Yep I will run some tests tomorrow morning and give @arnelgp the all clear when it all works.Hopefully @arnelgp has just given you a practical solution
I just think have to re-examine images that might have changed in the past tales you down a very difficult cycle. I think your organisation needs to find a way that works, that hopefully doesn't involve changing data that has already been managed and processed. I think we thought you were talking about files of data, such as invoices. However even though you are talking about single images, the same principles apply. The current image ought to be the one with the highest version, and all you need is a way to record the changes and reasons for anyone interested in tracing the development. That's why there really needs to be no question of modifying work that has been previously issued as "fit for processing". It's a matter of version management. Point out that it is next to impossible to examine imagines and spot the changes. There are whole quiz books of spot the difference comparisons.
I have a system that saves versions of quotations, Every time a new item gets added, or a price changed, a new version of the quote, with a new version number gets stored. Anyone who is interested can go back and see the changes. I didn't actually track the actual changes, although I could have. What users couldn't do is just change an old version. Any change to the active data would produce a new version. I suppose I could have kept an audit trail of changes, and then played the whole thing it back as a sort of "game history", but then you don't get the historical snapshots. I didn't think of the alternative at the time. In practice the old versions are hardly ever looked at anyway.
But you're completely on point Gemma. I will express this concern to my organisation. I also agree with you that we should only be processing the newest or highest version of a file. Sorry I didn't mention earlier that I was talking about single images, but your point still applies. The organisation's idea is to mitigate miscommunication between the imaging and editing team. Previous batches, we had issues with the metadata. The client requested EXIF data to be consistent from it's capture/shoot to it's final output. There was some inconsistencies between different stages of image processing in the metadata. Hence why I've been requested to run metadata checks on the different stages of processing (after imaging in it's directory folder, after a copy is made in a separate folder location for preservation purposes, after the master is moved to the editing folder and when it is finally in the delivery folder).
The organisation wants to observe at what stage the EXIF metdata was changing. And I guess to further micromanage this, they wanted to know when the Last Date Modified had changed in those images.