<html><head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body>
<blockquote>
<p>Adding blurry face regions to the "ignored" tag will cause
other things to match those later. I've seen real people that
appear in multiple photos get "matched/recognized" against a
name of "ignored" because they were ignored in previous runs.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Are you sure about that? I have never been suggested any face to
the "Ignored" group (and I have tagged thousands of pictures). In
the past, when you clicked on ignore, that "Ignored" would be
saved in the metadata, but it was fixed last September
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=459537">https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=459537</a>). I'd recommend you
delete that Ignored face region from the pictures they currently
have it, so those faces don't appear in other programs like
Pigallery2. In theory, the ignored tag shouldn't be used for the
face training (can a developer confirm that?).</p>
<p>As I said, I never had this issue. Clicking the red cross will
just remove that face from digikam (although if the picture is
scanned again, it will be re-detected), and the Ignore just hides
them into their own category, but without writing anything to the
pictures either.</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">El 2/3/23 a les 11:58, Travis Kelley ha
escrit:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAC0Og8mWOdhi-5Zm=119mUYR+v97LHFM0-BjdW4JtoUY34EN4g@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Let me caveat this by saying I'm not an expert/developer,
so I'm only commenting on what I've seen.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>When you use the red X button it throws away that detected
region completely. It doesn't save anything to the metadata
of the photo. I don't believe anything gets saved in the
database either (more on that below). It's as if that
"detection" never happened.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>My understanding of the intention of detection is that you
should only need to run it on a photo once. Hence there is a
setting under detection to only scan NEW photos. You are not
prevented from rescanning a photo, but I believe the normal
workflow would not be to do that. Hence using the red X
button effectively makes it as if the detection never happened
and unless you specifically rescan a previously scanned photo,
that same region would not get detected again.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Adding blurry face regions to the "ignored" tag will cause
other things to match those later. I've seen real people that
appear in multiple photos get "matched/recognized" against a
name of "ignored" because they were ignored in previous runs.
You need to be somewhat careful in what you ignore as if you
ignore someone important there is a chance the next photo of
that person will be "recognized" as the "ignored" person. You
can always correct that match and tell digikam that person is
a real name if that happens. From everything I can tell,
"ignored" is not treated as a special tag at all. It
effectively creates a name of "ignored" that gets treated just
like any other person name. It gets written to photo metadata
and I can for instance look at all the people named ignored in
PiGallery2 (which reads the face metadata that digikam
created). I suppose it would be fairly easy to strip all of
those out at any time by deleting the "ignored" name in
digikam or using something like exiftool, but they haven't
caused me to much trouble other than philosophically the
creation of useless metadata.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Someone with more knowledge feel free to correct me. I'm
only going based on experience having used digikam for a
while.<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 7:08 AM
Thomas <<a href="mailto:sdktda@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">sdktda@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
On 2023-03-02 13:00, Travis Kelley wrote:<br>
> Yes. When you "ignore" a face, you are essentially
marking that face <br>
> with a name of "ignore". Other software will see the tag
in the <br>
> metadata of that photo.<br>
<br>
<br>
Does this mean that it is problematic to tag exceptionally
blurry faces <br>
as "ignore" in that this could result in some kind of "catch
all face" <br>
that will match a lot of faces incorrectly?<br>
<br>
<br>
PS. What about the "This is not a face" (red X button) - does
this also <br>
just tag the detected face region as a "not face" tag? Or does
it rather <br>
just throw the face out of the detected faces pile (thus,
resulting in <br>
this image region being re-detected as a face some later
time)? Or how <br>
does this work?<br>
<br>
I have noticed that when I have a picture with high entropy
regions like <br>
a heap of gravel or rocks, it will often detect faces in that
"noise". I <br>
always click "This is not a face" but I have a feeling that
the same <br>
regions keep turning up when I do face detection again. But
maybe it is <br>
just other regions of the same "noise"?<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Mvh<br>
Thomas<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>