«

Does anyone know of software that will do this, preferable in batch
mode, and free? Seems like such an obvious thing, so why don't all
photo importing programs offer to do this?

"Ron Hunter" <> wrote in message
news: ...
> Does anyone know of software that will do this, preferable in batch mode,
> and free? Seems like such an obvious thing, so why don't all photo
> importing programs offer to do this?

Exifer for Windows will do this, and its free:
http://www.exifer.friedemann.info/

As for why all programs don't offer this option, the only answer I have is
that what seems obvious now may not have been so obvious in the early days
of designing the software.
--
Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com/forum/

Ron Hunter wrote:
> Does anyone know of software that will do this, preferable in batch
> mode, and free? Seems like such an obvious thing, so why don't all
> photo importing programs offer to do this?

It might be considered a corruption of the filing system
to have a file with a create date that isn't the file's true
create date.

As far as a filing system is concerned, the fact
that the file is a photograph, taken
by a camera at a particular time is not important.

On some operating systems, setting a files createdate
"arbitrairily" requires high level priveleges.

BugBear

Jhead version 2.6 will do this with the '-ft' option. You
can download this command line driven program that will
manipulate the non-image parts of JPEG files with Exif data
from: www.sentex.net/~mwandel/jhead

In article <>,
Ron Hunter <> wrote:
>Does anyone know of software that will do this, preferable in batch
>mode, and free? Seems like such an obvious thing, so why don't all
>photo importing programs offer to do this?

Mike Russell wrote:
> "Ron Hunter" <> wrote in message
> news: ...
>> Does anyone know of software that will do this, preferable in batch mode,
>> and free? Seems like such an obvious thing, so why don't all photo
>> importing programs offer to do this?
>
> Exifer for Windows will do this, and its free:
> http://www.exifer.friedemann.info/
>
> As for why all programs don't offer this option, the only answer I have is
> that what seems obvious now may not have been so obvious in the early days
> of designing the software.

Thanks. Have downloaded it and will give it a try.

bugbear wrote:
> Ron Hunter wrote:
>> Does anyone know of software that will do this, preferable in batch
>> mode, and free? Seems like such an obvious thing, so why don't all
>> photo importing programs offer to do this?
>
> It might be considered a corruption of the filing system
> to have a file with a create date that isn't the file's true
> create date.
>
> As far as a filing system is concerned, the fact
> that the file is a photograph, taken
> by a camera at a particular time is not important.
>
> On some operating systems, setting a files createdate
> "arbitrairily" requires high level priveleges.
>
> BugBear

Well, the computer is MINE. The files are MINE, and if I want the dates
to read something other than the date I uploaded the pictures, that's MY
decision. I always run with administrator setting as I might want to
actually DO something with my computer...
sigh.

Ron Hunter wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>> Does anyone know of software that will do this, preferable in batch
>>> mode, and free? Seems like such an obvious thing, so why don't all
>>> photo importing programs offer to do this?
>>
>> It might be considered a corruption of the filing system
>> to have a file with a create date that isn't the file's true
>> create date.
>>
>> As far as a filing system is concerned, the fact
>> that the file is a photograph, taken
>> by a camera at a particular time is not important.
>>
>> On some operating systems, setting a files createdate
>> "arbitrairily" requires high level priveleges.
>>
>> BugBear
>
> Well, the computer is MINE. The files are MINE, and if I want the dates
> to read something other than the date I uploaded the pictures, that's MY
> decision. I always run with administrator setting as I might want to
> actually DO something with my computer...
> sigh.

On my canon, if I use the camera and scanner wizard to access the file,
date shown is current date.
If I view in windows explorer or use a card reader, the file date/time
is same as exif data, so for cameras that behave like the canon, in
winxp it will depend on how card is accessed.
Dave Cohen

Ron Hunter wrote:

> bugbear wrote:
>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>> Does anyone know of software that will do this, preferable in batch
>>> mode, and free? Seems like such an obvious thing, so why don't all
>>> photo importing programs offer to do this?
>>
>> It might be considered a corruption of the filing system
>> to have a file with a create date that isn't the file's true
>> create date.
>>
>> As far as a filing system is concerned, the fact
>> that the file is a photograph, taken
>> by a camera at a particular time is not important.
>>
>> On some operating systems, setting a files createdate
>> "arbitrairily" requires high level priveleges.
>>
>> BugBear
>
> Well, the computer is MINE. The files are MINE, and if I want the dates
> to read something other than the date I uploaded the pictures, that's MY
> decision. I always run with administrator setting as I might want to
> actually DO something with my computer...
> sigh.

For backup software/scripts that looks at those dates. Also sometimes
copying/moving the files will set those dates as well so your going to have
to constantly check/reset those dates, then if you copy the files to a
backup drive you have to reset them again. Wouldn't it be less work to
just view the column which corresponds to the exif date in your file
manager?

In article < >, Eugene
<> wrote:

> Ron Hunter wrote:
>
> > bugbear wrote:
> >> Ron Hunter wrote:
> >>> Does anyone know of software that will do this, preferable in batch
> >>> mode, and free? Seems like such an obvious thing, so why don't all
> >>> photo importing programs offer to do this?
> >>
> >> It might be considered a corruption of the filing system
> >> to have a file with a create date that isn't the file's true
> >> create date.

Huh? How would this possibly corrupt anything?

> >> As far as a filing system is concerned, the fact
> >> that the file is a photograph, taken
> >> by a camera at a particular time is not important.

No, but as far as the human system is concerned, it could be very
important

> >> On some operating systems, setting a files createdate
> >> "arbitrairily" requires high level priveleges.

Not if they're "his" files according to the OS's ownership permissions.


> >> BugBear
> >
> > Well, the computer is MINE. The files are MINE, and if I want the dates
> > to read something other than the date I uploaded the pictures, that's MY
> > decision. I always run with administrator setting as I might want to
> > actually DO something with my computer...
> > sigh.
>
> For backup software/scripts that looks at those dates.

A _competent_ backup software looks at backup bits "set" or "not set",
or its backup catalog (or both). A competent backup program does not
*ever* rely on dates, as it knows that often files get moved into
places that they didn't exist previously, even if the file itself did,
so therefore the dates may not correspond in any meaningful way.

If a today someone gives me a copy of a file dated three days ago, or I
change the date on one of my files (which should automatically "set"
the backup bit), or copy a file to my hard drive that existed only on
my laptop, no decent backup program would miss that, even though the
file existed previously to my latest backup. Or if I actually restored
a previously backed up version of a file that had changed and had
subsequently been backed up again since that change. Or... or... or...
All of these would be recognized as whether or not they need to be (or
had been) backed up by a competent backup program, totally independent
of file dates. Even if I backed up 10 minutes ago.

> Also sometimes
> copying/moving the files will set those dates as well so your going to have
> to constantly check/reset those dates,

A competent OS allows you to copy files (including date and time of
creation and modification). As in "duplicates exactly". It _doesn't_
create a new file and move the internal data into it while leaving
other critical bits of the data (such as creation and modification
times) behind. Mac OS does this automatically. *nix does it with the
-p flag for CP (which also should reset the "last access" flag). The
new file is an exact duplicate of the old one, with the backup bit
cleared.

> then if you copy the files to a
> backup drive you have to reset them again.

Again, a competent OS wouldn't make YOU worry about this. A *copy* is
a *copy* - an exact clone, down to the very last piece of data with the
possible exception of the backup bits or permissions (if someone else
than the original owner is copying it in the latter case) and last
access time (which may get set to the creation time on some OS's or
with some utilities).


> Wouldn't it be less work to
> just view the column which corresponds to the exif date in your file
> manager?

Why should he have to open his file manager? How about if he wants the
OS to sort them in a file directory according to their date? Which OS
has a complete set of EXIF data columns?

There are many reasons why someone might want files with creation times
matching internal data. Not all programs have access to the EXIF data,
either. If the file date has been corrupted somehow, or, for instance,
he's opened it in Photoshop and saved it as a different file (a
frequent occurrance), it will have a different date and possibly be out
of sequence with the rest of the shots of a series. Perhaps the
program he might want to use for something (say, a slideshow program)
will only access the files in the order they are listed in the file
dialog, according to how the OS sorts them.



If it's objectionable to you, by all means don't do it with your own
files, but don't come up with non-valid, scare-tactic arguments ("It'll
corrupt the file system", "Backup program won't work properly", etc.)
as to why it _shouldn't_ be done by someone else who has reason to do
it and the wherewithal to want to find out how.

--
You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a
reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating
the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for
independence.
-- Charles A. Beard

In article <121220061752277691%>, Ken Lucke
<> wrote:
> times) behind. Mac OS does this automatically. *nix does it with the
> -p flag for CP (which also should reset the "last access" flag). The


oops, typo error - that should be "cp" not "CP".

I've aliased "cp -p" to "cpx" (for "CoPy eXactly") on my own system,
and I rarely ever think to use "cp" in its plain form.

--
You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a
reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating
the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for
independence.
-- Charles A. Beard