[digiKam-users] Migration of DigiKam to new PC

[Andrey Goreev]

Great work. Thanks for posting your success story!Enjoy your new PC.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
-------- Original message --------From: Paul Marfell <paul at marfell.me.uk> Date: 2019-11-16  5:04 a.m.  (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-users] Migration of DigiKam to new PC Success!The new PC has arrived. I have installed Ubuntu 19.10 and the important applications - including DigiKam from AppImage. I copied image files from the old PC, created a mount point in home/Pictures, pointed DigiKam at it and hey presto.The "Nature" tag parent has the children I was hoping for so ALL IS GOOD. This was my major worry which had an easy fix anyway - if it hadn't worked I would have spent a tedious few minutes moving the tags.I did somehow manage to create a recursive symlink so the same images were showing in /Photos/ then in /Photos/Photos/ and /Photos/Photos/Photos/ Deleting the symlink fixed that.I'm amazed at the improvement in performance on the new PC so I am a happy chappy.I am, at the moment, using DigiKam solely for its cataloguing functionality.ThanksPaulOn Mon, 11 Nov 2019 at 20:48, woenx <marcpalaus at hotmail.com> wrote:Hi, 

If I were you, considering you have those photos stored locally, I'd save
all metadata to the files (or to xmp sidecars) and let digikam rebuild the
database on the new installation.

If I understand correctly, until now you used the Organizer in Photoshop
Elements. Is there a way to force that software to write all metadata to
files? I have not personally used that organizer, but a tag hierarchy I made
in Adobe Lighroom was preserved in Digikam (and viceversa). If the metadata
includes the hierarchy, digikam should recognize it and recreate it, just
like you had it before. 

It shouldn't more complicated than that. 

About the categories... the first principle of a category system is that
they have to exhaustive and mutually exclusive. At the end of the day, the
best way of categorizing things is the one that works for you. Personally, I
have a structure tree for places
(Places/Country/Province/Municipality/Village) and another one for People
(mostly flat, except for a few groups of people, like coworkers, people from
the university, etc. and some day I'll try to hierarchize relatives). Your
categories for nature seem fine. I guess the more elements you have, the
more specific the categories would become (e.g. Lepidoptera instead of
Butterflies), but as I said, do what better suits your needs. Just bear in
mind that modifying something near the root of the category tree will imply
changing metadata for all elements of that tree.

Tell us how it went :)



--
Sent from: http://digikam.1695700.n4.nabble.com/digikam-users-f1735189.html
-- Family websitehttp://marfell.me.ukShop at Amazonhttp://www.amazon.co.uk/?&tag=themarfellfam-21
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20191116/c6f3ab8c/attachment.html>