Face Annotations - Rebuilding the Picasa Database

Started by jch2103, November 07, 2014, 05:30:01 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

jch2103

IMatch 5.2.8 introduced the ability to import face annotations from Picasa. One possible wrinkle in taking advantage of this new capability would be if the Picasa user had not previously enabled storage of face recognition data inside images (the Picasa default is to store such data in a separate location). In this situation, it's necessary to rebuild the Picasa database after changing the default setting. However, Picasa (unlike IMatch!) makes it difficult to rebuild the Picasa database.

Fortunately, Google has posted instructions for rebuilding a Picasa database at
https://sites.google.com/site/picasaresources/Home/Picasa-FAQ/picasa/troubleshooting/how-to-rebuild-database

Note that two methods are listed, the 'official' method and the alternate, safer way. Be sure to read the limitations and cautions if you need to use this technique.
John

Mario

I learned to hate Picasa while testing the Face Annotations. It is unable to detect changes in folders, or changes made to metadata by other applications. You always need to remove the folder from Picasa and add it again to  make it read data written by other applications. But it's free, so nobody can complain. You get what you pay for.

I've heard rumors that Google plans to abandon Picasa stand-alone application in the near future. Because they want users to move their images (and the contained face data) into the web where Google has access to that data. Face data stored in local Picasa databases is of no use for Google, no money in that.
-- Mario
IMatch Developer
Forum Administrator
http://www.photools.com  -  Contact & Support - Follow me on 𝕏 - Like photools.com on Facebook

jch2103

Note that the method I referenced above is supposed to be a substitute for deleting and re-adding folders in Picasa to pick up files changed by other (non-Picasa) programs.

But I can't disagree with your larger point. Google (and hence Picasa) is great for search and innovative functions like face recognition, but not always reliable in some areas (e.g., metadata editing), and Google is pretty lacking in transparency (e.g., future plans, including how they want to use your data).
John