Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

EXIF differences between programs

Tags:
Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
January 7, 2005 3:34:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In a separate post I've described how I've been trying to track down
some mysterious differences in the EXIF data reported by the same
program (IrfanView) when looking at the original HD file and the
identical file burned onto CD-R with Nero.

In the course of this I displayed 'EXIF data' from the same (HD) file
in three different programs, and the results are shown below.

Assuming that each has chosen a different subset of the *full* EXIF
data available, is there no consensus on what is generally regarded as
the most useful?

Anyone know why there are so many blank entries in the PSP 8 offering?


In PaintShop Pro 8
==================

Item Value
------- -----------
Date and time Monday, April 05, 2004 11:18:48 AM
Sub-second
Original date and time Monday, April 05, 2004 11:18:48 AM
Original sub-second
Digitized date and time Monday, April 05, 2004 11:18:48 AM
Digitized sub-second
Image title*
Image unique id
Image width
Image height
Components per pixel
Planar configuration
Orientation Landscape (Top Left)
Photometric interpretation
X resolution 72.0 dpi
Y resolution 72.0 dpi
Resolution unit Inches (in)
Pixel height 2048
Pixel width 1360
Component configuration YCbCr
Compressed bits per pixel 2.000000
Color space sRGB
Compression JPEG (thumbnail)
Reference black and white
White point
Primary chromaticities
YCbCr properties
JPEG bytes size
JPEG offset
Sound file

In IrfanView
============
EXIF Tag Value
File: D:\Docs\My
Pictures\ForDVD\Holidays\Algarve\02-05Apr04 11-18.jpg

Make SONY
Model CYBERSHOT
Orientation Top left
XResolution 72.00
YResolution 72.00
ResolutionUnit Inch
DateTime 2004:04:05 11:18:48
YCbCrPositioning Co-Sited
ExifOffset 122
ExposureTime 1/626 seconds
FNumber 5.60
ExposureProgram Normal program
ISOSpeedRatings 100
ExifVersion 0210
DateTimeOriginal 2004:04:05 11:18:48
DateTimeDigitized 2004:04:05 11:18:48
ComponentsConfiguration YCbCr
CompressedBitsPerPixel 2 (bits/pixel)
ExposureBiasValue 0.00
MaxApertureValue F 2.83
MeteringMode Center weighted average
LightSource Auto
Flash Not fired
FocalLength 9.20 mm
FlashPixVersion 0100
ColorSpace sRGB
ExifImageWidth 1360
ExifImageHeight 2048
InteroperabilityOffset 531
FileSource DSC - Digital still camera
SceneType A directly photographed image


In ThumbsPlus
=============
Original date/time: 2004:04:05 11:18:48
Exposure time: 1/626
F-stop: 5.6
ISO speed: 100
Focal length: 9.2000
Flash: Not fired
Orientation: Top-left
Light source: Unknown
Exposure bias: 0.0000
Metering mode: Center Weighted
Exposure program: Normal
Digitized date/time: 2004:04:05 11:18:48
Modified date/time: 2004:04:05 11:18:48
Scene type: Photograph
Camera make: SONY
Camera model: CYBERSHOT
X resolution: 72.0000
Y resolution: 72.0000
Resolution unit: Inches
Colorspace: sRGB
File source: DSC

--
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 12:47:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>>Anyone know why there are so many blank entries in the PSP 8 offering?
Most of the data fields which _could_ appear in EXIF data are optional.
Most sensible software doesn't report fields which are not present in the
file. It looks to me as if PSP is determined to report a number of data
items even if they are absent from the file.

If you really want to get down to the nitty gritty, and can bear to download
yet another package, you can get a full low-level analysis of an EXIF using
my PhotoMan application
(http://homepages.tesco.net/~Keith.Sheppard/photoman/hom...).

In PhotoMan, open the folder containing the file of interest, right click on
the photo and select "Anatomy" from the menu displayed. PhotoMan will then
produce a full and detailed report showing every IFD (see my response to
your previous message), where it appears in the file and exactly what it
contains.

>>Assuming that each has chosen a different subset of the *full* EXIF
>>data available, is there no consensus on what is generally regarded as
>>the most useful?

Clearly not. The significant difference about PhotoMan's report is that it
always shows exactly what is in the file (neither more nor less), not what
the
application is hoping or expecting to find in the file.

Regards
Keith
!