- Welcome to ExifTool Forum.
"Metadata R Us"
News:
2025-07-02: ExifTool 13.32 is now available
Recent posts
#1
The Image::ExifTool API / Re: Problem with tag qualifier...
Last post by Tom Cunningham - Today at 05:55:58 PMQuote from: Tom Cunningham on Today at 05:52:38 PMWriteValue wanted it as 2025:06:16 21:41:49-07:00.
Should be SetNewValue, sheesh.
#2
The Image::ExifTool API / Re: Problem with tag qualifier...
Last post by Tom Cunningham - Today at 05:52:38 PMTypical dumbness on my part. 
I even went so far as to step into Writer.pl and finally saw the error string generated. I had checked in a previous run in the debugger and it was empty, so I never went back to it. Anyway, the problem was the timestamp returned from the DateTime object looked like this: 2025:06:16 21:41:49-0700, and WriteValue wanted it as 2025:06:16 21:41:49-07:00. So it seems to be working now; thanks for your patience, guys. 
I even went so far as to step into Writer.pl and finally saw the error string generated. I had checked in a previous run in the debugger and it was empty, so I never went back to it. Anyway, the problem was the timestamp returned from the DateTime object looked like this: 2025:06:16 21:41:49-0700, and WriteValue wanted it as 2025:06:16 21:41:49-07:00. So it seems to be working now; thanks for your patience, guys. #3
The "exiftool" Application / Re: DNGs: Obtaining the byte o...
Last post by Phil Harvey - Today at 03:17:10 PMThinking about this, ExifTool may give priority to the tags in the IFD of the full image -- it certainly does for the image size tags, but I don't recall if this also applies to TileOffsets and I can't check right now.
- Phil
- Phil
#4
The "exiftool" Application / Re: DNGs: Obtaining the byte o...
Last post by User93848562 - Today at 01:22:56 PMThank you for the confirmation. And good callout on multiple IFDs.
#5
Metadata / Re: Need a favor from a Exifto...
Last post by StarGeek - Today at 09:59:04 AMD'oh. Yes, you're right.
#6
The Image::ExifTool API / Re: Problem with tag qualifier...
Last post by Phil Harvey - Today at 07:20:18 AMI don't see anything obvious. I suggest printing the arguments of the call to SetNewValue to be sure they are the same in both cases.
- Phil
- Phil
#7
Bug Reports / Feature Requests / Re: Geotagging with ExifTool
Last post by Phil Harvey - Today at 07:14:03 AMHi Antoine,
ExifTool should be able to handle RMC and GGA at different rates.
- Phil
ExifTool should be able to handle RMC and GGA at different rates.
- Phil
#8
Newbies / Re: How do I deal with "Warnin...
Last post by Phil Harvey - Today at 06:26:52 AMQuote from: Ian_Exif on Today at 05:02:58 AMQuote$ exiftool -api ExtendedXMP=2 -forcewrite=xmp IMG_20250629_221951785_HDR_AE.jpg
Warning: Reading non-standard extended XMP (GUID 8D0376C590E59E0CE8E2CAE1C75072DF) - IMG_20250629_221951785_HDR_AE.jpg
1 image files updated
The warning is gone when processing the file after this, `Is Auto Enhanced` is retained, `XML Toolkit` changes from `Adobe XMP Core 5.1.0-jc003` to `Image::ExifTool 13.10`.
OK, then this is maybe better if you want to retain the original XMPToolkit:
exiftool -api ExtendedXMP=2 -tagsfromfile @ -xmptoolkit FILE
The -xmp:all= -tagsfromfile @ is significantly more destructive because it will remove all unrecognized XMP.
- Phil
#9
The "exiftool" Application / Re: DNGs: Obtaining the byte o...
Last post by Phil Harvey - Today at 06:21:22 AMJust my quick thoughts on this:
You should maybe be more specific about which TileOffsets you are accessing because there may be more than one IFD with this information. Probably SubIFD:TileOffsets is the one you want, but to be sure you should check that SubIFD:SubfileType is the "Full-resolution image".
And yes, the TIFF alignment requirement may introduce a padding byte between the tiles.
- Phil
You should maybe be more specific about which TileOffsets you are accessing because there may be more than one IFD with this information. Probably SubIFD:TileOffsets is the one you want, but to be sure you should check that SubIFD:SubfileType is the "Full-resolution image".
And yes, the TIFF alignment requirement may introduce a padding byte between the tiles.
- Phil
#10
Newbies / Re: How do I deal with "Warnin...
Last post by Ian_Exif - Today at 05:02:58 AMThanks both for the speedy help. Here's how each of your suggested commands worked out (in order of suggestions):
So the warning has gone and I can see data with this.
Next:
This works in that I no longer get any warning processing the file after this but `Is Auto Enhanced : True` is gone from final file. In the metadata `XML Toolkit` changes from `Adobe XMP Core 5.1.0-jc003` to `Image::ExifTool 13.10`.
Next this:
The warning is gone when processing the file after this operation, `Is Auto Enhanced` is retained in the metadata and no change to `XML Toolkit`. This is best result so far for me. I note the additional warning above `Entries in IFD0 were out of sequence. Fixed.` - is this some clue?
Next:
The warning is gone when processing the file after this, `Is Auto Enhanced` is retained, `XML Toolkit` changes from `Adobe XMP Core 5.1.0-jc003` to `Image::ExifTool 13.10`.
So without any further info I would probably use
I've attached a sample picture.
Quote$ exiftool -api ExtendedXMP=2 -XMP:All IMG_20250629_221951785_HDR_AE.jpg
XMP Toolkit : Adobe XMP Core 5.1.0-jc003
Special Type ID : com.motorola.camera.SpecialType.AutoEnhance
Is Auto Enhanced : True
So the warning has gone and I can see data with this.
Next:
Quote$ exiftool -api ExtendedXMP=2 -XMP:All= -TagsFromFile @ -XMP:All IMG_20250629_221951785_HDR_AE.jpg
Warning: Reading non-standard extended XMP (GUID 8D0376C590E59E0CE8E2CAE1C75072DF) - IMG_20250629_221951785_HDR_AE.jpg
1 image files updated
This works in that I no longer get any warning processing the file after this but `Is Auto Enhanced : True` is gone from final file. In the metadata `XML Toolkit` changes from `Adobe XMP Core 5.1.0-jc003` to `Image::ExifTool 13.10`.
Next this:
Quote$ exiftool -api ExtendedXMP=2 -XMP:all= -TagsFromFile @ -XMP IMG_20250629_221951785_HDR_AE.jpg
Warning: Reading non-standard extended XMP (GUID 8D0376C590E59E0CE8E2CAE1C75072DF) - IMG_20250629_221951785_HDR_AE.jpg
Warning: [minor] Entries in IFD0 were out of sequence. Fixed. - IMG_20250629_221951785_HDR_AE.jpg
1 image files updated
The warning is gone when processing the file after this operation, `Is Auto Enhanced` is retained in the metadata and no change to `XML Toolkit`. This is best result so far for me. I note the additional warning above `Entries in IFD0 were out of sequence. Fixed.` - is this some clue?
Next:
Quote$ exiftool -api ExtendedXMP=2 -forcewrite=xmp IMG_20250629_221951785_HDR_AE.jpg
Warning: Reading non-standard extended XMP (GUID 8D0376C590E59E0CE8E2CAE1C75072DF) - IMG_20250629_221951785_HDR_AE.jpg
1 image files updated
The warning is gone when processing the file after this, `Is Auto Enhanced` is retained, `XML Toolkit` changes from `Adobe XMP Core 5.1.0-jc003` to `Image::ExifTool 13.10`.
So without any further info I would probably use
Code Select
exiftool -api ExtendedXMP=2 -XMP:all= -TagsFromFile @ -XMP FILES to fix all my files as it seems to make the least changes to the metadata but if there's something better I'd love to know.I've attached a sample picture.