Sorting in exposure time filter
entries in exposure time filter are "sorted" alphabeticaly but shorter to longer time would be more logical, helpful
Petr Ganaj
shared this idea
-
John Smith commented
You've posted a good graphic of the screen shot, it is a big problem because when the list is long it creates a peculiar sorting headache - when for instance filtering for all exposures longer than a quarter second, one must check boxes at both the top and bottom of the exposure filter list.
I would correct you on one detail, the list is not sorted "alphabetically" nor is it sorted by ASCII value, it is sorted completely uselessly, by the absolute value of the first numeral, which because both fractional and decimal values exist in the data set, does not correspond to the logical order of exposures as used in photography - length of time.
My screenshot is nowhere near as elegant as yours, but I included it as it adds the terms fractional & decimal to the report.
-
Petr Ganaj
commented
Current sorting :)
