Guillermo, Answers to your questions:
a) xmp's are named '<project name>_<camerafilename>_<$VERSION>.RAWextension.xmp' eg: original raw: '20200325_BonallyWoods_NIK_1413.NEF' version 3 xmp: '20200325_BonallyWoods_NIK_1413_03.NEF.xmp' b) I've checked the files and the new duplicate '3' has overwritten the existing xmp for the previous version 3. Also all xmp files in that group new have new modified dates - 24 July 2023, when I created the new duplicate Also I didn't mention that the NIK_1413 RAW and duplicates are in a single group. Thanks for your time. Dusenberg On 26/07/2023 03:41, Guillermo Rozas wrote:
That sounds strange. How are the xmp files named? If the duplicate uses a previously used version number, does it also overwrites the corresponding xmp sidecar? Regards, Guillermo On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 1:06 PM Dusenberg <dusenb...@gmx.co.uk> wrote: Hi Guillermo Yes the original and all duplicates were in the database before making the new duplicate. Regards Dusenberg On 25/07/2023 15:03, Guillermo Rozas wrote:Hi, were the original and all the duplicates present in the database before making the duplicate? Regards, Guillermo On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 5:57 AM Dusenberg <dusenb...@gmx.co.uk> wrote: Originally posted to darktable-dev list in error. dt 4.2.1 (OBS), Linux Mint 21,Ubuntu 22.04 jammy I have an image from March 2020 developed in darktable. I went back to it today to try another edit on it (its a monochrome rendition that I just can't get 'right'). However, today when I created a duplicate of this 2020 image in dt 4.2.1, it was given version number '3' - which already exists for that image (there are seven pre-existing duplicates). I see that dt has also given the new duplicate a different 'image id' to the original RAW image. I've never seen this before, although its not often I go back in time like this. My workflow is that I always create a new version (duplicate) of the base RAW for a different edit so I can trace back any final output that may result. My filenaming system is '<filename>_<version number>_<colorspace>_<max size>' where filename is composed of '<YYYYMMDD_projectname_original camera filename>'. Original camera images are renamed during download onto my workstation via a bespoke script (ie outside dt). I use variables in the dt export module to ensure any output follows this format. This provides unique identification of every image and its derivatives across my libraries, even when intermediate tiffs are involved in say, focus stacks. This is critical for me - I can't have two different edits of a RAW with the same filename! Why has it happened and what can I do about it? Thanks ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-user+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org <mailto:darktable-user%2bunsubscr...@lists.darktable.org> ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-user+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-user+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org <mailto:darktable-user%2bunsubscr...@lists.darktable.org> ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-user+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-user+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
