<div dir="ltr">Kent,<div><br></div><div>I moved from shotwell, i can say digikam is much better if you are a power user.</div><div>If you are not, maybe you should stick with shotwell, it is much easier!</div><div><br></div><div>I dont know about those pairs, but i will describe what i did.</div><div><br></div><div>I was really easy to migrate.. the "problem" is that shotwell uses a folder for organiazning albuns, Digikam can use many thinsg.. but most of the view is called "Albums" that are just folder.<br></div><div><br></div><div>How i did:</div><div>- Started digikam and select the option to watch for new files.</div><div>- Create a Root Album called "Shotwell-legacy"</div><div>- Closed digikam</div><div>- Move all picture too this Folder called Shotwell-legacy</div><div>- Open Digikam, it is now making a huge scan.</div><div>- All PHOTOS metada was preserved, every VIDEO metadata was LOST because shotwell does not save video metadata.</div><div>- You can ask for digikam to scan it again.</div><div>- Because shotwell didint handle duplicates very well, i suggest you to run find duplicates on digikam (it creates signatures of pictures and compare them, even with diferent names it works)</div><div>- After that i Started to organize my pictures in albuns, moving from shotwell legacy to "[New Named Album]" So it was a litle better organized.</div><div><br></div><div>Any questions you may have, just ask!</div><div><br></div><div>You can do so much more using lables and face recognition (can improve a lot yet, but is possible to use)</div><div><br></div><div>Hope that helps!</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">Em ter, 21 de jul de 2015 às 17:00, Kent Tenney <<a href="mailto:ktenney@gmail.com">ktenney@gmail.com</a>> escreveu:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I have the box checked, I shoot raw/jpeg pairs, as I<br>
understand, there are bugs in Shotwell regarding writing<br>
metadata to these pairs.<br>
<br>
Do you know if these issues effect Digikam's ability<br>
to manage the pairing correctly on import?<br>
Is this a process people are doing successfully?<br>
<br>
<br>
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Alan Pater <<a href="mailto:alan.pater@gmail.com" target="_blank">alan.pater@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> In Shotwell, under Edit > Preferences you will find the option to<br>
> Write tag and other metadata to the image files. Digikam will then<br>
> find and use those same tags and metadata.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Kent Tenney <<a href="mailto:ktenney@gmail.com" target="_blank">ktenney@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> Howdy,<br>
>><br>
>> I have about 70k photos managed by Shotwell, lots of tagging.<br>
>><br>
>> What about moving to Digikam without losing the work invested in Shotwell?<br>
>> Google doesn't have much to say about doing this ...<br>
>><br>
>> Thanks,<br>
>> Kent<br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Digikam-users mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Digikam-users@kde.org" target="_blank">Digikam-users@kde.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users</a><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Digikam-users mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Digikam-users@kde.org" target="_blank">Digikam-users@kde.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Digikam-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Digikam-users@kde.org" target="_blank">Digikam-users@kde.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users</a><br>
</blockquote></div>