Folder name search fails if numeric

The search field, methods, and restrictions should be better documented.
Most of my organization depends on folders as they were named upon import.
Numeric searches apparently require wildcards to return results.
Mylio, oh Mylio - the default search should be more inclusive, and allow tightening of results via operators and wildcards, not the other way around.

Example:
Folder name: 1928 Times

VAULT location:
J:\Mylio\1928 Times\JPG_Low\

File name:
Chattanooga_Daily_Times_Sun__Jul_1__1928_ p6_copy.jpg

Search term: 1928 (ZERO RESULTS)
Search term: *1928* (finds 113 photos via OCR and folder name/path. Finds ZERO folders!)
Search term: folder:1928 (ZERO RESULTS)
Search term: folder:*1928* (finally finds the folder)

Search term: Times (finds folder named 1928 Times)

I could go on and on…

It’s not actually a numeric thing. It’s because values between 1900 and 2099 are treated as dates. Lower or higher values won’t be an issue.

I take it you don’t have any pictures dated in 1928?

folder:1928 and *1928* should definitely work though. I’ll fix that.

If by ‘treated as dates’ means EXIF ‘date taken’ then why would dates previous to digital photography be automatically filtered? The majority of my managed images are pre-1960 scans from film.

The search feature should be intuitive and at least as capable as built-in OS file search.
As it is now, I’m finding myself having to augment many searches external to Mylio to find what I’m looking for.

Another question / observation on searching for folders…
I have photos stored in folders on my PC categorized by year taken.
Top level folder: 1974-2020
Subfolder example: 1974-1979

Logically, one would think searching for folder:*1974* would yield only folders with that number in the title.
But instead it results in ALL folders within the top level folder (75 of them).
However, searching for *1974* only returns two folders, the top level and the subfolder.

It’s not just EXIF ‘date taken’. Mylio starts off with EXIF date taken, but Mylio allows you to date your photos in a much more powerful way. We specifically have support for pre-1960 scans by allowing you to only specify a partial date (like a decade) or a range of dates (e.g. you may know it’s somewhere between January 1945 and June 1948) etc.

Dating or partially dating the photos will cause the photos to show up under those dates in calendar as well as then causing them to be correctly searched.

That is specifically correct, if somewhat unintuitive.

Specifying a specific term (like folder:) in search everywhere means you are searching for an item containing that term. Doesn’t matter if you’re in All Photos, Map, Album or Folder view, it means you’re searching for items in that folder. In All Photos view it means you’re looking for photos inside that folder. In folder view it means you’re looking for folders inside that folder. The meaning and result set is the same across all the views. If a photo is in “All Photos” when you search with folder:, its albums will be in the “Album” view and its folders will be in the “Folder” view. So the meaning of folder: doesn’t change across views, it’s the same set of results, just with different parts of the data.

HOWEVER, searching without any term has a different meaning on every search tab:

In “All Photos” it means: Search for photos with this keyword, title, caption, filename, people, date or ocr. (And if specified after an IN it adds to that list: folders, albums and places).
In “Folders” it means: “Search for a folder called this”
In “Albums” it means: “Search for an album called this”
In “People” it means: “Search for a person called this”
In “Map” it means: “Search for a place called this”

For most functionality you should just be able to do use the loose term (ala 1928 as you have above), it’s just that it’s broken right now which forces you into using folder: in the Folder view, but that’s not really the same thing as searching for just a name and viewing Folders with that name. That’s definitely a bug and I’ll get this fixed.

Thank you for the details. No wonder I was confused! I suspect the bug was introduced somewhere along the way because previously I wasn’t finding myself as frustrated in the search efforts.
If there isn’t one already - I’d encourage and value a ‘wiki’ for advanced options such as the search logic described here.
I do a reasonable amount of searching for answers before asking here, and do find a few bits & pieces in the community forums.
The website FAQ/support is a bit too shallow and perhaps written for 1st time users.

The better I understand Mylio - the more I love it.

1 Like