[FEATURE] Image Visibility Control (Public vs Restricted)

[patchingfailed]

Context

In wedding workflows there is usually:

• a set of images meant for sharing with guests
• and a subset intended only for the couple / photographer

This is not about “public internet access”, but about different user groups within the same event gallery.

Proposed Visibility Model

Define visibility relative to authenticated user roles:

Hierarchy example:

• Photographer / Admin
  • sees everything
• Client / Commissioner (e.g. couple)
  • sees everything
• Guests / Staff of client
  • see only unrestricted images

So:

• Public (Unrestricted)
  Visible to all users with access to the gallery (including guests)

• Restricted
  Visible only to elevated roles (Photographer/Admin + Client)

This keeps the concept simple while covering common real-world workflows.

---

Describe the solution you'd like

Add a per-image visibility attribute:

• Public (default)
• Restricted

Editable:

• During import (default flag)
• After import via bulk edit (similar to category editing)

Behavior:

• Filtering/rendering automatically respects user role
• No category dependency
• Works at image level

---

Use Case

• Keep one cohesive event gallery
• Avoid splitting galleries
• Avoid external permission handling
• Provide privacy control for selected images

---

Implementation Scope Suggestion

MVP

• Binary flag
• Role check based on existing authentication roles
• Bulk edit support

Future (optional)

• More granular role targeting
• Custom visibility groups
• Per-category defaults

---

Additional Note

The goal is not to introduce a complex permission matrix — just a lightweight visibility layer aligned with typical event photography workflows.

[the-luap]

I am not sure yet how to integrate this. will take some days for me to check it how to do it