Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Comments in image files

Reply
Thread Tools

Comments in image files

 
 
Peter in New Zealand
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-25-2008

"Jürgen Exner" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Peter in New Zealand" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>Can anyone tell me why, oh why, if these "Windows" EXIF fields show up in
>>a
>>text editor (I mean, ther're definitely in there y'know) and Photome shows
>>them, why do they not appear in Irfanview,

>
> They are accessible in IrfanView:
> - Image -> Information -> ExifInfo
> - Image -> Information -> IPTC Info -> "Caption" and "Origin" tabs
>
> I don't know about all fields, but at least those I tried do show up.
>
>
> jue


Yes, Irfanview is good like that, but although it shows a lot of EXIF and
IPTC data it doesn't show any of the embedded fields from MS Digital Image
even though the wretched things are embedded in the file! It's enough to
make you spit! Now MD have discontinued Digital Image and want everyone to
go Photo Gallery which is no more than a simple toy by comparison. And I
refuse to be manipulated towards using their Live services.

I dunno - I just might end up tossing a coin . . .

--
Peter in New Zealand. (Email address is fake)
Collector of old cameras, tropical fish fancier, good coffee nutter, and
compulsive computer fiddler.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Blinky the Shark
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2008
Peter in New Zealand wrote:

>
> "Jürgen Exner" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news(E-Mail Removed)...
>> "Peter in New Zealand" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>Can anyone tell me why, oh why, if these "Windows" EXIF fields
>>>show up in a
>>>text editor (I mean, ther're definitely in there y'know) and
>>>Photome shows them, why do they not appear in Irfanview,

>>
>> They are accessible in IrfanView:
>> - Image -> Information -> ExifInfo
>> - Image -> Information -> IPTC Info -> "Caption" and "Origin"
>> tabs
>>
>> I don't know about all fields, but at least those I tried do
>> show up.
>>
>>
>> jue

>
> Yes, Irfanview is good like that, but although it shows a lot of
> EXIF and IPTC data it doesn't show any of the embedded fields
> from MS Digital Image even though the wretched things are
> embedded in the file! It's enough to make you spit! Now MD have
> discontinued Digital Image and want everyone to go Photo Gallery
> which is no more than a simple toy by comparison. And I refuse
> to be manipulated towards using their Live services.


You might want to see if there's a Windows port of exiftool. It
shows and allows writing to about a million (I exaggerate)
different EXIF and IPTC fields. Far more than any Windows or non-
Windows apps/utils I've seen. And I think it uses the proper
labels for them; I've seen the same data field called *different
things* between different programs, even when they do see them.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mike Mills
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2008
"Peter in New Zealand" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:gbeoa3$u8m$(E-Mail Removed):

> Recently I was helped by this group with a question or two, which
> was a real help for me. Now I have another question, and hope
> someone can help me once more.
>
> I have been experimenting with a pile of various photo organisers
> and looking for one to settle on that will enable me to add
> comments etc to pictures. It seems this sort of function falls
> into two main groups, one that uses EXIF, IPTC, and so on. The
> other seems to be particular to Windows, with fields for subject,
> title, description, copyright etc. available through the right
> My question is this - do people here use the Windows properties
> fields and find them portable with the image file? Or should I
> stick only with IPTC for all this?


the iptc and comment fields are defined in the jpeg specifications.

jhead will manage and manipulate both.
I use it as a cmdline to stick info into groups of photos .
It is very fast and lightweight.

jhead -dt -du -ci mike *.jpg
jhead delete thumbnails, delete useless garbage, insert comment from
text file "mike" to all .jpg files in dir.
[the "mike" file may just say "Sept 25 pix of cow in field barn"]

Should be easy too find.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter in New Zealand
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2008
> Also don't confuse these "Windows" fields as being OS specific (I'm sure
> that comment will start a war). Since the information is stored within
> the jpeg file, any OS can read and display the jpeg without any
> conversion. In reality it's not the OS that is reading or updating the
> EXIF/IPTC fields, it's an application, Windows Explorer in your case.
>
> The reason why Photome, Irfanview, XnView, Picasa, Faststone, the new
> Windows Photo Gallery, etc display different EXIF/IPTC fields is that it
> is up to the developers of each application to determine what to call the
> fields on the screen and what EXIF/IPTC fields they want to display.
> However, when the application reads or writes the EXIF/IPTC fields they
> are following the EXIF or IPTC standards. Otherwise the jpeg itself may
> become corrupt.
>
> --
>
> Len


Yeah - I noticed. I messed with a jpg in Notepad (only deleted one little
space - honest), and the whole file was unreadable in any image viewer. (And
yes, it WAS a copy I was playing with.) So it's all a bit delicate it seems.
Interesting each apps developer seems to vary in what fields they feel are
important. PhotoME seems to be the most comprehensive, cheerfully displaying
the most amazing amount in data. Also, it is the only app I have found that
displays (and can edit) the "Windows" fields as well as the others.

Ummm, yes, I see how it is confusing to refer to them as Windows fields. I
just chose that name out of ignorance as a convenience but they are clearly
embedded in the file, so I guess they qualify as EXIF ot IPTC. I know the
difference between EXIF and IPTC, and therein lies a bit of frustration for
me. I want to continue using MS Digital Image but the fields in that don't
appear in other apps that display IPTC data. Nor do they appear anywhere in
the EXIF data. So, even though they are in the file, they seem to be
considered not as important by the apps developers.

--
Peter in New Zealand. (Email address is fake)
Collector of old cameras, tropical fish fancier, good coffee nutter, and
compulsive computer fiddler.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter in New Zealand
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2008

"Peter in New Zealand" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:gbi21t$rfi$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Also don't confuse these "Windows" fields as being OS specific (I'm sure
>> that comment will start a war). Since the information is stored within
>> the jpeg file, any OS can read and display the jpeg without any
>> conversion. In reality it's not the OS that is reading or updating the
>> EXIF/IPTC fields, it's an application, Windows Explorer in your case.
>>
>> The reason why Photome, Irfanview, XnView, Picasa, Faststone, the new
>> Windows Photo Gallery, etc display different EXIF/IPTC fields is that it
>> is up to the developers of each application to determine what to call the
>> fields on the screen and what EXIF/IPTC fields they want to display.
>> However, when the application reads or writes the EXIF/IPTC fields they
>> are following the EXIF or IPTC standards. Otherwise the jpeg itself may
>> become corrupt.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Len

>
> Yeah - I noticed. I messed with a jpg in Notepad (only deleted one little
> space - honest), and the whole file was unreadable in any image viewer.
> (And yes, it WAS a copy I was playing with.) So it's all a bit delicate it
> seems. Interesting each apps developer seems to vary in what fields they
> feel are important. PhotoME seems to be the most comprehensive, cheerfully
> displaying the most amazing amount in data. Also, it is the only app I
> have found that displays (and can edit) the "Windows" fields as well as
> the others.
>
> Ummm, yes, I see how it is confusing to refer to them as Windows fields. I
> just chose that name out of ignorance as a convenience but they are
> clearly embedded in the file, so I guess they qualify as EXIF ot IPTC. I
> know the difference between EXIF and IPTC, and therein lies a bit of
> frustration for me. I want to continue using MS Digital Image but the
> fields in that don't appear in other apps that display IPTC data. Nor do
> they appear anywhere in the EXIF data. So, even though they are in the
> file, they seem to be considered not as important by the apps developers.
>
> --
> Peter in New Zealand. (Email address is fake)
> Collector of old cameras, tropical fish fancier, good coffee nutter, and
> compulsive computer fiddler.

In case anyone else is learning as much from this thread as I am I have just
been in email contact with the author of PhotoME. He tells me what I have
called the "Windows" fields are proprietary (that awful word) and MS's own
invention. PhotoME can read them, but not edit them - yet. He is thinking of
making that available in a future version. However, since only MS Digital
Image seems to make good use of them, and MS have discontinued that line of
software, the future of those fields looks dicey to say the least. I had
assumed in my ignorance they were legitimate IPTC stuff when I saw them
embedded into the file, but no, it was good ol' MS once again going their
own independant way. So DI will have to go, and it's IPTC all the way from
now on.

--
Peter in New Zealand. (Email address is fake)
Collector of old cameras, tropical fish fancier, good coffee nutter, and
compulsive computer fiddler.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
??? I'm looking for an Online BackUp service for data files (not sysem files), anyone have + or - comments ?? Dudat... Computer Information 2 06-04-2006 05:00 AM
A program to replace all JS comments with JSP comments in jsp files tungchau81@yahoo.com Javascript 4 06-03-2006 02:00 PM
A program to replace all JS comments with JSP comments in jsp files tungchau81@yahoo.com Java 0 06-02-2006 06:35 AM
Comments format: comments extending over multi-line Monk C Programming 10 04-20-2005 05:09 PM
wx.Image: Couldn't add an image to the image list. Laszlo Zsolt Nagy Python 1 01-26-2005 09:55 PM



Advertisments