gui 4.18, tool v.8.61, win xp.
It appears that the exif copyright field is limited to 20 chars, based on my trying to put in more than that with gui (^ exif) and finding later that it has been truncated. If it is true that this field is limited to 20 chars, then it would be useful if gui did not allow more than the max number to be entered.
Also if true, then if gui is sending the entire >20 char string to exiftool, then also exiftool should complain. (If so, then I'll mention this on the exiftool forum.)
If it is not true that this field is limited to 20 chars, then there is some bug in gui limiting it.
Yes, I could check for some of the answers to the above on my own, but the developers probably know the answers offhand, while it would take a fair bit of effort for me to find them. Also, I realize that fixing small issues such as this complicates what is supposed to be a simple gui program. It's a matter of taste whether to resolve them.
By entering Copyright value via ^Exif, it's length is limited to 64 characters and all 64 characters are saved.
In QuickView, only first 31 characters are shown (maybe I should increase that), however in ExifView, complete Copyright tag content is shown (even there are more than 64 characters).
But there's something "weird" happening (again?)... if (any) tag is "marked", then only first 30 characters of tag value are displayed. As soon I click on particular tag (that is, it becomes selected), all characters become visible. Will check tomorrow...
Bogdan
The ExifTool application places no limit on the length of EXIF strings, although in JPEG images there is a practical limit of 64 kB due to the maximum size of a JPEG segment. However, IPTC strings may be truncated if they exceed the maximum length allowed by the specification, in which case a minor warning is issued, but ignoring these minor warnings disables the IPTC truncation.
- Phil
Sorry, I counted wrong. I was in fact looking in quickview, and it did indeed truncate at 31 chars, not 20. (Don't know how I counted only 20 -- I guess a combination of loss-of-10 brain fart plus fencepost error.) Glad that I was wrong and in fact the actual exif had the right thing inserted.
Now that I have all the facts, I hereby modify my suggestion to say that whatever I enter into a field to change that field using gui, should also be what gui shows me as being in that field when I go to look at it later, regardless of whether I use quickview, a specific header button, or 'all'. (So, for example, if gui only lets me enter 64 chars, then it should always show me at least 64 chars in that field.) That's what I think a reasonable user would expect. (Since I consider myself reasonable, though I have heard contrary opinions at times.)
If for some reason a field has more characters than gui is designed to display, then perhaps a truncated value concatenated with "..." might be a good thing to display. (I.e., if e.g. I used exiftool directly to put in 100 chars, but gui can show only 64 [or 31] chars, then maybe it should show the first 61 [or 28] chars + "...".)
I realize that every such suggestion implies many lines of code. Sorry.
Ok, this small "marked" issue is now corrected.
I realize, that such things happen because of my "old fashion" programming thinking: I started with programming when 512kB was a lot of memory, where one couldn't afford wasting a single byte (part of disciplined programming at that time). I'm afraid, I'm too old now, to get rid of that way of thinking :)
Back to topic.. As said, in all metadata views (except Quick), GUI displays complete tag values (as given by ExifTool). In Quick view, (from now on) the same size will be displayed as can be entered via ^Exif panel.
Your suggestion about final character(s) indicating truncated string value is reasonable -will happen.
As allways, I'm glad about suggestions which make sense (to me?) and which are within GUI purpose.
You've kept me quite busy in last days... have you thinked about starting to "examine" some professional software? :) -I hope you notice a joke ;)
Bogdan
Thanks!
The difference between "professional" (mass market) software and "amateur" (open source/freeware/shareware) is that with the "professional" kind, bugs never get fixed and no one listens to your bug reports. If a bug does get fixed in "professional" software, you have to pay all over again for the new version that fixes the bug that you spent hours isolating for free to help the company and other users.
I should add that I really appreciate all the effort you've spent dealing with these bug reports/suggestions. I'm sure I speak for many other users, too. Also, typically these things come in when it's not necessarily convenient to interrupt your life to fix them.