo's - it's just tooo much work.

Amen Nila. From now on I'm going to mention it in every build thread because I am becoming antsy and want to begin to organize all my pictures very soon! This doesnt seem like a very hard problem to fix at all. The people at JRiver seem to be focusing on the music part of their application, because this bug becomes very obvious if you do even a little tagging w/ the panes in MC.

sraymond · « **Reply #19 on:** July 26, 2003, 02:20:15 pm »

Quote

I personally dont like the thumbs - thats one of the things that I dont like about APA - the thumbs mean that each persons name takes up sooo much space - I just want a small little thing to drag - not some big clunky tag.

You know about changing the tag size, right?

Scott-

sraymond · « **Reply #20 on:** July 26, 2003, 02:23:59 pm »

Quote

Amen Nila. From now on I'm going to mention it in every build thread because I am becoming antsy and want to begin to organize all my pictures very soon! This doesnt seem like a very hard problem to fix at all. The people at JRiver seem to be focusing on the music part of their application, because this bug becomes very obvious if you do even a little tagging w/ the panes in MC.

I'm glad I'm there's a bunch of us asking for this - I'd imagine it will increase the chances of it getting fixed. It's hard waiting in the dark, but JRiver has come through on a number of occasions, so I hope this will be no exception.

The big attraction to using MC to manage photos is slideshows with music... other than that, there's not much it would (or could?) do that APA doesn't. Of course, APA has lots of advantages that MC doesn't...

Scott-

nila · « **Reply #21 on:** July 26, 2003, 02:40:33 pm »

I didn't, I might give it another shot and see what it's like.

Thanks for the info.

Matt · « **Reply #22 on:** July 26, 2003, 08:37:56 pm »

Mixed tag / search mode

We liked it, but it failed usability tests.

List everything in tag mode

It makes a big mess when everything gets listed. Maybe a better solution would be auto-complete in the "<new item>" dialog.

nila · « **Reply #23 on:** July 27, 2003, 03:40:18 am »

Just out of curiosity - not trying to like be all snide or anything - have you tried tagging a large amount of images with MC?

It makes no sense for values to disappear when tagging - NO other program I've seen does this and it really gives the impression that MC has a bug - you tag some files, move to another bunch to tag them and suddenly ur like - um, what happened to all my 'people' to tag with? They're all gone. It's just not useable and to have to re-add each value, even with an auto complete feature still means a lot of extra work when tagging 10,000 features. So much extra effort and work in fact that for me personally - if I'm the only one then ignore me - I just wouldn't consider it worth the energy required to tag using MC.

You say it makes it a mess if all values are listed - how so? If it's because there are too many values and the users list gets too long then that just means they have a lot of values to chose from to tag with - removing some of these values to stop the screen appearing cluttered is not a solution as for people with a lot of values it's going to mean EVEN MORE values they have to re-add each time.

If the list is getting too long and unmanageable then yeah that could be a problem and might need a solution, but not showing their values isn't a solution.

If you genuinely feel that alot of users would want to see only a few of their values and that this would be the majority choice then how about making a button on the 'locaiton' tool bar that toggles between all values and some values - dont put the button on the toolbar by default and this change will negatively effect no one - they wont see it or know about it.

For those of us that find the current way making MC not useable for tagging with we can add the button, toggle it to the other mode and get on with tagging happily.

Would that work?

sdgrizdan · « **Reply #24 on:** July 27, 2003, 08:59:47 am »

Quote

Mixed tag / search mode

We liked it, but it failed usability tests.

List everything in tag mode

It makes a big mess when everything gets listed. Maybe a better solution would be auto-complete in the "<new item>" dialog.

Fails usability tests?? Right now MC fails the image usability test as it stands. I agree w/ Nila's idea of having a toggle option. Taking away tagging options and not having everything listed makes no sense at all.

sraymond · « **Reply #25 on:** July 27, 2003, 01:10:26 pm »

Quote

Mixed tag / search mode

We liked it, but it failed usability tests.

List everything in tag mode

It makes a big mess when everything gets listed. Maybe a better solution would be auto-complete in the "<new item>" dialog.

While the mixed-mode/list everything fails usability tests, the current method fails functionality tests. You can always educate users how to use the more diffuclt features, but no amount of help can let users achieve functionality that just isn't there.

I've been quite impressed with the progress MC has made with image management (and I've said so on a number of occasions)... but this issue represents a serious divide that many of us aren't willing to cross.

Tagging *must* get better, or it won't be used for managing large amounts of media (I wouldn't do more than a couple hundred of images this way).

There have been a number of suggestions.... I hope JRiver can make use of some of them:
- For searching, I really like the smart "AND vs. OR".
- For tagging, I like seeing all the tags ( - if the list gets too large, grouping could fix that... maybe a "group" filed of People followed by the actual "People" field?).
- Mixed-mode could be a third option (Search, Quick Tag, and Mixed).

I'm glad to see the discussion is contunuing... I guess that means no doors have been closed yet.

Scott-

Doof · « **Reply #26 on:** July 27, 2003, 02:05:30 pm »

The way I see it... not having the entire list of options is really no different than just using the plain old File Properties box to edit the tags. Except that "Quick Tag" actually takes LONGER to do so. Once I've navigated to a group of pictures to add "Doof" to the list of people which is quicker? Just clicking on the People box in File Properties and entering Doof, or clicking the Quick Tag button to toggle into Quick Tag mode, clicking on "New Person", typing Doof anyway, then toggling out of Quick Tag?

There's really nothing quick about it, in my mind.

The first version of Quick Tag was actually really fast. The only problem with it's mixed mode was it was too easy to accidentally change a tag. Now with the two seperate modes, it's too slow to actually be useful. I think what we're asking for is just that the toggle button take us into mixed mode rather than just always being in it. That way we toggle it once when we're ready to tag, navigate by clicking on the text, change tags by clicking on the icon, then toggle back out. It then becomes quick again.

Allowing the full list of values just makes it even quicker and easier.

I know you guys hate this, and even I have argued against numerous options, but why not add a Quick Tag Options button in Tree & View Settings that takes you to two checkboxes?

Allow browsing in Quick Tag mode.
Quick Tag mode lists all possible values.

That way everybody can get what they want out of it. There will be varying levels of quickness and complexity with just two settings.

I can tell you right now that the way it works now is not only not quick, but it's actually slower than just using File Properties or inline editting, and it's a feature that's just going to go to waste on my system. It's a great idea but as crippled as it is now, it's kind of useless.

Marko · « **Reply #27 on:** July 27, 2003, 02:42:17 pm »

Quote

The first version of Quick Tag was actually really fast. The only problem with it's mixed mode was it was too easy to accidentally change a tag. Now with the two seperate modes, it's too slow to actually be useful. I think what we're asking for is just that the toggle button take us into mixed mode rather than just always being in it. That way we toggle it once when we're ready to tag, navigate by clicking on the text, change tags by clicking on the icon, then toggle back out. It then becomes quick again.

This sounds an excellent solution.
For new users going the "what happens if I press this" route, there could be a popup dialogue showing a quick warning of where it's taking them, with a "don't show this again" checkbox for when they've got the message.

nila · « **Reply #28 on:** July 27, 2003, 03:30:03 pm »

How about doing a poll - just ask users how many of them want half the values to disappear? I honestly cant see many vote for the current way it is - it's just illogical - why would people want their tagging options to vanish after having already entered a value?

And your right about the failed useability tests Matt, but as Doof pointed out - this is because this was all there was and people, me included, found this too dangerous, to leave our friends using our computers and able to mess up our tags this easily.
With mixed mode like we have now though - in browse mode our tags are perfectly safe and so it wouldn't fail those same tests.
Mixed mode is a LOT faster a way of tagging than the current way.

Also, your right about it being confusing to new users but I agree with Marko about having a prompt - I've said it many a time with many a more complicated feature of MC - a simple box appearing explaining a feature the first time it is used with a : dont show this again' checkbox.

The first time the user uses the feature it explains it to them - after this they can hide it.

sdgrizdan · « **Reply #29 on:** July 28, 2003, 05:54:49 pm »

As of version 9.1.223 this thread is officially done! YAYE!! Its fixed!!! Thanks a lot to the JRiver Team!

I heart Media Center!

Doof · « **Reply #30 on:** July 28, 2003, 08:49:57 pm »

Well, not entirely. We still can't browse while in Tagging Mode, so it's still a bit cumbersome when trying to select different subsets of files to tag, but displaying all possible values is a huge step towards making it more useable. I applaud the guys for making this change.

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: Important Bug: Tagging (Read 5661 times)

nila

sraymond

sraymond

nila

a2hoo

nila

nila

sraymond

sraymond

nila

nila

sraymond

Marko

nila