Title: Warning in displayed tags after using Microsoft Digital Image Library
Post by: Archive on May 12, 2010, 08:53:55 AM
Post by: Archive on May 12, 2010, 08:53:55 AM
[Originally posted by sinvee on 2006-06-22 07:19:23-07]
I am using Microsoft Digital Image Library to try to organise the photos I take by using the software labelling system. The software writes in a "XP Title" and "XP Keywords" tag in the image file to enable us to search via Windows XP's search tool as well.
After writing the tag, Exiftool's output for the modified file is reduced and gives one warning:
Warning : [minor] Possibly incorrect maker notes offsets (fix by 676?)
I noticed that the "Scale Factor To 35mm Equivalent" value is changed as well as some related tags like Hyperfocal Distance and the conversion of the 35mm equivalent value for Focal length.
Here are my questions:
As the warning is categorised as [minor], is it possible to correct this problem?
Is this a result of Microsoft writing the exif data in a non-standard way ...
Is there another software which can organise my photos without using an external catalog database like Adobe Album 2.0? Using the Metadata in the photos is quite convenient as the label stays with the photos and can be used by other software reading exif.
Thanks,
Derek Ip
I am using Microsoft Digital Image Library to try to organise the photos I take by using the software labelling system. The software writes in a "XP Title" and "XP Keywords" tag in the image file to enable us to search via Windows XP's search tool as well.
After writing the tag, Exiftool's output for the modified file is reduced and gives one warning:
Warning : [minor] Possibly incorrect maker notes offsets (fix by 676?)
I noticed that the "Scale Factor To 35mm Equivalent" value is changed as well as some related tags like Hyperfocal Distance and the conversion of the 35mm equivalent value for Focal length.
Here are my questions:
As the warning is categorised as [minor], is it possible to correct this problem?
Is this a result of Microsoft writing the exif data in a non-standard way ...
Is there another software which can organise my photos without using an external catalog database like Adobe Album 2.0? Using the Metadata in the photos is quite convenient as the label stays with the photos and can be used by other software reading exif.
Thanks,
Derek Ip
Title: Re: Warning in displayed tags after using Microsoft Digital Image Library
Post by: Archive on May 12, 2010, 08:53:55 AM
Post by: Archive on May 12, 2010, 08:53:55 AM
[Originally posted by exiftool on 2006-06-22 12:39:39-07]
I have made this a minor error only because it is so common. The problem is that offsets inside the maker notes are not handled correctly by most software. This is because the maker notes aren't part of the EXIF standard (frankly, this is a real flaw in the standard). So this problem will only effect maker note (and any derived) information.
ExifTool can read these damaged files correctly 90% of the time with the -F option. If you edit the file with ExifTool, be sure to use the -F option as well, or some information may be lost. However, the new file will still require the -F option to read properly. I am currently working on this area in the code: I would like the -F option to repair the damage when the file is rewritten, and if possible I want it to be applied automatically if I can improve the detection logic to be 100% reliable. But this is very difficult because, frankly, many maker notes structures are written improperly, and it is a challenge to handle all of the special cases.
The alternative is to use ExifTool to write the XPTitle and XPKeywords, then the maker notes won't be corrupted in the first place.
I have made this a minor error only because it is so common. The problem is that offsets inside the maker notes are not handled correctly by most software. This is because the maker notes aren't part of the EXIF standard (frankly, this is a real flaw in the standard). So this problem will only effect maker note (and any derived) information.
ExifTool can read these damaged files correctly 90% of the time with the -F option. If you edit the file with ExifTool, be sure to use the -F option as well, or some information may be lost. However, the new file will still require the -F option to read properly. I am currently working on this area in the code: I would like the -F option to repair the damage when the file is rewritten, and if possible I want it to be applied automatically if I can improve the detection logic to be 100% reliable. But this is very difficult because, frankly, many maker notes structures are written improperly, and it is a challenge to handle all of the special cases.
The alternative is to use ExifTool to write the XPTitle and XPKeywords, then the maker notes won't be corrupted in the first place.