Bug 300679 - looking for a possibility to check for differences between two pics
Summary: looking for a possibility to check for differences between two pics
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 314022
Alias: None
Product: digikam
Classification: Applications
Component: LightTable-Engine (show other bugs)
Version: 2.5.0
Platform: Ubuntu Linux
: NOR wishlist
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Digikam Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-05-26 19:29 UTC by Axel Krebs
Modified: 2017-08-13 17:39 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Axel Krebs 2012-05-26 19:29:45 UTC
I have to check pics pairwise quite often- it is important to find "similar" pics independant from very file format or even when slightly different sections occur. 

Background is  scientific demand which analyses differences. 

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. I guess, this is a new request.
2. maybe relatet to fuzzy search or face recognition techniques.
3. feature could be part of a plugin.
Actual Results:  
not possible

Expected Results:  
digiKam should offer this capability, at least "on demand", that could be by activating plugins. 
If not possible, use external libraries, e.g.
Comment 1 caulier.gilles 2012-05-27 07:29:48 UTC
Can you detail your which indeep please ?

Gilles Caulier
Comment 2 Axel Krebs 2012-05-28 17:53:20 UTC
Dear Gilles:

I'll try too. As I have to conduct a huge number of pics comparison
quite regular, I am searching for a helper application to support, me in
doing this so far. Usually, I have to compare about 350 pics per two
weeks...

When proposing "Linux, Open Source, Photography Tethered Shooting with
digiKam"
<"http://scribblesandsnaps.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/tethered-shooting-with-digikam/">
at March 13th, 2012, it came into my mind, that digikam could even
extend its capabilities to fulfil regular, lets call it "systematic
jobs" or, regular work.

As I describe peviously, I have to compare pics on a regular base, that
is, I must check pairwise pictures, if there are any changes/
differences between those two pics.

The ideal case would be, to use two pathes (from different time-stamps,
e.g.) where individual pics are stored, and a subsequent analysis by
digikam would find individual differences between two pics.

Best would be to mark these differences visually, mayby in red or yellow
(or so) to show these differences.

Background is the aim to derive changes from two time-stamps without
checking these differences manually and faulty.

I hope, I could clarify my wish!?

Please, let me know or ask.

thank you.


Axel


Am 27.05.2012 09:29, schrieb Gilles Caulier:
> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=300679
> 
> Gilles Caulier <caulier.gilles@gmail.com> changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                  CC|                            |caulier.gilles@gmail.com
> 
> --- Comment #1 from Gilles Caulier <caulier.gilles@gmail.com> ---
> Can you detail your which indeep please ?
> 
> Gilles Caulier
>
Comment 3 Axel Krebs 2012-06-11 18:10:56 UTC
Dear Gilles:

Just found: <http://www.imagemagick.org/Usage/compare/#compare> .

I would like very much to see digikam doing such a job, maybe on a basic
level.



Axel

Am 27.05.2012 09:29, schrieb Gilles Caulier:
> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=300679
> 
> Gilles Caulier <caulier.gilles@gmail.com> changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                  CC|                            |caulier.gilles@gmail.com
> 
> --- Comment #1 from Gilles Caulier <caulier.gilles@gmail.com> ---
> Can you detail your which indeep please ?
> 
> Gilles Caulier
>
Comment 4 caulier.gilles 2014-08-29 13:40:22 UTC
This entry is fully relevant of Light Table and is a duplicate of bug #314022
Gilles Caulier

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 314022 ***