[digiKam-users] Catalog in Place?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[digiKam-users] Catalog in Place?

Jeff Arnold
I'm playing with digiKam for Windows (I know, I know) and have a CIFS share mounted as a drive letter.  I'm wanting to "import" or "ingest" the photos on that share "in place":  I want thumbnails built locally and I want the metadata in the local DB, but I do NOT want the original files copied to my laptop, as the share contains about 8TB of images and videos going back to 2010.

It seems the way to accomplish this is by adding the CIFS share as new catalogue on network share or as removable media - but when I do that, I can see that files from the share are being copied down.

Is that so that digiKam can read the files and generate thumbnails?  Are the copies ephemeral?

If this isn't the correct approach, what is?

Thanks in advance,

-j
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Catalog in Place?

Andrew Goodbody
On 30/09/18 01:17, Jeff Arnold wrote:

> I'm playing with digiKam for Windows (I know, I know) and have a CIFS
> share mounted as a drive letter.  I'm wanting to "import" or "ingest"
> the photos on that share "in place":  I want thumbnails built locally
> and I want the metadata in the local DB, but I do NOT want the original
> files copied to my laptop, as the share contains about 8TB of images and
> videos going back to 2010.
>
> It seems the way to accomplish this is by adding the CIFS share as new
> catalogue on network share or as removable media - but when I do that, I
> can see that files from the share are being copied down.

How do you see the copes being made? Where are they copied to?
Digikam will of course read every image to extract the metadata and
build the thumbnails, but it should not copy them anywhere unless you
choose to import them rather than adding a new collection.

Andrew

> Is that so that digiKam can read the files and generate thumbnails?  Are
> the copies ephemeral?
>
> If this isn't the correct approach, what is?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> -j