Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Newbies / Re: Kodak ProBack 645M copy TextualInfo Tags to exif tags
« Last post by Alex Matiash on Today at 08:36:40 AM »
Thank you very much again, Phil!
Newbies / Re: Kodak ProBack 645M copy TextualInfo Tags to exif tags
« Last post by Phil Harvey on Today at 08:27:29 AM »
See FAQ 7 for deleting all metadata from a TIFF image.

- Phil
Hi Joakim,

Most of the warnings are because you aren't following the TIFF specification which says that all offsets should be even numbers (ie. all data values should be on 2-byte boundaries).

The most significant problem is that the maker notes have been corrupted because the offsets have not been updated properly.

The Aaaa, etc tags are XperiaCamera XMP tags.  Add -G1 to the exiftool command to see where the tags are coming from.

- Phil
Metadata / Strange bytes in JPEG meta data (Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact)
« Last post by joakimk on Today at 08:11:23 AM »
Hello again!

I have completed my app which edits meta data in JPEG files, on Android. I've run the following test image through the -validate option, and although it's not "OK" the warnings are all "minor". So I'm assuming the image to be OK.

However, I'm a bit confused by the "Aaaa" and "Aaab" sections in the output. Could you please have a look at the attached photo and see that it's not been damaged?

Code: [Select]
Focus Is Lens Moving            : 0
Aaaa                            : 90000000,e0000000
Aaab                            : ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff
Abaa                            : 05000000,5a000000

Newbies / Re: Kodak ProBack 645M copy TextualInfo Tags to exif tags
« Last post by Alex Matiash on Today at 07:43:10 AM »
Exiftool did remove all metadata.
I'm not sure, here is a screenshot of the beginning of this file:

All metadata listed by -s are visible.
Run exiftool -g0:1 -a on your file and it will show you where the info is coming from.
Code: [Select]
C:\Program Files (x86)\Portable\ExifTool>exiftool -g0:1 -a 4H4J1127.tiff
---- ExifTool ----
ExifTool Version Number         : 10.60
---- File:System ----
File Name                       : 4H4J1127.tiff
Directory                       : .
File Size                       : 95 MB
File Modification Date/Time     : 2017:10:20 12:39:12+03:00
File Access Date/Time           : 2017:10:20 12:39:12+03:00
File Creation Date/Time         : 2017:10:20 12:38:01+03:00
File Permissions                : rw-rw-rw-
---- File ----
File Type                       : TIFF
File Type Extension             : tif
MIME Type                       : image/tiff
Exif Byte Order                 : Little-endian (Intel, II)
---- EXIF:IFD0 ----
Subfile Type                    : Full-resolution Image
Image Width                     : 4080
Image Height                    : 4080
Bits Per Sample                 : 16 16 16
Compression                     : Uncompressed
Photometric Interpretation      : RGB
Image Description               :
Make                            : Kodak
Camera Model Name               : ProBack645
Strip Offsets                   : 364
Orientation                     : Unknown (9)
Samples Per Pixel               : 3
Rows Per Strip                  : 4080
Strip Byte Counts               : 99878400
Min Sample Value                : 0
X Resolution                    : 72
Y Resolution                    : 72
Planar Configuration            : Chunky
Resolution Unit                 : None
Software                        : 3.4.0.MH.ADF
Modify Date                     : 2017:10:16 13:31:03
Artist                          :
Copyright                       :
---- Composite ----
Image Size                      : 4080x4080
Megapixels                      : 16.6
Looks like this data is written to place where it should not be.
Looks like the file not opening in CaptureOne is related to something else.
No, it is the cause. Because the same file before copying metadata, or after copying but then opened and saved in Photoshop, is opened by C1 as it should. Copying all metadata with exifTool, and removing it also with exifTool leaves file without exif, but with some orphaned non-image data.
How did you create that tiff file?
By copying all metadata from raw to tiff with exifTool. Keep in mind, that the raw is from really old camera, and the whole topic is about working around it's non-standardness.
Newbies / Re: Kodak ProBack 645M copy TextualInfo Tags to exif tags
« Last post by Hayo Baan on Today at 07:10:43 AM »
Exiftool did remove all metadata. The info you are seeing is not metadata but file information. This you can't remove or otherwise there wouldn't be a file. Run exiftool -g0:1 -a on your file and it will show you where the info is coming from. Looks like the file not opening in CaptureOne is related to something else. How did you create that tiff file?
Newbies / Re: Kodak ProBack 645M copy TextualInfo Tags to exif tags
« Last post by Alex Matiash on Today at 06:25:10 AM »
Hi all, it's me again. And now I have the opposite problem: exifTool does not remove all metadata on "exiftool.exe -all= File". Actually:

Code: [Select]
C:\Program Files (x86)\Portable\ExifTool>exiftool.exe -all= 4H4J1127.tiff
Warning: [minor] Can't delete IFD0 from TIFF - 4H4J1127.tiff
    1 image files updated

C:\Program Files (x86)\Portable\ExifTool>exiftool.exe -s 4H4J1127.tiff
ExifToolVersion                 : 10.60
FileName                        : 4H4J1127.tiff
Directory                       : .
FileSize                        : 95 MB
FileModifyDate                  : 2017:10:20 12:39:12+03:00
FileAccessDate                  : 2017:10:20 12:39:12+03:00
FileCreateDate                  : 2017:10:20 12:38:01+03:00
FilePermissions                 : rw-rw-rw-
FileType                        : TIFF
FileTypeExtension               : tif
MIMEType                        : image/tiff
ExifByteOrder                   : Little-endian (Intel, II)
SubfileType                     : Full-resolution Image
ImageWidth                      : 4080
ImageHeight                     : 4080
BitsPerSample                   : 16 16 16
Compression                     : Uncompressed
PhotometricInterpretation       : RGB
ImageDescription                :
Make                            : Kodak
Model                           : ProBack645
StripOffsets                    : 364
Orientation                     : Unknown (9)
SamplesPerPixel                 : 3
RowsPerStrip                    : 4080
StripByteCounts                 : 99878400
MinSampleValue                  : 0
XResolution                     : 72
YResolution                     : 72
PlanarConfiguration             : Chunky
ResolutionUnit                  : None
Software                        : 3.4.0.MH.ADF
ModifyDate                      : 2017:10:16 13:31:03
Artist                          :
Copyright                       :
ImageSize                       : 4080x4080
Megapixels                      : 16.6

C:\Program Files (x86)\Portable\ExifTool>

It is not a problem for me, but it is for the CaptureOne, which is unable to open tiffs with this data inside. As far as I understand - it gets stuck on tag "Make" and following.
Unfortunately, I was unable to ask google correctly enough, so could anybody help me, please?
Metadata / Re: MP4 created date Google Photos vs Lightroom
« Last post by StarGeek on Today at 02:13:48 AM »
To be honest, you're going to have to choose whether you want Google or Lightroom to sort correctly, because they're not compatible in the way they're doing it.

The first problem is that Google is ignoring the time zone offset.  The second problem is that the Nexus 6P is incorrectly writing the timestamp.

Odds are the tags that are being read are in the Quicktime group (see Quicktime tags).  Timestamps in this group, by the specs, are supposed to be written in UTC.  Unfortunately, a lot of cameras write local time instead.

It's up to you to decide which is the best way to go about it.  Which are you going to rely on more, Google or LR?

Exiftool can write to some of the Quicktime timestamps (MediaCreateDate, MediaModifyDate, TrackCreateDate, TrackModifyDate, CreateDate, ModifyDate, and PreviewDate) but not to CreationDate or DateTimeOriginal.  I believe CreationDate is often given priority by various programs, though I haven't tested it extensively.

Metadata / MP4 created date Google Photos vs Lightroom
« Last post by MEH_PDX on October 19, 2017, 11:14:01 PM »
Can I fix this problem? I am trying to get Google and Lightroom to sort my photos correctly.

I took a video with my Panasonic Lumix at 19:18 this evening. I am -7UTC Pacific Time
I uploaded the Lumix MP4 to Google Photos but the time is incorrectly interpreted as 12:18.
I loaded the Lumix MP4 into Adobe Lightroom and the "capture time" shows correctly as 19:18.

I took another video with my Nexus 6P cellphone at 19:10 this evening.
I uploaded the 6P MP4 to Google Photos and the time shows correctly as 19:10.
I loaded the 6P MP4 into Adobe Lightroom and the "capture time" shows incorrectly as 02:10 the next day.

It would appear the Lightroom and Google handle the timezone offset differently but I don't know what to change to bring them into sync.

Thanks for any input,
Newbies / Re: Create Date:0000:00:00 00:00:00
« Last post by Alan Clifford on October 19, 2017, 07:30:09 PM »
I would say none of those choices although I don't understand what "formatting is off" means. If you have all those zeros in the date that I'd surmise that the date field exists and has zeros in it rather than being non-existent.  A copy would be exactly the same as the original otherwise it wouldn't be a copy.

If you post the video or post the results from

exiftool -G -a video_file_name_goes_here

we can have a look.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10