I propose a discussion on the “relevance” of the new collection filters. My goal is that together, we try to reach a common conclusion about if this is useful or not, and more importantly “why”. Lets just base our statements on logic and rationality, whenever possible, and have a friendly attitude. All opinions are welcome, as long as “civility” and respect is fully maintained.
So from my perspective, I see an inconsistency with the new collection filter and the collection panel itself. In the collection panel, we have already a powerful filtering mechanism, already present in 3.8. We can filter according to a huge array of features, quite amazing !
Now, with this new collection filtering panel, we also have a filtering mechanism, but presented differently. As far as I can see, there is no additional features offered by the collection filters panel (am I right ?? ) regarding filtering itself. What is new though is the fact that you can select which filter is “duplicated” at the top of the pictures grid. The idea I think is to provide quick access to some filters. I concede that if you have many filters, the access is maybe less direct in the collection filter panel. And since it can anyway be disabled by unpinning the filter, we may think it is actually a good idea. But I wonder if it is actually. It is because in practice, I tend to think we use quite few filters and in that case going directly to the collection filters panel is also very quick. And since the space is rather limited at the top of the pictures grid, we cant anyway add too many filters. So I come to the conclusion that there is no real added value in being able to display the duplicated filters at the top of the pictures grid.
So, my proposal (opened for discussion) would be to remove the filtering mechanism from the collection panel, keep the collection filters panel (this way we remove similar duplicated capabilities and we have a more “open” (“aéré”) way to display filters). But we remove the quick access duplicated filters at the top of the pictures grid since its true value is arguably debatable.
I think my main issue is with the UI of the “range” filters (particularly the rating range filter). I did raise an issue before the code freeze for darktable 4.0 and there is some useful discussion there.
My main issues are…
By default the range rating filter draws the eye as it’s the brightest thing on the screen (especially on darker themes)
It’s much harder to see at-a-glance what ratings are selected, since if you select 1-2, 3-4, 4-5, these all result in two stars being highighted on screen. You have to physically count along the widget to easily see what you have selected. With the old method I just saw ** in the corner of my eye and I knew what it meant without further thought.
We seem to have invented a new type of UI widget here (based on the timeline view – which I also never use), and when it comes to filters, there are some well-understood and well-used design patterns (used on websites, spreadsheets etc.). To change something this standardised needs a strong use case, and I’m not sure there is a problem here that range widgets solve. I believe the main reason for these widgets is “selection with fewer clicks” but honestly I was more than happy to scroll my mouse wheel over a combobox and I can’t really see when I’d want to select “between 3 and 4 stars” – also that latter use case is already catered for by the collections module.
I also can’t see myself ever needing to add any more filters (other than rating/color labels) to the top bar.
I think there might be a longer-term intention to integrate all this into a single module but I’m not sure.
The idea is (or was) that the collections module allows you to define a collection of images to appear in the lighttable view (I usually display the contents of a single directory) and then the stars (and color labels) allow you to perform quick filters on that view for the purposes of culling/image selection. I use the star ratings (legacy widget) and color labels regularly and their presence in the top bar is useful. I would prefer to make this UI as Aurelien has done in R&Darktable (simple rating and color label filters in the top bar, keep the collections module unchanged, remove the collection filters module).
I have read the entire discussion about the “star system” : very interesting and it shows that devs have put a lot of thinking on that thing already, so beware of the rapid judgement here, the problem is more complex that it appears. I do not see a problem if this is a “new widget” : why would it be ? Once you know you can “slide” the mouse (this is not obvious at first, I admit), it becomes quite intuitive and fast. This being said, most people seemed to agree that it is not ready and improvements are required for 4.2. One of the problem is that it is too dominant in the whole screen (your first issue). I personally find it useful to be able to select “rapidly” a range (lets say 2 to 4) : there are many practical use cases where you need that kind of things.
As for “removing the collection filter” panel, we agree I think that there is feature duplication here. But why do you find the filtering better in the current collection module ? It is more compact , yes, (because no more module needed), but it makes the collection module more complex, since you mix both displaying collections with specifying the filters. With the collection filters, you separate both (pattern - separation of concerns) and you open up more possibilities since you have more space to do things
I agree that the filter in the collection should be removed. This is the plan, but we did not had enough time to do that for 4.0. The goal is to get feedback (thanks for stating!) and see how we can move forward and have distinct module for the collection and the filtering.
thanks Pascal, this is great ! It now makes sense. Since 4.0 is out, there is no need to discuss if it would have been better to wait to complete the work before merging. This being said, you agree that more works could be beneficial to improve the star system or are you rather feeling comfortable with the current implementation ? As far as you know, is there any “document” that layout the current vision about this ?
The collections module is perfectly adequate, it’s UI is fine, and it’s been around for ages, so is pretty stable code-wise. Could the code do with some tidying up? Sure. But I’d rather incrementally adjust stable code than rip it out and replace it with something entirely new. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I don’t like the UI/UX of the range widgets, and I can’t think of a good way to improve them (I have tried, honestly – if I haven’t posted suggestions it’s because I dismissed them all shortly after they occurred to me). Those widgets seemed like a good idea at first glance but on reflection I prefer the more “traditional” approach of the collections module.
As I say the idea (at least to me) is that a collection is something you adjust occasionally and the “quick filters” (the top panel) something you do often. As such the collections module does the computationally-expensive stuff (selecting from the database) and the quick filters just act on the cut-down list of images selected by the collections module. There’s just no need to add lots of extra quick filters for things you’ll rarely filter on.
Just as a devil’s advocate. I am either too lazy or too disorganized to ever use star rating and tag etc etc. maybe one day I will. My folder system is all I need. So essentially a lightable that is much more than a browser is overkill for me. A version with the leanest fastest most stable code would suit me fine. It would even be cool if custom module groups controlled modules as modular components and so you could totally dissociate or reintroduce any modules that you will likely never use. I know this is not possible and there would be issues with old edits etc . I say this only to point out that I suspect there are quite a range of users. I wonder how many people use all these features in Lightable and maybe other modules… It’s the old 80% of the people use 20% of the features… At some point adding features can skew this ratio at the expense of performance and stability… Maybe this is the crossroads
it doesnt help to collect statements why someone doesn’t need this or that.
it’s more important to get a broad set of use cases to get a base for a prioritization.
in the end i won’t be surprised if these ends up in three major use cases:
a way to have table of contents like current filmroll, folder or tag, dates or whatever based collection
a quick but simple way to filter a collection in lighttable and darkroom
a sophisticated expert mode to define filters for very specific purposes
or a one size fits all approach to try to satisfy everybody. That would make dt extraordinarily stunning because no one never achieved this…
I myself find that new filter the best add and quicker and easier than old one (just one click or one drag and click instead of 2 to 4 clicks) but we are all different. For your first issue, I agree even if I do that. I can’t find a better way by now, but I began to have some new ideas (that will need a specific and different code because actually this use the same as other “timeline” range filters).
For the second, I will probably never understand how it can be difficult to quickly see how many stars are selected in just 5 stars. It took me less than a second and it’s not harder than old one. So as you with old one, I knew what it meant with new one without further thought. And at the opposite, with previous one, I find it worse to click on a menu then select stars and if needed click on a second menu and click on condition one (equal or less than, etc.). But I understand that we are all different. I so can’t help and can’t have ideas how to deal with that.
Collections module filter is not fine UI. We have had complaints of some users, especially about boolean symbols used and so the way to set conditions. It’s easy for people like us with good maths skills but not for all users. And with such tiny UI, boolean symbols are the only good way. Other way would override that UI part. So having better way to see filers was needed. Given the controversial feedback (some people like the new way, others hate it ; not easy). I’m not a fan of range filters (those with timeline display) but I never like timeline ways and I never (or rarely) use those filters (even with historic filters).
So, even if historic filters are not broken, they are not user-friendly for all users and this need to be improved. I don’t have real ideas actually to find a better way between old and new filters but it would be good to take care of old filters issues AND of course new ones, to find a good way. I’m sure we could find it.
I’ve seen some other software, like Lightroom or Digikam. They have filters that took more place than old darktable ones and sometimes more than new ones. But it’s mainly text. Not sure it’s so good but maybe something to think about.
You’re completely right and I think this all what we want. So let’s continue to that direction. How to make that better, regarding what is good and what is not good with old filters and new ones.
I must admit, that the filter UI and the introduced collection filters module are the main reason, why I really currently take a quite close look at R&Darktable.
For me the filtering and the collection filters are non-intuitive and also the UI representation e.g. of the filters for star ratings does not work. I have the impression that there now are 3 places to look/configure/switch for filtering in my collection with parts not yet thought through completly and seeming “not ready for primetime”.
How e.g. would I filter for specific tags in the collection/folder using the new “collection filters”? in dt 3.8. this is pretty straightforward with drill down configuring the filter in the collection module. I did not see a specific filter for tags in the “collection filters”? The “search” filter as for as the tooltip tells me does not only search in tags, but also in descriptions …
So I really must admit, that I don’t like the direction darktable here is taking in breaking/confusing well known collection filtering methods.
And you could just not use it in darktable and keep going with “old” filters.
Apart of that, I’ve explained some things about why new filters had been done and why we can’t only keep historic filters as they are. And yes, new filters need to be improved. Keeping 3 places to filters is of course not the goal. On start, those had been done to replace old ones. For many reasons, this was not possible, even not good too, to do that in one step.
Said all that, as @MStraeten said, “it doesnt help to collect statements why someone doesn’t need this or that.”
So now, all is needed and wanted, is ideas to have a good filtering system. Something maybe between old and new one. And better than both.
I use really few filters, so I don’t have ideas by now but with more people we can go on.
I still haven’t found the new collection-filter thing… imagine that. That means that I didn’t look for it, didn’t need it and also wasn’t left wanting with the ‘old’ system.
That boolean-building of conditions, I thought that was the new system… until I see it’s still in R&Darktable, so that isn’t the thing that’s ripped out there… so I didn’t even notice the new system while still running 3.9 devbuilds.
Maybe it helps to know the reason or the use case for the new system? Why was it created in the first place, what are the problems with the old system that it tries to fix?
Otherwise you’ll only collect people saying yay or nay to one or the other, I’m afraid.
I understand that some people want something simple, but that also means some people want more control and options. And the old system was perfectly capable of both I guess. If people have no interest in building a somewhat query, they’ll rarely need more than a simple filter-on-star-or-rejected and/or ‘search string filter’-box.
The good:
New UI is prettier
Collection filters to the side are laid out in easy to understand manner without need for understanding weird and tiny symbols
The bad:
Duplication of function in 3 places.
Removal of recent collections (yes I know you can access it via history, but that’s an extra click for an oft used feature. Very annoying. Also confusing, as there are two different history buttons).
Stars default highlighting at top is too bright and distracting.
Click and drag to select. Don’t like it. Doesnt feel as kind on the fingers. And doesn’t reduce clicks when you need to click and drag over again because you selected the wrong range first time (easy to do).
Needing two tooltips when hovering over stars to tell you their meaning.
Solutions:
I mostly agree with @quovadit above.
There should be a base collection - eg, film roll, folder, tag, etc… Then there should be one filtering system only. (If you really need two - one top and one side - it should all be part of the same code and module, not two different ones as is current).
Recent collections needs to be accessible in one click always.
Get rid of click and drag.
Get rid of all weird symbols that aren’t easily understood, but keep those that are (basic Math functions like =<> etc)
As with anything I post, it’s “for what it’s worth” and intended in a positive manner. Kudos to everyone involved in making DT what it is.
I pretty much agree with Todd.
I have a hierarchical folder structure that’s fundamentally self-documenting and new images are reviewed / culled in a staging folder before they even make it into their permanent folder – indeed before their folder is even created. Would that change if I regularly shot hundreds of images? Dunno, but for me personally probably not.
I find that – on my system at least – the lighttable is just sluggish enough and the import process just enough extra overhead that I review, (very rarely) rate and cull in another image browser first, usually XnView MP. If the lighttable were faster I could do it all in one place, but I’m more productive in XnView, et. al. at that point in the process. In all fairness I’m probably more familiar with them than DT but not that much.
The bottom line is, in the lighttable I basically never rate and minimally tag, if at all. The discussion of ratings are about a subsystem I’ve not explored. I tagged quite a bit at first since it looked neat, but haven’t kept it up (just don’t need it). Functionally the lighttable is more or less a browser for me. A fairly slow browser.
Even I was able to restore the last one “hold 6 and scroll” (the upgrade from 3.8 to 4.0 removed it by the way)- there is no indication on the top screen what it is doing. I have to keep both open in order to see the filter on 2 completely different areas.
Then it is possible to go into disconnect - it displays 1 star on the top and 2 stars on the rating panel on the left. So - what is what?
From end user point of view - while I can work with either views - 3.8 and 4.0 - it is more strain to understand what is selected - 1 star or 2 stars etc. in 4.0 ( - 3.8 was clearer.
I like the option to select between 2 and 4 stars with a drag of a mouse but for the last 2 hours I was unable to assign a short cut to this functionality.
The “and” “or” mathematical symbols I don’t mind them as there is a pop up on mouse over. Even if the user is not used to them - it is possible to figure it out by hovering on top.
But I really miss the <>= etc. on the top.
Not sure what is the future vision of this module. Currently I see elements I like (range of stars selected) and elements that I don’t like at all (the need to keep the collection filter open and the lack of the logical symbols <>= etc on top)
The top bar is really in need of its own config/hamburger menu to choose what is shown. Having it tied to the left hand module is terribly confusing and it makes no sense to duplicate functionality in that way.
I do like that the sort order can be part of a preset now.
I manage my photos in a file manaager. I just import them from the different folders to darktable. I do tag the images in darktable and occasionally use star ratings.
I think for me the filteroptions in the top panel are sufficient enough.
Sad to admit but this feature - there is something very much wrong with it (or something wrong with me). Is there a way to disable it? AP was talking about a check box but I couldn’t find it.
If you need a video let me know and I will try to record one. Perhaps the intention was good and I can see good parts of selection 2-4 stars or 3-5 but personally - for me the drawback is bigger than the benefit.
The reason is not only because I can’t utilize shortcuts effectively but worse is that I can’t be completely confident that I am seeing the exact images that I believe I should be seeing.
Maybe there is something that I am failing to grasp… The closest I can get to is reset the collection filter on the left and completely close it - abandon completely <>=etc and use 7 scroll only and this shortcut behaves differently - if I am to click 1 star or 2 stars - it travels up and down (but only 1 star). If I am to click on 5 stars - it expands 4-5 3-5… all I think I will continue tomorrow. On the good side - looks like DT4 is faster.
I think I will continue tomorrow. On the good side - looks like DT4 is faster.