[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2023-05-19 Thread bugzilla_noreply
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

caulier.gil...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Version Fixed In||8.1.0

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-26 Thread Metal450
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #18 from Metal450  ---
Aha, perfect, thanks!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-26 Thread Peter
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

Peter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||benedekppe...@gmail.com

--- Comment #17 from Peter  ---
> No rush, take your time! I was just curious where to find them, more
> generally - sounds like I did have the right spot :)

Hi Metal450,
It is in the same place as 7.10, only in the unstable branch:
https://files.kde.org/digikam/unstable/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-25 Thread Metal450
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #16 from Metal450  ---
(In reply to caulier.gilles from comment #15)
> Hi Maik and Merry Christmas,
> 
> Yes, i'm busy bu i advance well
> 
> https://docs.digikam.org/en/index.html
> 
> I hope to finalize online doc in few days...
> 
> I will rebuild the Windows bundle tomorrow morning, no problem.
> 
> Gilles

No rush, take your time! I was just curious where to find them, more generally
- sounds like I did have the right spot :)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-25 Thread bugzilla_noreply
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

caulier.gil...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Platform|Other   |Microsoft Windows
 CC||caulier.gil...@gmail.com

--- Comment #15 from caulier.gil...@gmail.com ---
Hi Maik and Merry Christmas,

Yes, i'm busy bu i advance well

https://docs.digikam.org/en/index.html

I hope to finalize online doc in few days...

I will rebuild the Windows bundle tomorrow morning, no problem.

Gilles

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-25 Thread Metal450
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #14 from Metal450  ---
(In reply to Maik Qualmann from comment #13)
> Normally, Gilles creates weekly snapshots. However, he is very busy at the
> moment, restructuring and porting the digiKam documentation. I don't think
> he'll be anywhere near the build machines over the holidays either. A bit
> patience...
> 
> Maik

Ah OK, so I guess they'll appear at that same place when available then? Just
wasn't sure if there was somewhere else for 8.x snapshots.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-25 Thread Maik Qualmann
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #13 from Maik Qualmann  ---
Normally, Gilles creates weekly snapshots. However, he is very busy at the
moment, restructuring and porting the digiKam documentation. I don't think
he'll be anywhere near the build machines over the holidays either. A bit
patience...

Maik

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-25 Thread Metal450
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #12 from Metal450  ---
(In reply to Maik Qualmann from comment #11)
> The metadata viewer only displays the entry of a single selected image. In 
> the case of a multi-selection or maintenance tool process, we would have to 
> examine the images for this beforehand.

Ohh I see - so that's literally directly viewing the metadata in the file, not
in the catalog (and the catalog only stores a more generalized subset of meta -
not knowing that "tags" came from XP specifically).

> Writing an empty tags list now correctly removes XPKeywords. If you don't 
> have write with ExifTool enabled, XPKeywords will be removed in all cases. If 
> you have enabled writing with ExifTool, XPKeywords will be written correctly.

Gotcha, great! So no settings changes needed.

> My research resulted in a bug report for a Windows photo program, either they 
> also use Exiv2 in the background, since XPKeywords is also always deleted. 
> Also the author of ExifTool writes that one should avoid the XP* metadata.

Yeah, I mean I wouldn't use it myself. But since one doesn't have control over
what others might have done to photos before they were received, I just wanted
to make sure it was possible to reliably work with tags, more generally, even
if someone else has already used XP tags.  Sounds like this fix now does it :)

Sorry, quick semi-related question: I'm using v8.0.0 (per our other discussion
related to sharing the db between win+linux), but it looks like the weekly
builds are for 7.10, not 8.0 (https://files.kde.org/digikam/). Is there
somewhere with weekly builds for 8.0, that contain all the latest patches?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-25 Thread Maik Qualmann
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #11 from Maik Qualmann  ---
We already have requests to provide a user viewable log in digiKam. I'm sure it
will come in the future.

The metadata viewer only displays the entry of a single selected image. In the
case of a multi-selection or maintenance tool process, we would have to examine
the images for this beforehand.

Writing an empty tags list now correctly removes XPKeywords.
If you don't have write with ExifTool enabled, XPKeywords will be removed in
all cases.
If you have enabled writing with ExifTool, XPKeywords will be written
correctly.

My research resulted in a bug report for a Windows photo program, either they
also use Exiv2 in the background, since XPKeywords is also always deleted. Also
the author of ExifTool writes that one should avoid the XP* metadata.

Maik

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-25 Thread Metal450
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #10 from Metal450  ---
(In reply to Maik Qualmann from comment #7)
> Giving a warning every time isn't really practical.

So currently the software has that toast UI, i.e. "Updating database - process
is done." I was thinking a similar pop-up when applying from database to file,
i.e. "Writing files from database - xxx items may not have been successful."
Something like that.

> On the one hand we don't get an error message from Exiv2 in this case.

But the digiKam catalog already knows the files have that particular metadata
tag: https://jiij.cc/snaps/2022-12-25_09.17.56.png. So it shouldn't need an
explicit error for Exiv2, right? Just knowing that "we're writing tags to a
file" and "that file has the XP* tag" is enough to infer that "this file may
not be written correctly."

> On the other hand, we would have to read all the metadata of the images to 
> determine which ones contain the XP* tags, which would lead to a severe loss 
> of performance, especially on network drives.

Why would it need to read all the metadata from files again? The catalog
clearly already knows the metadata is there (that's how it knew that tag
existed in the first place, and made it available to be unchecked in the
"Captions" pane). So no need to re-read from disk again...?

> We can actually write the XP* tags with ExifTool in the same step as the 
> modified metadata container. In a first patch we will generally remove the 
> XP* tags when writing new tags.
> add write support for XP* metadata when Exiftool writing is enabled
> By default, the legacy XP* metadata is disabled in a new config.

So to clarify, to avoid the issue, I need to explicitly enable
"Settings->Metadata->Delegate to ExifTool all backend operations to write
metadata to files"?

If so, any other ramification/side effect, besides this bug not occurring?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-25 Thread Maik Qualmann
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

Maik Qualmann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |FIXED
  Latest Commit||https://invent.kde.org/grap
   ||hics/digikam/commit/0e93b53
   ||44bf740ad0db1ca85532a66f1f4
   ||72146a
 Status|REPORTED|RESOLVED

--- Comment #9 from Maik Qualmann  ---
Git commit 0e93b5344bf740ad0db1ca85532a66f1f472146a by Maik Qualmann.
Committed on 25/12/2022 at 13:40.
Pushed by mqualmann into branch 'master'.

add write support for XP* metadata when Exiftool writing is enabled
By default, the legacy XP* metadata is disabled in a new config.
Related: bug 422242, bug 421464, bug 450522

M  +8-5NEWS
M  +22   -2core/libs/metadataengine/dmetadata/dmetadata_comments.cpp
M  +13   -1core/libs/metadataengine/dmetadata/dmetadata_tags.cpp
M  +3-0   
core/libs/metadataengine/dmetadata/dmetadatasettingscontainer.cpp

https://invent.kde.org/graphics/digikam/commit/0e93b5344bf740ad0db1ca85532a66f1f472146a

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-25 Thread Maik Qualmann
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #8 from Maik Qualmann  ---
Git commit d71f6605893d5b1b801ebc425756114711c5fc97 by Maik Qualmann.
Committed on 25/12/2022 at 10:20.
Pushed by mqualmann into branch 'master'.

add support for XPTitle and remove XP* metadata when writing
Related: bug 422242, bug 421464, bug 450522

M  +36   -1core/libs/metadataengine/dmetadata/dmetadata_comments.cpp
M  +24   -10   core/libs/metadataengine/dmetadata/dmetadata_tags.cpp
M  +13   -5   
core/libs/metadataengine/dmetadata/dmetadatasettingscontainer.cpp

https://invent.kde.org/graphics/digikam/commit/d71f6605893d5b1b801ebc425756114711c5fc97

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-25 Thread Maik Qualmann
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #7 from Maik Qualmann  ---
Giving a warning every time isn't really practical. On the one hand we don't
get an error message from Exiv2 in this case. On the other hand, we would have
to read all the metadata of the images to determine which ones contain the XP*
tags, which would lead to a severe loss of performance, especially on network
drives.
We can actually write the XP* tags with ExifTool in the same step as the
modified metadata container.
In a first patch we will generally remove the XP* tags when writing new tags.

Maik

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-23 Thread Metal450
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #6 from Metal450  ---
Those options all work as a one-off fix for a particular images/images (or for
users who somehow become aware of the issue), but more broadly, the software
should really provide some warning. Ie just a simple check to see if that tag
is there, and if so, the confirmation toast should let the user know that their
changes may have not been applied. Otherwise, anytime someone copies a bunch of
photos from a friend/relative/etc, and attempts to just work with tags
normally, it's not at all obvious that half the actions taken were actually
ignored.

If or until there's a true fix, why not just show: "Warning: 12 of the images
written contained XP metadata, so your changes may not have applied. Please see
(link to this issue, or to the most relevant)."

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-23 Thread Maik Qualmann
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #5 from Maik Qualmann  ---
Exactly, XP Keywords is the problem. I can look up the relevant bug reports for
you. Just so much, because of the encoding, this tag has historically only been
read-only in Exiv2. It also doesn't help to enable writing with ExifTool in
digiKam-8.0.0 because we create the container with Exiv2. digiKam uses the C++
program Exiv2 internally.

What options do you have?
1. You can remove XP Keywords using batch processing and the Remove Metadata
Tool, there is an extra entry for Exif in the combo box.

2. You can disable the reading of XP Keywords in the advanced metadata
settings, but the value of XP keywords will still remain in the image metadata.

3. We find another solution...

Maik

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-23 Thread Metal450
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #4 from Metal450  ---
Is the output of exiftool enough? Let me know if not & I'll send the picture
itself, but exiftool's output is below.  I do see mention of "XP Keywords."

However, if there's a known issue that a particular type of keyword will not be
properly written, shouldn't the software raise an error/warning, rather than
appearing to succeed but just silently failing? I spent quite some time going
through & cleaning up tags before (much later) uncovering that all that time
had actually been wasted, and nothing was actually being updated. I found it
completely by chance when I diffed an image for other reasons, then re-read
from metadata and suddenly every single tag I'd just removed was back. So
apparently I hadn't actually done anything.

```
ExifTool Version Number : 12.51
File Name   : Mich visit 10-2010 003-2.JPG
Directory   : .
File Size   : 969 kB
File Modification Date/Time : 2022:12:22 22:57:20-08:00
File Access Date/Time   : 2022:12:23 08:38:53-08:00
File Creation Date/Time : 2022:12:17 19:44:13-08:00
File Permissions: -rw-rw-rw-
File Type   : JPEG
File Type Extension : jpg
MIME Type   : image/jpeg
Exif Byte Order : Big-endian (Motorola, MM)
Make: SONY
Camera Model Name   : DSC-W70
Orientation : Horizontal (normal)
X Resolution: 72
Y Resolution: 72
Resolution Unit : inches
Software: Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Modify Date : 2010:10:27 09:21:26
Y Cb Cr Positioning : Co-sited
XP Keywords : Mich visit 10-2010
PrintIM Version : 0300
Exposure Time   : 1/50
F Number: 5.2
Exposure Program: Program AE
ISO : 160
Exif Version: 0221
Date/Time Original  : 2010:09:23 17:56:36
Create Date : 2010:09:23 17:56:36
Components Configuration: Y, Cb, Cr, -
Compressed Bits Per Pixel   : 8
Exposure Compensation   : +1.7
Max Aperture Value  : 2.8
Metering Mode   : Multi-segment
Light Source: Unknown
Flash   : On, Return detected
Focal Length: 18.9 mm
Flashpix Version: 0100
Color Space : sRGB
Exif Image Width: 2304
Exif Image Height   : 3072
Interoperability Version: 0100
File Source : Digital Camera
Scene Type  : Directly photographed
Custom Rendered : Normal
Exposure Mode   : Manual
White Balance   : Auto
Scene Capture Type  : Standard
Contrast: High
Saturation  : High
Sharpness   : Normal
Padding : (Binary data 2060 bytes, use -b option to
extract)
Offset Schema   : 4200
Compression : JPEG (old-style)
Thumbnail Offset: 5030
Thumbnail Length: 6889
XMP Toolkit : XMP Core 4.4.0-Exiv2
Creator Tool: Microsoft Windows Photo Gallery
6.0.6001.18000
Metadata Date   : 2010:10:27 09:21:26-07:00
Format  : image/jpeg
Color Mode  : RGB
ICC Profile Name: sRGB IEC61966-2.1
Instance ID : xmp.iid:0B6D863FE6E1DF11964DF8DAF7BB095B
Document ID : xmp.did:0B6D863FE6E1DF11964DF8DAF7BB095B
Original Document ID: xmp.did:0B6D863FE6E1DF11964DF8DAF7BB095B
Description :
History Action  : saved
History Instance ID : xmp.iid:0B6D863FE6E1DF11964DF8DAF7BB095B
History When: 2010:10:27 09:21:26-07:00
History Software Agent  : Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
History Changed : /
Profile CMM Type: Linotronic
Profile Version : 2.1.0
Profile Class   : Display Device Profile
Color Space Data: RGB
Profile Connection Space: XYZ
Profile Date Time   : 1998:02:09 06:49:00
Profile File Signature  : acsp
Primary Platform: Microsoft Corporation
CMM Flags   : Not Embedded, Independent
Device Manufacturer : Hewlett-Packard
Device Model: sRGB
Device Attributes   : Reflective, Glossy, Positive, Color
Rendering Intent: Perceptual
Connection Space Illuminant : 0.9642 1 0.82491
Profile Creator : Hewlett-Packard

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-22 Thread Maik Qualmann
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #3 from Maik Qualmann  ---
According to the log, the metadata was written without errors. If the tag was
written with Windows programs, there is a possibility that the tag is written
in Microsoft XP* metadata. Exiv2 can currently only read this metadata area,
but not change it. That would explain the tag reappearing. Can you email me the
image?

Maik

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-22 Thread Metal450
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

--- Comment #2 from Metal450  ---
> Whether the modification date changes depends on the metadata settings. 

Yeah, that was desired - was just mentioning it to illustrate that digiKam had
actually done something to the file (even though no binary changes took place).

> You enabled it to update back to the previous one.

Not sure what you mean by this...?

> We need a DebugView log

[11176] digikam.metaengine: Loading metadata with "Exiv2" backend from
"D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit
10-2010 003-2.JPG"
[11176] digikam.general: Writing tags
[11176] digikam.general: Delete all keywords
[11176] digikam.metaengine: "D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early
Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit 10-2010 003-2.JPG"  ==> New Iptc
Keywords:  ()
[11176] digikam.metaengine: MetaEngine::metadataWritingMode 0
[11176] digikam.metaengine: Will write Metadata to file
"D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit
10-2010 003-2.JPG"
[11176] digikam.metaengine: wroteComment:  true
[11176] digikam.metaengine: wroteEXIF:  true
[11176] digikam.metaengine: wroteIPTC:  true
[11176] digikam.metaengine: wroteXMP:  true
[11176] digikam.metaengine: Metadata for file "Mich visit 10-2010 003-2.JPG"
written to file.
[11176] digikam.metaengine: Loading metadata with "Exiv2" backend from
"D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit
10-2010 003-2.JPG"
[11176] digikam.dimg: "D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops &
Grandma Misc/Mich visit 10-2010 003-2.JPG" : "JPEG" file identified
[11176] digikam.database: Scanning took 6 ms
[11176] digikam.database: Finishing took 7 ms
[11176] digikam.metaengine: Loading metadata with "Exiv2" backend from
"D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit
10-2010 003-2.JPG"
[11176] digikam.general: Trying to get thumbnail from
"D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit
10-2010 003-2.JPG" ( "image" )
[11176] digikam.general: Trying to get thumbnail with Exiv2 for
"D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit
10-2010 003-2.JPG"
[11176] digikam.metaengine: Loading metadata with "Exiv2" backend from
"D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit
10-2010 003-2.JPG"
[11176] digikam.general: Trying to get thumbnail from
"D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit
10-2010 003-2.JPG" ( "image" )
[11176] digikam.general: Trying to get thumbnail with Exiv2 for
"D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit
10-2010 003-2.JPG"
[11176] digikam.general: Trying to get thumbnail with DImg preview for
"D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit
10-2010 003-2.JPG"
[11176] digikam.general: Trying to get thumbnail with DImg preview for
"D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops & Grandma Misc/Mich visit
10-2010 003-2.JPG"
[11176] digikam.dimg: "D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops &
Grandma Misc/Mich visit 10-2010 003-2.JPG" : "JPEG" file identified
[11176] digikam.dimg: "D:/_Pics+Vids_/Pics/0-(82-94) - Early Childhood/Pops &
Grandma Misc/Mich visit 10-2010 003-2.JPG" : "JPEG" file identified
[11176] digikam.general: Using  8  CPU core to run threads
[11176] digikam.general: Using  8  CPU core to run threads
[11176] digikam.general: Action Thread run  1  new jobs
[11176] digikam.general: Action Thread run  1  new jobs
[11176] digikam.general: One job is done
[11176] digikam.general: Cancel Main Thread
[11176] digikam.general: One job is done
[11176] digikam.general: Cancel Main Thread

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[digikam] [Bug 463378] Applied Tags Don't Get Written To File?

2022-12-22 Thread Maik Qualmann
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463378

Maik Qualmann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||metzping...@gmail.com

--- Comment #1 from Maik Qualmann  ---
We need a DebugView log of the process. Download and launch DebugView from
Microsoft. Activate internal debugging in the digiKam settings under
Miscellaneous-> System and start digiKam again. Run the tag operation and post
the DebugView log. Whether the modification date changes depends on the
metadata settings. You enabled it to update back to the previous one.

Maik

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.