Do you use “lazy syncronization” ? If yes you need to click on the “refresh” icon in the bottom bar.
I just found the check-box for “Lazy Synchronization” and it is not checked.
Okay…, one more experiment failed.
First, I copied the digiKam files folder as a back-up.
I started digiKam, put it in Albums View, and clicked the very top “Albums” so nothing was selected.
I opened Tag Manager; and, I hi-lited the top of the tag tree “Tags”.
I then clicked Sync/Export (which is somewhat misleading, as I don’t see any way to export anything).
In the Sync/Export menu, I clicked “Wipe All Tags from Database ONLY”.
In a matter of seconds, the Tag/Categories pane went blank and the Tag Manager disappeared.
I waited a bit and then closed digiKam.
I waited a bit and restarted the machine.
I waited a bit and started digiKam.
I opened the Tag Manager and then the Sync/Export menu and clicked “Read Tags from Image”.
It told me that could take a while and I clicked to go ahead.
It did take a while.
I went to bed and came back a few hours later and it was done.
My tag tree was mostly there.
In the main parent tags, there were a few errant sub-tagged images listed as parent tags, not many, maybe half-a-dozen; in most of these cases, it would not be all of the images within the particular sub-tag group, but maybe three of several.
I did not meticulously explore any deeper than the main parent tag structure; I have no idea how many misplaced tags may have been scattered where they did not belong.
All of my tag icons were gone.
Now for the acid test:
I went to Tag View and tested some of the tags that I knew had been displaying incomplete information and missing thumbnails = FAIL FAIL FAIL
After all of this, I hadn’t gained a thing.
All of the corrupted data had obviously remained while the tags were wiped and digiKam just re-associated the re-enlisted tags back with the corrupted data — it did not purge itself of the corrupted data as I had hoped.
Back to the drawing board…
Before I performed my lengthy experiment described above, I found another distressing problem that may or may not be related to my big problem.
I noticed some antique and classic car images were also tagged as “Sawmill”
I know for absolute fact that I did not mistakenly apply the Sawmill tag to these images; also, the affected images were scattered as to when they had been inducted into digiKam and it would be a huge coincidence if I had made the same mistake with the Sawmill tag on all of those occasions.
I noticed the number of images tagged with Sawmill was many more than I thought there should be.
So, I checked the Sawmill tag in Tags View and I found many more wrongly tagged with the Sawmill tag than there were correctly tagged.
I had images of people, fire-trucks, Poland-China Hogs, 1972 Plymouth Barricudas, Minneapolis Moline tractors, Shetland ponies, helicopters, and more, all showing as tagged with the Sawmill tag; no way could I have made that many mistakes.
I don’t yet know if this discrepancy is restricted to only the Sawmill tag, or if I am going to start finding many more other wrongly associated tags…; I suspect and expect the later.
I have spent countless hours meticulously building my tag tree and carefully tagging my images and now my sole reason for doing so is self-destructing.
I fear it may be years before my bug report yields a fix or a solution.
I have considered deleting the database and starting all over anew; but I have very little hope that digiKam won’t somehow reconnect itself to the corrupted information, hidden somewhere within the bowels of my registry, and me be back in the same place I am after all the work, or just wait until I get everything to working good and fall to pieces again.
Thanks for everyone’s patience and suggestions thus far.
Sorry for so long and so much to digest in a single post; I tried to make this in two separate posts but it would not allow it.
Update 11-Dec-2018: After meticulously finding and removing all the wrongly applied “Sawmill” tags from random images scattered throughout my collection, this morning I found a few more totally unrelated files carrying the Sawmill tag.
I had hopes that migrating the database to a different HDD would possibly solve the problem; however, after a very lengthy fight to get it done, nothing was gained; and, if anything, things were worse.
I have given up on any means of fixing my corrupted database; and, one-by-one, folder-by-folder, I am building a new database.
I am going to be hugely frustrated if my problem shows back up in this entirely new configuration.
I am a patient man, but at this point I am getting severely frustrated.
I thoroughly hid the old digiKam database folder.
I started with a clean slate, or at least I thought.
I restarted the machine several times in hopes of purging any remnants of bad memories.
I meticulously re-enlisted my photo collection, folder by folder.
I periodically checked tags view and so far all was seeming to be going good.
…until, I got into mid-2017 (I started at present day and was working my way backwards), at which point I checked tags view and the exact same thumbnails that were refusing to display before were behaving in the exact same manner as they were before.
Another failed attempt…another two or three days wasted…this is getting ridiculous.
I don’t see how this could even be possible; I thought I had disassociated digiKam from the old problem.
My next plan of attack is to completely and totally remove digiKam; dig way down deep in the hidden confines of the registry and pick out all of the hidden pieces; and, start from the very beginning with a new virgin install.
digiKam could be a really good program if it would work; it has the best method by far for creating tag trees and installing tags; it also has the best method for searching out images by tag.
It is wonderful that there is this huge tags panel on both sides of the window, one for assigning and the other for finding.
I have used and free-trialed just about every free and pay-for organizing program out there and not a single one even comes close to the wonderful tag handling features of digiKam.
But, none of this matters if it doesn’t work.
And I know that it can work, because it did work wonderfully for several years.
Honestly, it is as if some virus or worm has taken over my tags view and is progressively eating away at it from the inside out.
And then there is that Sawmill tag that keeps popping up on image files that I would never in my wildest imaginings have ever put there.
I search them all out, remove the errant Sawmill tag, and in a few hours there is a another random bunch showing up with it.
There are people in the crazy house that haven’t went through what I have in the last few weeks.
In the past I’ve used Revo Uninstaller to get rid of some crusty java installations, perhaps it can be of use here.
I found this back when I swore I would never own another nVidia product:
I have found the method to be quite successful for completely removing whatever the target may be; just substitute the program in question wherever it says nVidia.
I am not sure what is happening. Maybe it is worth to compare a couple of recent images to few from that problemaric mid 2017 ? Exiftool or exiv2 could be good tools to read all metadata and see if there is anything suspicious
Also you could try setting up a Linux virtual machine and try digikam with the same image collection there.
Is there a particular reason you add every folder as a separate collection instead of the parent folder?
Of course this shouldn’t cause the problems you describe, but I would expect it to be slower.
If it’s the exact same files, did you already try to copy those and only those to another location and add that as a collection to digikam - to see if the problem occurs as well?
The behavior is so erratic that it is a bit hard to explain.
I first thought that, once a thumbnail refused to display, that it always behaved in that manner; however, last night, I just started at the bottom of the tag tree and worked my up, and I found images affected from all years randomly scattered throughout; and, images that I know for a fact were not displaying properly were displaying fine and others that had not previously been affected were exhibiting the problem. (I didn’t get very far up the tree)
That being said, there is one particular tag group that has certain thumbnails that, once they disappear, they have stayed disappeared; however, in that same group, there are others that disappear for days, only to reappear later.
That is a good experiment you described and I will definitely try it.
I had considered also copying some of them onto one of our other machines and seeing what the other machine’s digiKam did with them.
Thanks for the idea.
Okay, it gets even weirder…
Using FastStone so as to be independent of digiKam, I selected 18 files that were not displaying properly and copied them to a test folder and made that folder a Collection in digiKam.
In Albums View, all 18 images displayed and worked as they should.
In Tags View, even Collections that had been displaying the correct number of items on the blue separator bar, now are only saying and displaying a single item, even when I know there are many more.
In a couple of instances, the blue separator bar would be half-lapped over the thumbnails, either above or below.
Thumbnails that belonged to one collection would be displaying in the wrong collection.
And it gets even weirder…
No matter which tag group any of the 18 test images was displaying in, only a single item would display where there should have been more — and — high-lighting/selecting any of the test images would result in the right-side Tags panel to grey out.
Even weirder still…
I have no idea what was going on in the collections that were out of my view.
That being said, I could see a test image thumbnail and also a thumbnail of the collection above.
There would only be a single item displaying in the above collection.
However, when I clicked on the test image thumbnail, the single thumbnail being displayed in the collection above would change to a different image.
These 18 test images function as they should in other programs that I have tried.