IV Issues

[Mike Buckley]

Marc (or anyone),

I have been using IV for two weeks after thorough testing and familiarizing myself with the program.  I am very enthusiastic about it and posted favorable comments about the program at the IDimager support forum and the NikonCafe to introduce it to people who might not be aware of it. 

Everything has been working wonderfully until just now.  My issues are explained below.  I'm running 1.2.02 on Vista Home Premium 32-bit edition.  I have not downloaded IIP, if that matters.

Issue #1: I ran a hash check on files with previously stored hashes and was surprised to see 738 hash errors.  All of them were JPEGs.  (I also use NEFs and may have a very rare PSD or TIFF.)  I opened all of the suspected images in IDimager with no problems.  I spot checked a dozen of them by opening them in Capture NX2 also with no problems.  I am very confident that I had not made any changes to the images or metadata since having stored hashes or since runing my previous hash check of stored hashes, the latter of which took place one week ago.  Do you have any idea why suddenly IV might be reporting so many hash errors?

Issue #2: The hash check mentioned above terminated before it was completed because it came upon a folder that had been deleted.  I had stored the hashes while the image files were in that folder, but I later moved the images (did not change the filenames) and deleted the source folder.  EDIT:  See my follow-up post.

Issue #3: Being confident that all of the suspect images are indeed fine, I attempted to store new hashes by writing over the previously stored hashes.  I limited the folders only to those containing hash errors.  However, I cancelled the run because the display was showing that it was verifying folders that were not included in the heirarchy that I had selected.  What do you recommend that I do?  EDIT:  See my follow-up post.

Issue #4:  The panel that displays the "Suspected Invalid Images" in the results report is not wide enough to accomodate my longest paths. Alternatively, if the text is supposed to wrap, it is not wrapping.  I can't see the entire path on the right side, which means that I can't see the filename.

Suggestion:  When identifying individual files with hash errors, the reports mention "no hash stored."  If I understand that correctly, it is referring to new hashes as opposed to previously stored hashes.  If that's the case, it would be helpful to newbies who are not techies such as I if the report mentions "no new hash stored."  Similarly, the Run Log mentions the number of "hashes stored." It would be more clear if the log reports the number of "new hashes stored." 

Many thanks in advance for your help and consideration!

[Marc Rochkind]

Mike--

I'm going to go through this list this weekend and get back to you. Thanks for putting it together!

--Marc

[Mike Buckley]

This follow-up message describes my progress since posting the above message.

Issue #3:  I have resolved the issue, which might have been caused by an incorrect assumption I had made about how the software works. The "Folders to Verify" panel can display multiple paths.  At the time that I ran the hash check, there were two paths.  I highlighted the second path, thinking that that would be the path that would be verified.  Instead, I now realize that the first path which was not highlighted was being verified.  I have now deleted the first path and everything worked fine.

That leads to more questions:  To effectively run the verification process, is the software designed so there should only be one path in the display window?  My guess is that that's not likely, so I wonder if the solution is to use the function that names jobs.  I haven't figured out what a named job preserves, whether it is the items that are enabled/disabled, whether it is the file path, or both.

Issue #2: Now that I had stored new hashes as described immediately above in my follow-up to Issue #3, I ran a new hash check and it worked fine.  The deleted folder that had brought the verification to a stop the first time posed no issue this time.  Perhaps an anomoly?  Perhaps a symptom that the product is still in beta status?

--Mike

[Mike Buckley]

Marc,

I was writing my follow-up post when you posted, so please be sure to check it before responding to me.  Doing so might save you some time.

Please don't feel that you need to get back to me this weekend.  I'm not in a jam.  If I ever get in one that needs a quick response, I'll be sure to let you konw. 

--Mike

[Mike Buckley]

Marc,

If you could respond to my issues by Friday, I would appreciate it.  I do a major backup process which includes comparing hashes each weekend and it would be helpful to have a better handle on IV prior to the weekend.

[Marc Rochkind]

Mike--

Response to your issues by number:

1. Anything at all in the file that changed can cause the hash to be different. (Which, after all, is the point of the hash.) If you can ever find 2 files with different hashes where the files are the same bit-for-bit, I can look into this. Otherwise, I don't have enough data to determine if anything is amiss and, if so, what it is.

2. Not sure what is going on. An anomaly I guess, most likely related to the rearrangement/deletion of folders.

3. Your guess is correct. From the User's Manual: "For each verification run, called a job, you can choose the folders, whether to process subfolders or just the top level, what kinds of images to process (PSD, TIFF, JPEG, DNG, and/or non-DNG raw), the maximum number of errors to report, and whether to store the results in a built-in database. You can save the settings in a named job, which acts something like ImageIngester's Master Presets."

4. This is an unfortunate flaw in the UI design, as the window doesn't resize. You can press the "Containing Folder" button to see where the file is.

Thanks also for your suggestion. I do see how the wording could be misleading.

--Marc

[Mike Buckley]

Thanks for getting back to me, Marc.  I understand most of the responses and they make sense.  However, please hang in there with me with regard to the stuff below.

From the User's Manual: "For each verification run, called a job, you can choose the folders, whether to process subfolders or just the top level, what kinds of images to process (PSD, TIFF, JPEG, DNG, and/or non-DNG raw), the maximum number of errors to report, and whether to store the results in a built-in database. You can save the settings in a named job, which acts something like ImageIngester's Master Presets."

I gather from the above that saving the settings in a named job is supposed to also save the folder.  I can't get it to save the folder.  Assume I have saved Job A that verifies folder A.  If I run a different job in Folder B and then return to saved Job A, it doesn't bring up Folder A; instead, I have to manually selet Folder A.  Am I missing something?

I also have never figured out how to configure it to verify only the top level of a folder (not the subfolders) even though the documentation says that can be done.  Please advise.

--Mike

[Marc Rochkind]

Mike--

I've gotten no other reports of IV not saving the folder in the job, and just verified this myself on an XP system. I will check it on Vista when I get a chance over the next couple of days.

I'm still researching the subfolder problem.

--Marc

[Mike Buckley]

Marc,

I'm using Vista 32-bit.  I also asked another user to report which OS he uses because he apparently successfully saves folders in saved jobs.

By the way, I really do hope that your next post is in response to mine.  I would be quite proud to claim that your 1000th post is to me. 

--Mike

[Mike Buckley]

Marc,

The person I asked about saving the folder in the named job is using XP.

--Mike

[Marc Rochkind]

Mike--

I will fire up my Vista machine today. And, I guess this would be post #1000.

--Marc

[Mike Buckley]

And, I guess this would be post #1000.

        

--Mike

[rsmith1]

I am the other person that Mike mentioned.  I want to throw in that I am running IV and IIP on a 64-bit XP system.  The installers don't run, but if I install manually the programs seem to work fine.  The latest version of IV does save folders correctly on my XP x64 system.  I only have one Vista system, a laptop that I keep turned off as much as possible, but I could test there if you would like me to.

Randall Smith

[Marc Rochkind]

Randall--

Saving of the folder list in a job would be something I'd like you to test. I tested it again on my Vista (Business) 32-bit system last night, and it worked fine.

The skip-subfolders option is permanently disabled, but I am going to fix that later this week.

--Marc

[Mike Buckley]

Marc,

You're using a Vista Business edition but mine is Vista Home Premium.  I have no idea if that could matter.

Thanks to you and Randall for looking into this!