How can I move a lot of albums to another collection?

[Anders Lund]

See topic. I have found no easy way - can that really be true?

Kindly,
Anders

[Anders Lund]

onsdag den 1. marts 2017 10.30.59 CET skrev Anders Lund:
> See topic. I have found no easy way - can that really be true?



So, I sit here dragging one album into another.



Then click "move here".



I have to do this many hundred times.



That SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!



PLEASE implement in next version of digikam proper file management. Using file
manager is not proper, as it will either discard metadata, og require 10000s
of metadata files written.


>
> Kindly,
> Anders

[Anders Lund]

onsdag den 1. marts 2017 10.44.36 CET skrev Anders Lund:

> onsdag den 1. marts 2017 10.30.59 CET skrev Anders Lund:
> > See topic. I have found no easy way - can that really be true?
>
> So, I sit here dragging one album into another.
>
>
>
> Then click "move here".
>
>
>
> I have to do this many hundred times.
>
>
>
> That SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
>
> PLEASE implement in next version of digikam proper file management. Using
> file manager is not proper, as it will either discard metadata, og require
> 10000s of metadata files written.

Requirements:

1. Add "move to..." function to album menu/context menu, allowing to move an
album into another album or collection.
2. Add ability to select multiple albums. Preferably in current gui, to avoid
clutter. No harm in displaying files from multiple albume in the album view
either.

Quite simple!



> > Kindly,
> > Anders

Le 01/03/2017 à 10:44, Anders Lund a écrit :

> PLEASE implement in next version of digikam proper file management. Using file
> manager is not proper, as it will either discard metadata, og require 10000s
> of metadata files written.

I'm not sure (not tested). I already know that one can rename files from
file manager without disturbing digikam, so probably digikam manage
files by UID, not file name.

so moving a file from a folder to an other may not be a problem. May be
only on the same disk/partition?

pretty easy to test

jdd

[Chris Green]

Anders Lund <[hidden email]> wrote:
> See topic. I have found no easy way - can that really be true?
>
Use the underlying file system:-

    chris$ mv album1 /new/file/tree/album1

or use your favourite GUI file manager.

--
Chris Green
·

[Anders Lund]

onsdag den 1. marts 2017 10.56.25 CET skrev jdd:

> Le 01/03/2017 à 10:44, Anders Lund a écrit :
> > PLEASE implement in next version of digikam proper file management. Using
> > file manager is not proper, as it will either discard metadata, og
> > require 10000s of metadata files written.
>
> I'm not sure (not tested). I already know that one can rename files from
> file manager without disturbing digikam, so probably digikam manage
> files by UID, not file name.
>
> so moving a file from a folder to an other may not be a problem. May be
> only on the same disk/partition?
>
> pretty easy to test
>
> jdd

I would loose alle metadata in the digikam database if I do that.

[Anders Lund]

onsdag den 1. marts 2017 10.59.44 CET skrev Chris Green:
> Anders Lund <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > See topic. I have found no easy way - can that really be true?
>
> Use the underlying file system:-
>
>     chris$ mv album1 /new/file/tree/album1
>
> or use your favourite GUI file manager.

No, I would loose metadata. As I stated in my mail, I do not want sidecar
files - I tried, and it is a hazzard.

Le 01/03/2017 à 11:22, Anders Lund a écrit :

> onsdag den 1. marts 2017 10.56.25 CET skrev jdd:
>> Le 01/03/2017 à 10:44, Anders Lund a écrit :
>>> PLEASE implement in next version of digikam proper file management. Using
>>> file manager is not proper, as it will either discard metadata, og
>>> require 10000s of metadata files written.
>>
>> I'm not sure (not tested). I already know that one can rename files from
>> file manager without disturbing digikam, so probably digikam manage
>> files by UID, not file name.
>>
>> so moving a file from a folder to an other may not be a problem. May be
>> only on the same disk/partition?
>>
>> pretty easy to test
>>
>> jdd
>
> I would loose alle metadata in the digikam database if I do that.
>

did you test it?

I can't test myself because as I keep metadata in the file it will
obviously be also moved

jdd

[Anders Lund]

onsdag den 1. marts 2017 11.43.57 CET skrev jdd:

> Le 01/03/2017 à 11:22, Anders Lund a écrit :
> > onsdag den 1. marts 2017 10.56.25 CET skrev jdd:
> >> Le 01/03/2017 à 10:44, Anders Lund a écrit :
> >>> PLEASE implement in next version of digikam proper file management.
> >>> Using
> >>> file manager is not proper, as it will either discard metadata, og
> >>> require 10000s of metadata files written.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure (not tested). I already know that one can rename files from
> >> file manager without disturbing digikam, so probably digikam manage
> >> files by UID, not file name.
> >>
> >> so moving a file from a folder to an other may not be a problem. May be
> >> only on the same disk/partition?
> >>
> >> pretty easy to test
> >>
> >> jdd
> >
> > I would loose alle metadata in the digikam database if I do that.
>
> did you test it?

I tried this a while ago, and it did not work. Nothing indicates that that
have changed. And in any case, it is a quite obvious feature to have.

> I can't test myself because as I keep metadata in the file it will
> obviously be also moved
>
> jdd

[Chris Green]

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 11:22:43AM +0100, Anders Lund wrote:

> onsdag den 1. marts 2017 10.56.25 CET skrev jdd:
> > Le 01/03/2017 à 10:44, Anders Lund a écrit :
> > > PLEASE implement in next version of digikam proper file management. Using
> > > file manager is not proper, as it will either discard metadata, og
> > > require 10000s of metadata files written.
> >
> > I'm not sure (not tested). I already know that one can rename files from
> > file manager without disturbing digikam, so probably digikam manage
> > files by UID, not file name.
> >
> > so moving a file from a folder to an other may not be a problem. May be
> > only on the same disk/partition?
> >
> > pretty easy to test
> >
> > jdd
>
> I would loose alle metadata in the digikam database if I do that.

Which is why the metadata should all be in the files - always!

--
Chris Green

[Chris Green]

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 11:23:30AM +0100, Anders Lund wrote:

> onsdag den 1. marts 2017 10.59.44 CET skrev Chris Green:
> > Anders Lund <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > See topic. I have found no easy way - can that really be true?
> >
> > Use the underlying file system:-
> >
> >     chris$ mv album1 /new/file/tree/album1
> >
> > or use your favourite GUI file manager.
>
> No, I would loose metadata. As I stated in my mail, I do not want sidecar
> files - I tried, and it is a hazzard.

Which is why I keep going on about it being *very* important that it's
the default, or at least very easy, to keep *all* metadata in the
image files.

--
Chris Green

[Anders Lund]

onsdag den 1. marts 2017 12.08.24 CET skrev Chris Green:
> > I would loose alle metadata in the digikam database if I do that.
>
> Which is why the metadata should all be in the files - always!

Yes, but so long at writing metadata to RAW is not safe/implemented, this is
not reality...

Le 01/03/2017 à 12:09, Chris Green a écrit :

> Which is why I keep going on about it being *very* important that it's
> the default, or at least very easy, to keep *all* metadata in the
> image files.
>
but it's very easy :-) I always did

for sure the UI can be enhanced, many file manager options lack. May be
it's not that important given it's done with the file manager :-)

I would better like having the face recognition way faster :-)

jdd

jdd

Le 01/03/2017 à 12:20, Anders Lund a écrit :
> onsdag den 1. marts 2017 12.08.24 CET skrev Chris Green:
>>> I would loose alle metadata in the digikam database if I do that.
>>
>> Which is why the metadata should all be in the files - always!
>
> Yes, but so long at writing metadata to RAW is not safe/implemented, this is
> not reality...
>
>
raw files are not true photo files, so anyway you can't make anything
with them without sidecar

jdd

[Anders Lund]

onsdag den 1. marts 2017 12.50.47 CET skrev jdd:
> raw files are not true photo files, so anyway you can't make anything
> with them without sidecar

Well, digikam stores the metadata I provide in its database - ratings, tags,
titles, geodata etc. That is the main problem here - without file management
tools in digikam, the only option is to use sidecar files, which is slow and
unnice in many ways.

Kindly,
Anders

[Daniel Bauer-2]

Am 01.03.2017 um 12:08 schrieb Chris Green:
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 11:22:43AM +0100, Anders Lund wrote:
>> onsdag den 1. marts 2017 10.56.25 CET skrev jdd:
>>
>> I would loose alle metadata in the digikam database if I do that.
>
> Which is why the metadata should all be in the files - always!
>
No. There are many reasons NOT to want metadata in files. I don't want
to accidentally publish photos with my personal annotations just because
I forgot to strip them before publishing. This is just one example.

It is good and I am happy that digikam does NOT save these things in
image files unless explicitly wanted by those users who prefer it that way.

There is no "always!", each one has it's own needs and procedures and it
is nice that many programs, like digikam, leave the freedom to the user.

Daniel
--
Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Barcelona
http://www.daniel-bauer.com

[jsbain]

one safe option would be to exit digikam, move the album, then use a sql browser software to edit the sql database to point the album at a different albumroot.  Or this could be done in a few lines of python that finds/moves the album in the database, then moves the files on disk.