| Summary: | Some images were not correlated even though GPS coordinates were available for the time they were taken | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Applications] digikam | Reporter: | Steve Franks <stevef48> |
| Component: | Geolocation-Correlator | Assignee: | Digikam Developers <digikam-bugs-null> |
| Status: | RESOLVED NOT A BUG | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | caulier.gilles, metzpinguin |
| Priority: | NOR | ||
| Version First Reported In: | 8.3.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Platform: | Microsoft Windows | ||
| OS: | Microsoft Windows | ||
| Latest Commit: | Version Fixed/Implemented In: | 8.4.0 | |
| Sentry Crash Report: | |||
| Attachments: | GPX Track | ||
|
Description
Steve Franks
2024-04-10 16:15:07 UTC
The photos are too big to upload here. digikam metadata shows that one was taken at 11:45:29, the other at 11:45:37. The problem is clear and easy to fix. @Gilles, Now that we are at Qt-6.7.0 with the Windows MSVC version, do we want to go back to a local date/time in digiKam or do we want to keep UTC as the timespec? One would probably be the speed of date calculations, we can easily test this with a change in digikam_globals.cpp without patching the entire code. The question is also, if we were to support time zones in the future, would UTC be better as a timespec? Maik Qt 6.7.0 in VCPKG ? As i can see it's always 6.6.1. There is a PR, but not yet merged : https://github.com/microsoft/vcpkg/pull/37923 AppImage and MacOS uses 5.15.13. Gilles Ah yes, I hadn't even thought about this dependency at the moment. Maik @Steve, After looking at the code it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the UTC timespec we are currently using. Can you send me the two images by email. I looked at the GPX data, you are in UTC time, +1 hour daylight saving time. I think you didn't set your camera to daylight saving time. Maik >Now that we are at Qt-6.7.0 with the Windows MSVC version, do we want to go back to a local date/time in digiKam or do we want to keep >UTC as the timespec? yes, when 6.7.0 will be available >One would probably be the speed of date calculations, we can easily test this with a change in digikam_globals.cpp without patching the >entire code. yes, a factorized method checking the QT version will help here. >The question is also, if we were to support time zones in the future, would UTC be better as a timespec? I think yes. a C++20 response is given here : https://www.modernescpp.com/index.php/calendar-and-time-zone-in-c-20-time-zones/ Gilles There is no problem in digiKam, I tested it with my test GPX route. For your images with 11:45:29 and 11:45:37, only a GPS time around 12:45:xx comes into question where the images correlated correctly. So you have to set your time zone to -01:00 in the digiKam correlation settings. We might have to make a checkbox for daylight saving time or calculate it automatically. Maik (In reply to Maik Qualmann from comment #6) > I looked at the GPX data, you are in UTC time, +1 hour daylight saving time. > I think you didn't set your camera to daylight saving time. > > Maik That's probably true. Sorry to have bothered you. Steve |