<html><head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>I believe I just went to the Tag panel, selected all the pictures
under the "Ignored" tag and removed the tag from there. I think it
shouldn't affect the "Ignored" classification in the face tags,
but I did that a few months ago and I don't remember exactly what
I did. But I definitely didn't use any external tool. Maybe you
could try with just a few pictures and see if they still appear
under the "Ignored" category in faces?<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">El 3/3/23 a les 8:47, Travis Kelley ha
escrit:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAC0Og8=2RzMiFpq9r5aKyTmncD_Jp0z1wTpvXF_=kE-db2GzHg@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>I wasn't aware of that bug. I did validate it did that in
the past, and the bug you pasted seems to agree, but I haven't
specifically validated that lately (since that bug was
patched) and the pictures that were once updated with that tag
still have it obviously. It seems that the fix implemented in
that bug would cause ignored faces to behave the way you would
expect. I assume that since they are saved in the digikam
database, as long as you keep the same database they will not
be re-detected by future detection runs even if run against
the same picture. I wonder how someone in my situation can
easily remove the ignored tag from the 1300 pictures I have
that have that tag stored in the metadata? I hate to delete
them in digikam as I don't want them to be removed from the
digikam database and then have to re-ignore them. Maybe
exiftool would be the easiest method?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Separately on the question of "matching" ignored faces. I
currently have 41 faces that have been "recognized" as matches
to existing faces that I have not confirmed in my ignored
group in digikam (some as recent as Nov of last year). It
seems to me that once you mark a face as ignored, digikam does
match future faces against that group. I can only imagine
that the trained model for the ignored face is a mess because
there are many different faces inside that one group.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at
12:34 PM Marc Palaus <<a href="mailto:marcpalaus@hotmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">marcpalaus@hotmail.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">
<div>
<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 href="https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=459537" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>