digikam default options

Sat Jan 14 14:50:22 GMT 2017

When digikam says "Update file timestamp when files are modified", does
it refer to the OS timestamp, or the file's internal (EXIF, XMP etc)
metadata?

I assume it means the OS timestamp. If so, this is a bit confusing
since this option comes under the heading "Reading and Writing
Metadata" and "Metadata" usually means EXIF, XMP etc that is written
into the file itself.

The Operating System's timestamp for that file is not "Metadata" in the
sense that the word "Metadata" is used everywhere else in digikam.

On Sat, 2017-01-14 at 15:43 +0100, Simon Frei wrote:
> 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. 
> 
> On 14/01/17 15:30, Andrey Goreev wrote:
> > Well, I take pictures to capture moments. So why should the date of
> > the moment be changed if I simply added an info in order to be able
> > to find that picture later ? 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> > 
> > -------- Original message --------
> > From: Simon Frei <freisim93 at gmail.com>
> > Date: 2017-01-14 7:24 AM (GMT-07:00)
> > To: digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with
> > the power of open source <digikam-users at kde.org>
> > Subject: Re: digikam default options
> > 
> > Well that is your philosophy. Mine is that anytime a file is
> > modified on disk (the metadata header is part of the file) the
> > timestamp should be updated. There is no correct philosophy, that
> > is why there is an option to set the behaviour to ones taste.
> > The usual (as in not photography related) behaviour is to change
> > the timestamp on any file when it gets modified, so that is why
> > this is the standard behaviour in digikam.
> > 
> > On 14/01/17 15:14, Andrey Goreev wrote:
> > > Wanted to add to my message below.
> > > I think adding any info to metadata should not be considered as
> > > "file modifying". Why would you add any metadata? To get your
> > > pictures organized, right? So why would mess with timestamps
> > > then? Original timestamps should be preserved.
> > > If you actually develop a picture that is a different case.
> > > Filestamp should be up to date.
> > > IMHO.
> > > 
> > > Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> > > 
> > > -------- Original message --------
> > > From: Andrey Goreev <aegoreev at gmail.com>
> > > Date: 2017-01-14 7:04 AM (GMT-07:00)
> > > To: cerp at eeos.biz, digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a
> > > professional with the power of open source <digikam-users at kde.org
> > > >
> > > Subject: Re: digikam default options
> > > 
> > > I guess it is not clear what the "file timestamp" is and what is
> > > considered "file modifying".
> > > 
> > > There are tons of date tags in metadata  (try to "exiftool -s
> > > filename" one of your files has been modified few times using
> > > different programs. You will be surprised how many date/time tags
> > > are there. So which one being updated when the option is on?
> > > 
> > > Also, is adding a keyword or caption or label or geolocation
> > > considered a file modifying? Or that only applies to an image
> > > that has been touched in Image Editor module?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> > > 
> > > -------- Original message --------
> > > From: cerp <cerp at eeos.biz>
> > > Date: 2017-01-14 6:50 AM (GMT-07:00)
> > > To: digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with
> > > the power of open source <digikam-users at kde.org>
> > > Subject: Re: digikam default options
> > > 
> > > Dear all,
> > > 
> > > This is exactly the second problem we have: when you modify the
> > > exif  
> > > data of the JPG or RAW fle, for example for adding copyright  
> > > information, or photograph title and description (important for
> > > some  
> > > assignment and for some contests / prizes), the file timestamp
> > > is  
> > > modified, which means the whole time order is screwed and when
> > > you  
> > > then try to open the photographs with another editor or DAM
> > > tool.  
> > > Would it be possible to have the option to switch off
> > > modification of  
> > > the file timestamp when we only modify the exif data?
> > > 
> > > Best Regards
> > > 
> > > Corrado & Rina
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Quoting Remco Viëtor <remco.vietor at wanadoo.fr>:
> > > 
> > > > On samedi 14 janvier 2017 13:55:04 CET Gilles Caulier wrote:
> > > >> 2017-01-14 13:51 GMT+01:00 Remco Viëtor <remco.vietor at wanadoo.
> > > fr>:
> > > >> > On jeudi 12 janvier 2017 08:49:06 CET Andrey Goreev wrote:
> > > >> > > Hello,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I thought it might be not a bad idea to let users
> > > activate/deactivate
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > following options during the initial setup wizard:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > * Update file timestamp when files are modified (activated
> > > by default)
> > > >> > > * Always show original images (deactivated by default)
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I have a feeling that many users would prefer to have
> > > updating the file
> > > >> > > timestamp box unchecked and show original images checked.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Showing original images as default: yes; that avoids images
> > > appearing as
> > > >> > 'not
> > > >> > present' and considered 'lost' (see mailing list...)
> > > >> >
> > > >> > NOT updating timestamps as default: no, for at least one
> > > simple reason.
> > > >> > If you mean the file "last-modified" timestamp, not updating
> > > that would
> > > >> > break
> > > >> > all "make-like" programs and scripts, that use that
> > > timestamp to see if a
> > > >> > particular fiel needs treatment?
> > > >>
> > > >> Ah i miss-understand your previous mail. The option is enabled
> > > by default
> > > >> and your want to see this option turned off now. Right ?
> > > >>
> > > >> Gilles Caulier
> > > >
> > > > It's my first mail in this thread, so, "which previous mail"?
> > > :^)
> > > > My reply was to Andrey Goreev (the OP)
> > > >
> > > > For the record, I agree with what you stated as Digikam
> > > defaults in your
> > > > earlier mail (Sat, 14 Jan 2017 11:10:12 +0000 (UTC)):
> > > > Update file timestamps          : YES
> > > > Always show original images : YES
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> >  
>  