Possibly incorrect maker notes warning

[Tarn]

Hi Phil

  For your information and for what it's worth, here is a URL to a TIF file that has: "[minor] Possibly incorrect maker notes offsets (fix by 4944?)" in the "Warning" tag.
www.dustylenzkapp.com/Dump/040822-0256.tif (14,408Kb)


  I ran the following command on it to put the camera  model into the Model tag.
-P -m -overwrite_original -Model="C5050Z" *.tif
it returned: "Warning: Maker notes could not be parsed - 040822-0256.tif", but updated the "Model" tag with the proper information.

  This is not something that I need help with as ExifTool updates the tag in spite of the error, or warning; and opening it in Photo Shop and saving it right back to itself corrects the problem. This is one of the few, and I mean very few, files that the "-m" option did not clear up. So I offer it to you in the event that you may want to take a look and see what is going on with it.

  I don't remember which software I used to edit it. I believe it was either the software that came with the camera (Olympus C5050Z), or with Correl; but I'm not positive on that.

  Again, this is nothing I need you to jump into. Just thought you might want to take a look at it for information purposes.

Thanks.

[Phil Harvey]

Thanks for the sample.  Yes, this is one case where ExifTool doesn't know what to do, so when the error is ignored the maker notes are simply copied as a block, and the resulting image will give the same warning.

FYI:  There is no useful information in these maker notes anyway.  They seem to be an abbreviated form of the Olympus maker notes, but only contain a pointer to a 4kB thumbnail image, which is missing.

- Phil

[Tarn]

Thanks for the sample.  Yes, this is one case where ExifTool doesn't know what to do, so when the error is ignored the maker notes are simply copied as a block, and the resulting image will give the same warning.

Like I said, this one of the very, very few images that ET did not correct. And even un-corrected, the information was stored where I wanted it to go; I can read that information fine; and I can view the image. I have no complaints at all.

FYI:  There is no useful information in these maker notes anyway.  They seem to be an abbreviated form of the Olympus maker notes, but only contain a pointer to a 4kB thumbnail image, which is missing.

That was taken with the Olympus C5050Z, close to a hundred years ago. To begin with, the picture itself is not very good. Add to the mix that it's been hacked by several different editors and I'm surprised that it can even be opened at all.

Thanks for taking a look. While we are on the subject, are you interested in image samples like that? Or have you seen enough of them? I mean is there any valuable info in them for you or am I wasting your time with them?

Thanks again.

[Phil Harvey]

I'm interested in any sample that causes a run-time error with ExifTool, or any image where you don't think that ExifTool behaves correctly.  I don't expect Exiftool to be able to fix everything (or even be able to write image which has significant problems)... the number of possible ways to corrupt an image is simply too large.  So from that point of view, more samples like this one would not be very useful, but thanks for asking.

- Phil

[Tarn]

No problem.