Bug 266593 - Wrong thumbnails with new camera
Summary: Wrong thumbnails with new camera
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: digikam
Classification: Applications
Component: Thumbs-Image (show other bugs)
Version: 1.9.0
Platform: Compiled Sources Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Digikam Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-02-18 11:49 UTC by Simon
Modified: 2016-07-15 20:58 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In: 5.1.0


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Simon 2011-02-18 11:49:12 UTC
Version:           1.9.0 (using KDE 4.5.5) 
OS:                Linux

I'm getting wrong thumbnails once again. This time it is kind of weird since I previously shot with a D90 and now with a D7000; nearly all thumbnails are wrong.

Strange: One image is e.g. DSC_7738.JPG. When I search for this image I get two results, one the D7000 image  with a wrong thumbnail and a second image from the D90 which is completely different. (The thumbnail cannot come from this one.)

Any hint on how to debug this?

(And, will the download/compile instructions occasionally be updated for git?)

Reproducible: Sometimes




OS: Linux (x86_64) release 2.6.37-0.slh.7-aptosid-amd64
Compiler: cc
Comment 1 Simon 2011-02-18 14:23:33 UTC
Perhaps the problem is related to my workflow? I always copy the images into one folder called «new» and sort them when I have time for it. The image whose thumbnail is incorrectly displayed on DSC_7738.JPG has been in this folder as well some weeks ago.

Found the old bugs btw:
#217422
#233222
Comment 2 Simon 2011-02-18 14:30:54 UTC
Additional information:
* The file size is shown correctly.

For a different file, DSC_7784.JPG:
SELECT * FROM IMAGES WHERE name LIKE '%DSC_7784.JPG';
4058|103|DSC_7784.JPG|1|1|2010-04-15T18:24:04|2444724|809a56d68abe1a307f18c6475a2b9e68
18154|241|DSC_7784.JPG|1|1|2009-06-17T12:43:50|1679033|8143ae40268d035cd47a90f951e70c50
43973|462|2011-01-07-DSC_7784.JPG|1|1|2011-01-07T17:37:56|2114032|ea82a64dae71d7ddd2f3d950e0910ecd
45059|85|DSC_7784.JPG|1|1|2010-02-16T19:32:12|2857274|1c03ae71339910df1d7e88e78e1d4eea

The image search returns these four images, three of them with correct thumbnails, the newest one (I just noticed that I set the camera date incorrectly, it should be 2011-02-16) with an incorrect thumbnail from 2011-01-07-DSC_7784.JPG. (I started to rename files based on their date to maintain a total order on the file names.)
Comment 3 Simon 2011-02-18 14:35:37 UTC
… so now I changed the timestamp via Image > Adjust Time & Date.
The thumbnails have been updated and are correct now.

Is it possible that the thumbnail generation process is skipped (based on some conditions) when digikam detects a new image, and an already existing one (and hopefully correct one) is used instead? Perhaps these conditions could/should be checked?
Comment 4 Marcel Wiesweg 2011-04-18 21:55:56 UTC
The criteria for "identical file" is hash+file size. From your db excerpt, it seems the hash is (correctly) different for each file, so this cannot be the explanation.
Is there any pattern how you can reliably reproduce the problem?
Comment 5 Simon 2011-05-31 18:49:58 UTC
Not yet. But today I renamed several images to have unique names (yyyy-MM-dd-filename), and again wrong thumbnails.
Comment 6 caulier.gilles 2011-12-19 13:57:01 UTC
Simon,

This file still valid using digiKam 2.4 ?

Gilles Caulier
Comment 7 Marcel Wiesweg 2012-09-29 12:19:25 UTC
Please update your database to use the new hash generation (bottom of database tab in settings) if retesting
Comment 8 caulier.gilles 2015-07-01 06:03:13 UTC
New digiKam 4.11.0 is available :

https://www.digikam.org/node/740

Can you reproduce the problem with this release ?
Comment 9 caulier.gilles 2015-08-24 05:13:56 UTC
digiKam 4.12.0 is out :

https://www.digikam.org/node/741

We need a fresh feedback using this release please...
Thanks in advance.
Comment 10 Simon 2015-08-26 19:23:19 UTC
I will test as soon as possible (may take some time as I first need to upgrade my distribution …).
Comment 11 caulier.gilles 2016-07-15 20:58:11 UTC
With digiKam 5.0.0, this problem is not reproducible.
I close this file now. Don't hesitate to re-open if necessary.
Gilles Caulier