[Digikam-users] Tags not written to XMP sidecar?

[Tobias Margiani]

Hi,

I'm not sure if I understand your problem correctly. Are XMP files created but 
without (the right) content or are there no XMP files at all (you could check 
that with a file manager)?
I don't use XMP files normally so there might be people who know all this 
better but from a few quick tests it looks like exiftool only reads xmp files 
if you pass them as argument directly and not if you try to read tags from an 
image file (e.g. if you have image.jpg and image.xmp you have to use "exiftool 
image.xmp" to read the tags). In my checks there is a "Tags List" entry 
showing the digikam tags.
To comment on you problem when moving the files. If you only moved image files 
the metadata might indeed be lost but if you have moved the whole folder the 
xmp files could still be there! So check with a file manager. That the tags 
aren't read by digikam may result from your configuration. Are you sure that 
you've configured digikam to read metadata from sidecar files.
Another source of this problem may be that you haven't configured digikam to 
write Tags into file at all. You can check in the metadata tab what information 
is written to the files.

I hope some of this could help.
Regards
Tobias

Am Samstag, 21. Mai 2016, 10:12:13 CEST schrieb Anders Kamf:
> Hi!
> 
> I have the setting "Write to sidecar files": "Write to XMP sidecar file for
> read-only image only", which creates xmp sidecar files for the movie files
> that are in my collection.
> Now, I thought that this would mean that the tags applied to those movies
> was written to the XMP sidecar file. But that seems not to be the case! I
> now realise that at least neither exiv2 nor exiftool finds those tags.
> Also, when I access the file from "another" digikam on another computer, no
> metadata seems to be found.
> 
> If this is true, it means that all metadata for those files have been lost
> when I have moved the files outside Digikam (to another server), which
> truly is a sad awakening.
> 
> Is this the intended behaviour, or is it a bug? Or am I doing something
> wrong (a user-fault...)?
> 
> I'm using digikam 4.14.10 on Ubuntu 15.10.
> 
> Best regards
> Anders