I don’t think so. These are just configuration files not database files
1 Like
I haven’t noticed - seems to pick all what tagged.
This is getting ridiculous !
I completely un-installed digiKam, even to the point of manually deleting every last vestige from the registry.
I performed a new pristine virgin installation of the most recent stable release that I could ascertain, version 5.9.0
One by one, I meticulously reinstated my entire photo collection of finished jpegs ONLY.
Once I got the entire collection reestablished in digiKam, I closed my eyes and investigated Tags View.
THE STUPID PROBLEM IS STILL THERE.
Just for fun, I purged the metadata from a selected group that were not displaying properly.
I created some brand new header tags and brand new sub-tags.
I brought these up in Tags View and still they had the problem.
I did learn another quirk about the situation: I had a particular tag that I knew for fact should have had 22 images displaying from a certain “collection” or “Album” if you prefer.
Only five were showing; the blue header-bar said there should be eight; and, I knew for fact that there should be 22.
I removed the tag from the five that were showing and the remaining seventeen that had not been showing magically appeared with full control abilities.
Just for fun, I moved to a different HDD and that did not help a bit.
I was determined to get to the bottom of this situation, emphasis on the “was”; I think I will take up drinking instead.
So far, all thumbnails show up and work fine in Albums View.
Just about every time I use digiKam, I find more and more images wrongly tagged with various random tags that no way did I apply.
Surely I am not the only human alive that has had this issue.
The big mystery is that there was no problem at all and everything worked perfectly right up until it all went haywire.
Also, since I did the new install, digiKam now crashes frequently for no reason that I can fathom; and, when it reopens after a crash, it has forgotten where I was.
I have numerous photo editing programs and not the least problem with the performance of any of them — only digiKam.
Perhaps your cat tag of subs isn’t registering? I have resorted to using subs only I dunno how to turn on cats.
Have u used other soft on u pics? How tags are written to DB/images/sidecars might not be the most compatible. Depends.
I don’t think you have ever investigated the tags on problematic images with a different program - or did I miss it? When I was using some very olde digikam version (4.x) I managed to **** up my tags pretty well, and digikam was even more confused than I was. I do think nowadays it is much more robust with regards to “weird” tags, but maybe it isn’t.
tldr: I propose to examine a problematic file for all its tags (e.g. with exiftool -a -G1, I think there is also an exiftool gui program for windows) and see whether there is something weird. If there is nothing obvious, do the same with a picture that works just fine and compare.
1 Like
I can see all the applied tags in (to only name a few of the programs I checked) Windows Explorer, FastStone, XnView, etc.
Every tag in my entire photo collection has been applied with digiKam.
I have noticed that, although not all of the problem images, but the majority of them, were images taken in 2017.
What blows my mind is that I completely purged my system of digiKam, as if it had never existed; then, I installed it anew and folder-by-folder reinstated my collection and the problem is right there as if I hadn’t done a thing.
Right up until I first noticed the problem, there was no problem.
I think I have a recent version of Exiftool in my “things to install someday” folder; maybe I will get it installed and see if it reveals anything.
Thanks for the suggestions.
I hate to admit it; but, I investigated Lightroom to see if it would be a viable and hopefully working solution to my situation; however, working correctly or not, Lightrooms tagging and tag-searching abilities fail miserably when compared to even a crippled digiKam.
That’s not so surprising. I know from my windows only times that setting up from a clean install was the solution to everything (and it definitely is a good thing to do in many cases), but it is not a solution to everything. It just makes it very unlikely this is due to disk and thus database corruption. In my opinion you shouldn’t invest any more time in the “reinstall” vector - I just didn’t write that because without having an alternative idea, it just sounds like me being an a***ole.
That’s more interesting. If the reason isn’t that you just never looked closely enough before, this is a pointer that maybe something changed between the last time it worked and when you noticed it doesn’t - but I guess you have thought that over and over already.
That’s good, but that’s not enough. Probably - I don’t know the capabilities of these programs but I highly doubt they do anything than reading one specific metadata field. Digikam operates on various ones for compatibility with all kinds of programs and also for nested tag support, and if the wrong one is “corrupted”, that might through it off (it shouldn’t of course, but it did in the far past and might still now).
2 Likes
This is a screenshot that exhibits the weird behavior of white rectangles appearing wherever I left-click a missing thumbnail that I have managed to make to reappear.
The thumbnails look as if all is well; however, if I attempt to select them for whatever reason, either they disappear again, or the white rectangles just sort of erase them.
Very curiously, I can press the Windows key and all the missing thumbnails will immediately appear — but I cannot do anything with them; likewise, when I attempt to take a screenshot, as soon as the screenshot selecting tool appears on the screen, all of the missing thumbnails immediately show up and thus I cannot capture the evidence of them being gone.
This screenshot also proves that I was not hallucinating when I said that, before the re-install, I was able to view two rather large thumbnails, instead of the three smallish one that are all I can manage now.
When I had uninstalled digiKam, I went back and installed the first version that I ever had and could not for the life of me manage to figure out how I managed to get the two larger thumbnails.
Although I do not have a screenshot, I could also choose to view a single very large thumbnail exactly as you see the two, except that it would be a single column of thumbnails, one per row.
Being able to do such allowed me to be much more accurate when adding tags, as I could better see the details.
I started a thread on digikam users mailing list.
Could you reply to Gilles please?
http://digikam.1695700.n4.nabble.com/digiKam-users-White-rectangles-over-thumbnails-td4707555.html
1 Like
[quote=“Andrius, post:63, topic:9835, full:true”]
I started a thread on digikam users mailing list.
Could you reply to Gilles please?[/quote]
Thanks.
I did reply as soon as I saw this and it said “waiting for my reply to be approved”
I have not yet seen my reply show up on the board.
Thanks again.
It usually happens when you attached files to the reply. I find it is easier to upload images/videos to Google Drive, Box, Dropbox, Onedrive, etc. and share a link.
I hadn’t attached the files just yet; I asked whether they wanted the jpegs “before tags applied” or “after tags applied”
I got to thinking about it and I sort of figure “after tags”
Thanks.
I would rather share both versions - before and after adding tags.
Good idea; I will gather a few samples.
digiKam groups - so much trouble! get a DB glitch and all grouping info is gone - GONE!
some kind of backup/reapply group info to files is needed(!)
Yes, grouping information is database only, meaning if your database is trashed, your grouping information is gone. Conclusion: Include the database in your backup process.
My problem has remained through several data base replacements and two complete re-installs and has gotten exponentially worse.
Now, when I bring up a tag group that has images in several collections, I will get collections overlapping collections, meaning the thumbnails are stacked atop each other in cascade fashion.
I got busy with something else and need to upload my sample images.
I never before had any dealings with this Cloud business; I wonder if I just loaded them in my Flickr account if that would work ?
Better not flick, you never know what those services do with metadata. There’s lots of ways, if you don’t use any of the usual suspects (google drive, dropbox, …) there’s also non-registration services, e.g. https://wetransfer.com/.
However overlapping thumbnails definitely does not look like a metadata issue. If you haven’t done that already, do screenshots and run in debug mode (I think on windows there’s something included for that, not sure) to capture logs and report them to the digikam bugtracker.
Well, another experiment failed.
To see whether the problem carried over to Linux, I installed Linux Mint 19 Cinnamon, got the initial ticks worked out of that, and installed digiKam 5.6.0.
I have only gotten a very few of my pictures initiated into the Linux digiKam and I have all the same problems that I was having in Windows plus several new ones.
One of the weirdest is that, when I am in Tags View and click on a tag to view all images that carry that tag, the thumbnails keep swapping places as I mouse over them; for instance, a thumbnail with a red truck will become a thumbnail with a green car.
Plus, in Linux, images that don’t even have a given tag and never did will show up in a tag search.
My workflow has been the same for ages.
I use DIM (Digital Image Mover) to rename/renumber from the SD-card into my dated folder structure.
I then use DxO to enhance and convert the RAW files into jpegs.
I then use FastStone to add Title, Subject, Lens info, Flash info, and Comments.
Once all of this is done, I use mostly Photoshop Elements 7 to do the beginning and end of the editing, supplementing that with GIMP and various other programs when needed with all of this work being incorporated as layers in the Elements layer stack.
I save the finished product as a jpeg which I then and only then admit into digiKam.
The only operations I do in digiKam are to add geolocation information and keyword tags.
Once through digiKam, these images remain in that same folder; they are considered finished and it is very seldom that any other manipulations would ever be done to those particular files.
Yet, when I use digiKam to try and find all images carrying a certain tag, it is anyone’s guess as to what I will get and I cannot and do not trust the accuracy of a simple tag search.
The more I think about it, the more I believe that all of these problems followed upon the heels of me updating digiKam from a somewhat old version to what was the most recent at that time.
I just now realized that I never did provide the rest of the story; maybe, at the time, I was waiting to see if the problem really was gone.
I don’t know why I didn’t think of this and try it early on instead of wasting hours (and days) trying to get it sorted.
I occasionally create a system backup using Macrium Reflect.
I replaced my system with one of these images and have not had this problem since.
I may or may not have switched disks at that time; I cannot remember.