[Digikam-users] Migration problems - Digikam 1.8 to 2.0

[David Vincent-Jones]

There is however a school of thought that maintain that writing data
directly into an image file can be a source of corruption and that such
an approach to the raw image file is totally unacceptable.

On Mon, 2011-09-12 at 23:27 +0200, Martin Burnicki wrote:
> Anders Stedtlund wrote:
> > This is not going to help but I'm just curious. (I might have missed
> > something in the conversation...)
> >
> > Do you really mean that you lose all your tags whenever you upgrade to
> > a new version? I can't remember that I ever have had that problem when
> > upgrading to a new version.
> 
> I think one of the best advantages of digital photos is that you can store 
> data inside the image file, i.e. camera and lens information, but also 
> comments, copyright, geo tags, etc.
> 
> If you give those photos away to someone else then those people have all the 
> information available, if you want.
> 
> The advantage of using a database is that a program like digikam can search 
> very much faster for photos which match certain criteria.
> 
> In my opinion the best practice is to save all meta data inside the photos, so 
> if your database gets corrupted for any reason you can always rebuild the 
> database from the information inside the photos.
> 
> This is also a good thing if you should sometimes decide to use a different 
> photo management software than DK. OK, OK, this will never happen as long as 
> DK is such an excellent program ;-))
> 
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> Digikam-users at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users