<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
I can only repeat myself:<br>
<pre>
There is clearly a misconception here:
The "Date modified", "mtime" or whatever it is called property is
NOT the time a picture was taken. That information is stored in the
file itself, in the exif header. So the moment of your capture does
not change at all unless you specifically do so using tools to
modify the exif header of the file. </pre>
There is no harm in updating the modified time/mtime. This is not
part of the file, it is a property of the file in the filesystem. It
has NOTHING AT ALL to do with time you captured your image. It is
used for stuff like backuping, syncing, ...<br>
So please change the option if you must (it is not a good idea as
you don't seem to understand it), but the standard behaviour is
correct.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 14/01/17 16:38, Andrey Goreev wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:f5ag2s4clxl1f10hum82twjp.1484407581281@email.android.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div>I don't agree. Any options that can "harm" an inattentive
user. Any date changes are a harm.</div>
<div>For example, I installed digikam and imported my pictures.
Some of them went to Miscellaneous / Places / zoo instead of
Places / zoo. For sure I changed it right away but I was not
aware of that timestamp update option being turned on and
changed the date of 300+ files.</div>
<div>For sure it might be considered as a user issue but again, I
think user should be protected. Let's at least allow users to
turn that option on/off in the initial setup wizard.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div id="composer_signature">
<div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757" dir="auto">Sent from my
Samsung Galaxy smartphone.</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div style="font-size:100%;color:#000000"><!-- originalMessage -->
<div>-------- Original message --------</div>
<div>From: Remco Viëtor <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:remco.vietor@wanadoo.fr"><remco.vietor@wanadoo.fr></a> </div>
<div>Date: 2017-01-14 8:11 AM (GMT-07:00) </div>
<div>To: digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a
professional with the power of open source
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:digikam-users@kde.org"><digikam-users@kde.org></a> </div>
<div>Subject: Re: digikam default options </div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
On samedi 14 janvier 2017 07:30:08 CET Andrey Goreev wrote:<br>
> Well, I take pictures to capture moments. So why should the
date of the<br>
> moment be changed if I simply added an info in order to be
able to find<br>
> that picture later ? <br>
<br>
There is a tag reflecting the time the image was taken. That one
is not (and <br>
should not be) modified on any update, afaik.<br>
<br>
Also, we were talking about the best default for a configuration
option. If <br>
you do not like the default, you can change it.<br>
<br>
But for me, a timestamp that's supposed to record the date/time an
image was <br>
changed should _as_a_default_ do exactly that, to avoid surprising
(new) <br>
users.<br>
<br>
Remco.<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>