Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is 'lost' EXIF data gone forever?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
March 23, 2005 3:57:01 PM

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

I'm trying to reconstruct the chronological sequence of many holiday
photos, edited before I wised up to all the issues over the
impermenance of EXIF data.

Before I give up and resort entirely to guesswork and arguments with
my wife, can I just double check with the experts here on one
fundamental point please. Is there *any* way that JPG files on my HD
can be processed to yield the original EXIF data? The files obviously
started life in my digicam, complete with EXIF Date/Time to the
second, so it's frustrating to have lost it.

In the same sense that 'deleted' HD files *can* actually be recovered,
is there any program that will do so for my EXIF data please?

If, as I suspect, the answer is a firm No, then out of intellectual
curiosity, can anyone explain in non-techie terms why it wasn't simply
preserved? That is, regardless of various image editors' indifference
to it?

--
Terry, West Sussex, UK

More about : lost exif data forever

Anonymous
March 23, 2005 4:14:35 PM

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

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:57:01 +0000, Terry Pinnell wrote:

> I'm trying to reconstruct the chronological sequence of many holiday
> photos, edited before I wised up to all the issues over the
> impermenance of EXIF data.
>
> Before I give up and resort entirely to guesswork and arguments with
> my wife, can I just double check with the experts here on one
> fundamental point please. Is there *any* way that JPG files on my HD
> can be processed to yield the original EXIF data? The files obviously
> started life in my digicam, complete with EXIF Date/Time to the
> second, so it's frustrating to have lost it.
>
> In the same sense that 'deleted' HD files *can* actually be recovered,
> is there any program that will do so for my EXIF data please?
>
> If, as I suspect, the answer is a firm No, then out of intellectual
> curiosity, can anyone explain in non-techie terms why it wasn't simply
> preserved? That is, regardless of various image editors' indifference
> to it?


There is no way to recover the EXIF data once it has been overwritten.

Apparently those photos have been edited buy a Photo Editor that does not
preserve EXIF data then saved under the same filename overwriting the
original file.

The .JPG file format has been around for a long time and as a result has
many extensions to the format. Old JPG editors and / or simple editor
programs don't support the latest file formats so EXIF data can be easily
lost. There is lots of technical information about EXIF on the WEB.

You should always make backup copies of the Original files.
These are your "Digital Negatives" and they cannot be replaced once they are
destroyed.

Only work with Copies of the original files.

CD-ROM Disk are cheep insurance against loosing irreplaceable files such
as original camera files.







--
Korbin Dallas
The name was changed to protect the guilty.
Anonymous
March 23, 2005 5:06:44 PM

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

"Terry Pinnell" <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:p ap241lrqgq3mdt1ld1d43lkbi3mvr3j8g@4ax.com...
> I'm trying to reconstruct the chronological sequence of many holiday
> photos, edited before I wised up to all the issues over the
> impermenance of EXIF data.
>

You actually pressed Delete on a number of your *original* pictures then?
Wow. That's extraordinary.
Don't EVER do that again.

But ref your chronological sequence problem, surely it is identical to the
numbering sequence of your copies? Or don't tell me you renamed them to the
likes of "Mary paddling in the sea at Brighton.jpg"?

H.
Related resources
Anonymous
March 23, 2005 5:48:35 PM

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

Terry Pinnell wrote:
[]
> If, as I suspect, the answer is a firm No, then out of intellectual
> curiosity, can anyone explain in non-techie terms why it wasn't simply
> preserved? That is, regardless of various image editors' indifference
> to it?

It takes more programming effort to preserve it. Try Paint Shop Pro 9
which will preserve at least some of the EXIF information if you ask it.

Sorry to hear you lost the originals, but next time be sure to backup onto
CD or DVD first. I suppose the originals aren't still on your memory
cards? We have a work flow which keeps originals ("masters") and edited
copies ("prints") on the computer until all editing is finished.

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
March 23, 2005 9:27:40 PM

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

> CD-ROM Disk are cheep insurance against loosing irreplaceable files
> such
> as original camera files.

They degrade to unusability within 2 years. Hard drive backup is much more
reliable.
--
Phil, Squid-in-Training
Anonymous
March 23, 2005 9:27:41 PM

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

In article <wyi0e.2096$kI3.1562@fe07.usenetserver.com>,
"Phil, Squid-in-Training" <phil_leeIHEARTBASHGUARDS@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> > CD-ROM Disk are cheep insurance against loosing irreplaceable files
> > such as original camera files.
>
> They degrade to unusability within 2 years. Hard drive backup is much more
> reliable.

Er, not really. I have 6-year-old CD-Rs that are still perfectly fine,
and hard drives that have failed with some frequency. I would recommend
keeping both, and making new CD backups every few years.

----j7y

--
jere7my tho?rpe | "The land knows whom it sent out;
(440) 775-1522 | In the place of human beings
jere7my2@oberlin.net | Their ashes in urns
http://www.livejournal.com/~jere7my | Come back to each man's house."
--- Aeschylus, The Agamemnon
Anonymous
March 23, 2005 9:27:42 PM

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

jere7my tho?rpe wrote:
> In article <wyi0e.2096$kI3.1562@fe07.usenetserver.com>,
> "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <phil_leeIHEARTBASHGUARDS@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>>CD-ROM Disk are cheep insurance against loosing irreplaceable files
>>>such as original camera files.
>>
>>They degrade to unusability within 2 years. Hard drive backup is much more
>>reliable.
>
>
> Er, not really. I have 6-year-old CD-Rs that are still perfectly fine,
> and hard drives that have failed with some frequency. I would recommend
> keeping both, and making new CD backups every few years.
>
> ----j7y
>
I find it simpler, faster, and in the end, cheaper, to just copy my
pictures to several HDs. With storage at below $.50 a GB, even CDR's
are more expensive if you buy good ones.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
March 23, 2005 10:05:33 PM

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

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:14:35 GMT, Korbin Dallas
<korbindallas@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:57:01 +0000, Terry Pinnell wrote:
>
>You should always make backup copies of the Original files.
>These are your "Digital Negatives" and they cannot be replaced once they are
>destroyed.

Yes, this should be done immediately following the download and before
erasing the card.

>Only work with Copies of the original files.

Definitely only save new files, never overwrite an original.

>CD-ROM Disk are cheep insurance against loosing irreplaceable files such
>as original camera files.

DVD-R would be more suitable. It is a physically tougher medium, and
can accommodate more data.

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga
March 24, 2005 12:24:48 AM

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

Not so. Special gold Cd-Rs such as Delkin Archival Gold supposedly will last
100 years, as estimated by accelerated testing. In any event, hard drives do
fail, you know. Even the gold CD-R blanks cost about $1.75 each, a heck of a
lot cheaper than a spare hard drive.
Morton

"Phil, Squid-in-Training" wrote:

> > CD-ROM Disk are cheep insurance against loosing irreplaceable files
> > such
> > as original camera files.
>
> They degrade to unusability within 2 years. Hard drive backup is much more
> reliable.
> --
> Phil, Squid-in-Training
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 3:37:30 AM

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

"jere7my tho?rpe" <jere7my2@oberlin.net> wrote in message
news:jere7my2-6319B0.13434723032005@corp.supernews.com...
> In article <wyi0e.2096$kI3.1562@fe07.usenetserver.com>,
> "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <phil_leeIHEARTBASHGUARDS@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > CD-ROM Disk are cheep insurance against loosing irreplaceable files
> > > such as original camera files.
> >
> > They degrade to unusability within 2 years. Hard drive backup is much
more
> > reliable.
>
> Er, not really. I have 6-year-old CD-Rs that are still perfectly fine,
> and hard drives that have failed with some frequency. I would recommend
> keeping both, and making new CD backups every few years.
>

Not only that, I have a DVD RAM drive and that media is extremely long-lived
and not as expensive as it used to be. Great for archiving. Besides, HDD
failures are more apt to occur than something happening to my RAM discs kept
in a fire proof document safe.

Ron
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 10:00:46 AM

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

Ron Krebs wrote:
> Not only that, I have a DVD RAM drive and that media is extremely long-lived
> and not as expensive as it used to be. Great for archiving. Besides, HDD
> failures are more apt to occur than something happening to my RAM discs kept
> in a fire proof document safe.
>
> Ron

Don't expect a "fire proof document safe" to preserve your DVDs or CDs.

-Dave
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 10:04:25 AM

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

mort wrote:
>
> Not so. Special gold Cd-Rs such as Delkin Archival Gold supposedly will last
> 100 years, as estimated by accelerated testing. In any event, hard drives do
> fail, you know. Even the gold CD-R blanks cost about $1.75 each, a heck of a
> lot cheaper than a spare hard drive.
> Morton

I've been paying < $100 per 200GB HDD, less cost/MB than gold CDs. I
keep my HDDs in removeable trays in USB/Firewire housings so that
they're portable, adaptable and powered only when needed. And I also
back up to DVD.

-Dave
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 2:35:54 PM

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

"David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote:

>Terry Pinnell wrote:
>[]
>> If, as I suspect, the answer is a firm No, then out of intellectual
>> curiosity, can anyone explain in non-techie terms why it wasn't simply
>> preserved? That is, regardless of various image editors' indifference
>> to it?
>
>It takes more programming effort to preserve it. Try Paint Shop Pro 9
>which will preserve at least some of the EXIF information if you ask it.
>
>Sorry to hear you lost the originals, but next time be sure to backup onto
>CD or DVD first. I suppose the originals aren't still on your memory
>cards? We have a work flow which keeps originals ("masters") and edited
>copies ("prints") on the computer until all editing is finished.
>
>Cheers,
>David
>

Thanks all, that's pretty well what I expected. Must say I'm still a
bit surprised that a single crop or brightness increase in PaintShop
Pro 7, for example, has placed all EXIF data in that file beyond even
partial recovery of a clever program.

Needless to say, I do things differently now. But that leaves a fair
bit of detective work to be done on the victims of my early-day
carelessness!

But I suppose anyone who has digitised old photos from scans of prints
and slides must be used to similar chores? The bulk of my prints have
no dates marked on the reverse side, and I never got around to marking
many of them myself.

--
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 2:35:55 PM

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

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:35:54 +0000, in rec.photo.digital Terry Pinnell
<terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote:

>Thanks all, that's pretty well what I expected. Must say I'm still a
>bit surprised that a single crop or brightness increase in PaintShop
>Pro 7, for example, has placed all EXIF data in that file beyond even
>partial recovery of a clever program.

Why, PSP7 doesn't preserve the exif info. If you then resaved the
files using the same name and you're overwriting the copy of the file
that contained it, or at least the reference to it. IF you immediately
stopped and wrote nothing else to the hard disk the original file
containing the exif info might be recoverable. Once other writes are
made to the disk the chance of this being possible gets smaller and
smaller. You can try a file recovery program such as PC Inspector on
your disk and memory card and see what you might be able to recover.
Aside from that it's over.


________________________________________________________
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://EdwardGRuf.com
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 2:35:55 PM

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

Terry Pinnell <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> writes:

> Thanks all, that's pretty well what I expected. Must say I'm still a
> bit surprised that a single crop or brightness increase in PaintShop
> Pro 7, for example, has placed all EXIF data in that file beyond even
> partial recovery of a clever program.

If you have the originals stored away somewhere else, such as on a CD, there
are programs that can copy the EXIF information from one image to another. The
two that I know of are:

exiftool: http://owl.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/ (needs perl)
jhead: http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/jhead/

--
Michael Meissner
email: mrmnews@the-meissners.org
http://www.the-meissners.org
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 3:11:22 PM

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

Terry Pinnell wrote:
[]
> But I suppose anyone who has digitised old photos from scans of prints
> and slides must be used to similar chores? The bulk of my prints have
> no dates marked on the reverse side, and I never got around to marking
> many of them myself.

All my slides and my wife's prints have the film and print number on them.
Mostly they were taken at "events" of one form or another, and the events
were recorded on a database.

Having said that, we don't have any plans at the moment to digitise old
stuff - rather as when CDs came out it was chance to purchase fresh
versions or different works as one's tastes had changed over the years, so
digital is a chance to start from scratch or revisit those places which
are merely memories now....

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 7:29:32 PM

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

Dave Herzstein wrote:
> mort wrote:
>
>>Not so. Special gold Cd-Rs such as Delkin Archival Gold supposedly will last
>>100 years, as estimated by accelerated testing. In any event, hard drives do
>>fail, you know. Even the gold CD-R blanks cost about $1.75 each, a heck of a
>>lot cheaper than a spare hard drive.
>>Morton
>
>
> I've been paying < $100 per 200GB HDD, less cost/MB than gold CDs. I
> keep my HDDs in removeable trays in USB/Firewire housings so that
> they're portable, adaptable and powered only when needed. And I also
> back up to DVD.
>
> -Dave

backing up off site is also a good idea too. fireproof safe, excess
hdd's, cd's, dvd's are all well n good but if the house goes up chanses
are those dvd's/cd's in the safe are nice n melty, hdd's unrecoverable.
heaven forbid that should happen but unfortunetly in this world it does.
hence most companies back up all their data to an off site place. just
incase.

cheers
kat
Anonymous
March 24, 2005 8:23:46 PM

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

"Phil, Squid-in-Training" <phil_leeIHEARTBASHGUARDS@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> CD-ROM Disk are cheep insurance against loosing irreplaceable files
>> such
>> as original camera files.
>
> They degrade to unusability within 2 years.

Nonsense. Quit buying 100 for $19.99 closeouts and your problem will go
away.
March 25, 2005 5:48:42 AM

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

"Ron Krebs" <rkrebs11@verizon.net> wrote:

>Not only that, I have a DVD RAM drive and that media is extremely long-lived
>and not as expensive as it used to be. Great for archiving. Besides, HDD
>failures are more apt to occur than something happening to my RAM discs kept
>in a fire proof document safe.
>
>Ron

Fire proof (resistant) relates to paper. Internal temps are allowed
to come up to a limit of 350F during fire. Take a cd dvd hd and give
it 15 minutes at 300+ in your oven and get back to me.

I have oversimplified this a bit.

Wes
--
Reply to:
Whiskey Echo Sierra Sierra AT Gee Tee EYE EYE dot COM
Lycos address is a spam trap.
!