Thumbs Plus destroys EXIF?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Terry Pinnell, Dec 2, 2004.

  1. I use Thumbs Plus 4.50-R Build 2041 (about 3 years old). Recalling
    that this program was one of few that preserved EXIF data, I opened a
    photo, fresh from camera and containing full EXIF data, rotated it a
    few degrees and cropped it to remove the inevitable triangular slices.
    I did *not* enable the option in the JPEG save dialog to remove EXIF
    data. But after saving, EXIF was gone.

    --
    Terry, West Sussex, UK
     
    Terry Pinnell, Dec 2, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Terry Pinnell

    YoYo Guest

    Yes and so do alot of other older programs.

    Trick is to edit and save as a new file then the original isn't stripped of
    its exif data

    "Terry Pinnell" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I use Thumbs Plus 4.50-R Build 2041 (about 3 years old). Recalling
    > that this program was one of few that preserved EXIF data, I opened a
    > photo, fresh from camera and containing full EXIF data, rotated it a
    > few degrees and cropped it to remove the inevitable triangular slices.
    > I did *not* enable the option in the JPEG save dialog to remove EXIF
    > data. But after saving, EXIF was gone.
    >
    > --
    > Terry, West Sussex, UK
    >
     
    YoYo, Dec 2, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "YoYo" <_> wrote:

    >Yes and so do alot of other older programs.
    >
    >Trick is to edit and save as a new file then the original isn't stripped of
    >its exif data


    Naturally, this was a copy! Original still has its EXIF. But
    cross-checking to get the date/time a photo was taken is a PITA. I
    also use EXIFER, which can BU and restore EXIF. But my key point was
    that TP seems to ignore its own option setting ;-(

    (I've emailed the developer too.)

    --
    Terry, West Sussex, UK
     
    Terry Pinnell, Dec 2, 2004
    #3
  4. Terry Pinnell

    Jack Hoying Guest

    I use ThumbsPlus 7 and have never had a problem like you mentioned. It's
    probably something to do with the older version. I started with version 3.5
    years ago and that was before I had a digital, so I never paid attention to
    EXIF until the last couple years. If you haven't tried the newer version of
    ThumbsPlus, you are missing lots of enhancements. I wouldn't want to do
    without it!

    Jack
    Fort Loramie, Ohio
    http://www.pbase.com/jmhoying

    "Terry Pinnell" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I use Thumbs Plus 4.50-R Build 2041 (about 3 years old). Recalling
    > that this program was one of few that preserved EXIF data, I opened a
    > photo, fresh from camera and containing full EXIF data, rotated it a
    > few degrees and cropped it to remove the inevitable triangular slices.
    > I did *not* enable the option in the JPEG save dialog to remove EXIF
    > data. But after saving, EXIF was gone.
    >
    > --
    > Terry, West Sussex, UK
    >
     
    Jack Hoying, Dec 2, 2004
    #4
  5. "Jack Hoying" <> wrote:

    >I use ThumbsPlus 7 and have never had a problem like you mentioned. It's
    >probably something to do with the older version. I started with version 3.5
    >years ago and that was before I had a digital, so I never paid attention to
    >EXIF until the last couple years. If you haven't tried the newer version of
    >ThumbsPlus, you are missing lots of enhancements. I wouldn't want to do
    >without it!


    Thanks Jack, guess I should seriously consider an upgrade.

    --
    Terry, West Sussex, UK
     
    Terry Pinnell, Dec 2, 2004
    #5
  6. Terry Pinnell

    Eric Gill Guest

    Terry Pinnell <> wrote in
    news:eek::

    > "Jack Hoying" <> wrote:
    >
    >>I use ThumbsPlus 7 and have never had a problem like you mentioned.
    >>It's probably something to do with the older version. I started with
    >>version 3.5 years ago and that was before I had a digital, so I never
    >>paid attention to EXIF until the last couple years. If you haven't
    >>tried the newer version of ThumbsPlus, you are missing lots of
    >>enhancements. I wouldn't want to do without it!

    >
    > Thanks Jack, guess I should seriously consider an upgrade.


    You definately should. Either 6 or 7 introduced a wonderful speed increase,
    and he's not kidding - there have been a metric crapload of new features
    added since 4.5.

    Cerious has their own newsserver and groups, btw. Go to the cerious site to
    find out how to use them.
     
    Eric Gill, Dec 2, 2004
    #6
  7. "YoYo" <_> writes:

    > Yes and so do alot of other older programs.
    >
    > Trick is to edit and save as a new file then the original isn't stripped of
    > its exif data
    >
    > "Terry Pinnell" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > I use Thumbs Plus 4.50-R Build 2041 (about 3 years old). Recalling
    > > that this program was one of few that preserved EXIF data, I opened a
    > > photo, fresh from camera and containing full EXIF data, rotated it a
    > > few degrees and cropped it to remove the inevitable triangular slices.
    > > I did *not* enable the option in the JPEG save dialog to remove EXIF
    > > data. But after saving, EXIF was gone.


    The command line utility jhead has options to copy the EXIF information from
    one file to another, so assuming you have a copy of the original, you could
    restore the information:

    http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/jhead/

    --
    Michael Meissner
    email:
    http://www.the-meissners.org
     
    Michael Meissner, Dec 2, 2004
    #7
  8. Michael Meissner <> wrote:

    >"YoYo" <_> writes:
    >
    >> Yes and so do alot of other older programs.
    >>
    >> Trick is to edit and save as a new file then the original isn't stripped of
    >> its exif data
    >>
    >> "Terry Pinnell" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > I use Thumbs Plus 4.50-R Build 2041 (about 3 years old). Recalling
    >> > that this program was one of few that preserved EXIF data, I opened a
    >> > photo, fresh from camera and containing full EXIF data, rotated it a
    >> > few degrees and cropped it to remove the inevitable triangular slices.
    >> > I did *not* enable the option in the JPEG save dialog to remove EXIF
    >> > data. But after saving, EXIF was gone.

    >
    >The command line utility jhead has options to copy the EXIF information from
    >one file to another, so assuming you have a copy of the original, you could
    >restore the information:
    >
    >http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/jhead/


    Thanks a lot, looks interesting. Downloaded and will try shortly.

    Did you also try EXIFER?
    http://www.exifer.friedemann.info/

    --
    Terry, West Sussex, UK
     
    Terry Pinnell, Dec 3, 2004
    #8
  9. Terry Pinnell <> writes:

    > Michael Meissner <> wrote:
    > >The command line utility jhead has options to copy the EXIF information from
    > >one file to another, so assuming you have a copy of the original, you could
    > >restore the information:
    > >
    > >http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/jhead/

    >
    > Thanks a lot, looks interesting. Downloaded and will try shortly.
    >
    > Did you also try EXIFER?
    > http://www.exifer.friedemann.info/


    No. I do all of my processing on Linux, and I have never gotten around to
    installing Wine to be able to run Windows programs.

    --
    Michael Meissner
    email:
    http://www.the-meissners.org
     
    Michael Meissner, Dec 3, 2004
    #9
  10. "Jack Hoying" <> wrote:

    >I use ThumbsPlus 7 and have never had a problem like you mentioned. It's
    >probably something to do with the older version. I started with version 3.5
    >years ago and that was before I had a digital, so I never paid attention to
    >EXIF until the last couple years. If you haven't tried the newer version of
    >ThumbsPlus, you are missing lots of enhancements. I wouldn't want to do
    >without it!


    I have now upgraded to TP7. But it seems that the original problem I
    raised remains!

    This time I resized a digicam photo. But, although once again I was
    careful *not* to enable 'Remove file information (EXIF, IPTC)' while
    saving that JPG under anew name , the EXIF info still disappeared.
    (And there was no green 'i' icon underneath the thumbnail.)

    From your earlier reply I take it this does not happen to you? Can you
    or anyone else confirm by reproducing the simple test I described
    above please, and advise exactly what steps you take?

    --
    Terry, West Sussex, UK
     
    Terry Pinnell, Dec 8, 2004
    #10
  11. Terry Pinnell

    Mike F Guest

    Seems to me someone was discussing that issue over on the
    Cerious support newsgroup the other day -- ;you might want
    to subscribe to the cerious.support newsgroup on the
    news.cerious.com news server and snoop through there -- lots
    of good information to be found !

    mikey

    "Terry Pinnell" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Jack Hoying" <> wrote:
    >
    > >I use ThumbsPlus 7 and have never had a problem like you mentioned. It's
    > >probably something to do with the older version. I started with version

    3.5
    > >years ago and that was before I had a digital, so I never paid attention

    to
    > >EXIF until the last couple years. If you haven't tried the newer version

    of
    > >ThumbsPlus, you are missing lots of enhancements. I wouldn't want to do
    > >without it!

    >
    > I have now upgraded to TP7. But it seems that the original problem I
    > raised remains!
    >
    > This time I resized a digicam photo. But, although once again I was
    > careful *not* to enable 'Remove file information (EXIF, IPTC)' while
    > saving that JPG under anew name , the EXIF info still disappeared.
    > (And there was no green 'i' icon underneath the thumbnail.)
    >
    > From your earlier reply I take it this does not happen to you? Can you
    > or anyone else confirm by reproducing the simple test I described
    > above please, and advise exactly what steps you take?
    >
    > --
    > Terry, West Sussex, UK
    >
     
    Mike F, Dec 9, 2004
    #11
  12. "Mike F" <> wrote:

    >Seems to me someone was discussing that issue over on the
    >Cerious support newsgroup the other day -- ;you might want
    >to subscribe to the cerious.support newsgroup on the
    >news.cerious.com news server and snoop through there -- lots
    >of good information to be found !


    Thanks. Joined yesterday. Didn't see the topic at a brief look, so
    will get back there now.

    It would be good to have confirmation one way or the other from any
    TP7 user here. Does the program preserve EXIF, or not?


    --
    Terry, West Sussex, UK
     
    Terry Pinnell, Dec 9, 2004
    #12
  13. I have been using ThumbsPlus for years and it preserves the EXIF data when
    you use it to edit a picture.

    Bye.

    "Terry Pinnell" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Mike F" <> wrote:
    >
    >>Seems to me someone was discussing that issue over on the
    >>Cerious support newsgroup the other day -- ;you might want
    >>to subscribe to the cerious.support newsgroup on the
    >>news.cerious.com news server and snoop through there -- lots
    >>of good information to be found !

    >
    > Thanks. Joined yesterday. Didn't see the topic at a brief look, so
    > will get back there now.
    >
    > It would be good to have confirmation one way or the other from any
    > TP7 user here. Does the program preserve EXIF, or not?
    >
    >
    > --
    > Terry, West Sussex, UK
    >
     
    David Sommers, Dec 9, 2004
    #13
  14. "David Sommers" <> wrote:

    >I have been using ThumbsPlus for years and it preserves the EXIF data when
    >you use it to edit a picture.


    I'm pretty sure the issue is one of defining 'edit'.

    After further tests I see TP7 preserves EXIF after cropping or
    rotating. But EXIF is lost on *resizing*. Here it is, anyway; YMMV. So
    far I've heard from no one who has done that specific simple test, so
    some doubt remains.

    Resizing happened to be the test I chose after upgrading TP4 to TP7.
    As mentioned in my opening post, TP4 *also* implied that it preserved
    EXIF; it had the same option, 'Remove file information (EXIF, IPTC)'
    in its JPG Save dialog as there is in TP7. But TP4 did not preserve it
    even after cropping or rotating. So it looks to me that TP7 is much
    better, but still not 100% EXIF safe. After resizing all my photos to
    make a web page, I'd like to be able to still see their original
    dates/times! And, until I see some definitive documentation, I have to
    assume there might be other editing operations that destroy EXIF, not
    just resizing.

    I've emailed Cerious Software about this, but so far only had the same
    answer you gave me: "ThumbsPlus 7 does preserve EXIF information. I
    haven't had any reports of it not." Presumably, that excludes mine!

    --
    Terry, West Sussex, UK
     
    Terry Pinnell, Dec 9, 2004
    #14
  15. Terry Pinnell

    E. Magnuson Guest

    On 2004-12-09, Terry Pinnell <> wrote:
    > After further tests I see TP7 preserves EXIF after cropping or
    > rotating. But EXIF is lost on *resizing*. Here it is, anyway; YMMV. So
    > far I've heard from no one who has done that specific simple test, so
    > some doubt remains.


    Resized in thumbsplus 7 with exif intact:
    http://www.pbase.com/maderik/image/37158102&exif=Y

    I do this all the time. Now the MakerNote data is not preserved...

    --
    Erik
     
    E. Magnuson, Dec 9, 2004
    #15
  16. "E. Magnuson" <> wrote:

    >On 2004-12-09, Terry Pinnell <> wrote:
    >> After further tests I see TP7 preserves EXIF after cropping or
    >> rotating. But EXIF is lost on *resizing*. Here it is, anyway; YMMV. So
    >> far I've heard from no one who has done that specific simple test, so
    >> some doubt remains.

    >
    >Resized in thumbsplus 7 with exif intact:
    >http://www.pbase.com/maderik/image/37158102&exif=Y
    >
    >I do this all the time. Now the MakerNote data is not preserved...


    Many thanks, appreciate your going to the trouble. But your result
    baffled me, so I tried yet again - and still failed! HOWEVER - an
    hour or so later, happily I think I now understand the cause. I had
    become too focused on that one test file. It appeared to have EXIF
    data in its original 2048 x 1360 size, and that was lost when I
    resized it to 550 x 347. But I should have cast my net wider. When I
    tried another, so far *completely* untouched file, the EXIF *was*
    preserved.
    So, my bad, TP7 does preserve EXIF.

    But I'm still puzzled by that initial file issue. I've uploaded it
    (1.4MB) here for anyone still interested and patient enough to study:
    http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/Day1-1037Newbridge.jpg

    When I had opened this in IrfanView and clicked E, the shortcut for
    displaying EXIF info, a window had duly appeared, headed 'IrfanView -
    EXIF information'. (No window appears if it does not have EXIF). And
    in the TP7 browser, it had a green 'i' icon alongside, which I took as
    supportive evidence. But I now realise that was too hasty. On proper
    examination of *what* 'info' is provided, it has only the file name
    and date (and not even the correct picture taken date).

    Also, I clearly don't fully understand how to use TP7. Searching Help
    for EXIF gave me a definition, but so far I've found no practical
    advice on how to view it. Am I right that in TP7 there is no explicit
    'EXIF info' window? Is it just the lilac coloured entries under the
    'info' tab? If so, where is all the rest of it? I see only 7 entries,
    yet there are 31 in IrfanView, and 30 in PaintShop Pro 8. Not that I
    *want* more than a few items - I'm just curious. Is it just a matter
    of customising what appears? If so, where in TP7 is that configured
    please?

    Thanks for your patience...

    --
    Terry, West Sussex, UK
     
    Terry Pinnell, Dec 10, 2004
    #16
  17. Terry Pinnell

    Jürgen Eidt Guest

    "Terry Pinnell" <> schrieb
    > But I'm still puzzled by that initial file issue. I've uploaded it
    > (1.4MB) here for anyone still interested and patient enough to study:
    > http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/Day1-1037Newbridge.jpg


    BTW, the file is about 0.5MB, not 1.4MB. Is this the right one?
    The structure is really messed up. First, a APP1 (EXIF) section and then a
    separate JFIF signature.

    The IFD0 section normally contains at least some 20+ entries. Yours has only
    one:
    IFD0 (main info), 1 entry
    Tag 0x132: DateTime

    The thumbnail in IFD1 looks OK but has a JFIF signature, quite rare ;)
    IFD1 (thumbnail info), 5 entries
    Tag 0x103, 0x11a, 0x11b, 0x201, 0x202

    --
    Regards
    Jürgen
    http://cpicture.de/en
     
    Jürgen Eidt, Dec 10, 2004
    #17
  18. "Jürgen Eidt" <> wrote:

    >"Terry Pinnell" <> schrieb
    >> But I'm still puzzled by that initial file issue. I've uploaded it
    >> (1.4MB) here for anyone still interested and patient enough to study:
    >> http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/Day1-1037Newbridge.jpg

    >
    >BTW, the file is about 0.5MB, not 1.4MB. Is this the right one?


    Thanks for the feedback Jürgen. Yes, that is the file. (Not sure now
    where that '1.4 MB' came from...)

    >The structure is really messed up. First, a APP1 (EXIF) section and then a
    >separate JFIF signature.
    >
    >The IFD0 section normally contains at least some 20+ entries. Yours has only
    >one:
    >IFD0 (main info), 1 entry
    >Tag 0x132: DateTime
    >
    >The thumbnail in IFD1 looks OK but has a JFIF signature, quite rare ;)
    >IFD1 (thumbnail info), 5 entries
    >Tag 0x103, 0x11a, 0x11b, 0x201, 0x202


    Unfortunately you've lost me technically with this JFIF and IFD0/IFD1
    stuff! I take it that, somehow, prior editing must have screwed up the
    file? But what about my query re apparently correct files only
    displaying 7 EXIF entries?

    --
    Terry, West Sussex, UK
     
    Terry Pinnell, Dec 10, 2004
    #18
  19. Terry Pinnell

    Jürgen Eidt Guest

    "Terry Pinnell" <> schrieb
    > Unfortunately you've lost me technically with this JFIF and IFD0/IFD1
    > stuff! I take it that, somehow, prior editing must have screwed up the
    > file? But what about my query re apparently correct files only
    > displaying 7 EXIF entries?


    The software you were using got somehow confused and didn't wrote the full
    set of the information block.
    Most of the time, the full information block is read and written back as it
    is. No need to change anything.
    There are some exceptions when the new width/height gets updated or when the
    thumbnail needs to be changed.

    EXIF (EXchangable Image Format) and JFIF (JPEG File Interchange Format)
    specifies how a JPEG stream is organized as a file. Both have the file
    extension .jpg (or .jpeg/.jpe)
    A picture stored as JFIF has a very small header which identifies the file
    containing JPEG data. So first the small header and then the JPEG data.
    For EXIF, a more structured header is defined containing lots of shooting
    data (like f-stop, exposure time, date, ...) and a thumbnail.
    The shooting data is stored in an information block "IFD0". The thumbnail is
    in "IFD1".

    In your case, the information header contains only a date entry. The
    thumbnail section is OK for this file.
    And then, after the "EXIF", a "JFIF" is followed ;)
    You see, quite messed up, but the JPEG decoder skips all these APP segments
    anyway when decoding the image data.
    (Each information block is written as an APP segment. For example, an ICC
    profile is also stored in an APP. They all have different numbers from 0 to
    15 and can be used multiple times.)

    --
    Regards
    Jürgen
    http://cpicture.de/en
     
    Jürgen Eidt, Dec 11, 2004
    #19
  20. "Jürgen Eidt" <> wrote:

    >"Terry Pinnell" <> schrieb
    >> Unfortunately you've lost me technically with this JFIF and IFD0/IFD1
    >> stuff! I take it that, somehow, prior editing must have screwed up the
    >> file? But what about my query re apparently correct files only
    >> displaying 7 EXIF entries?

    >
    >The software you were using got somehow confused and didn't wrote the full
    >set of the information block.
    >Most of the time, the full information block is read and written back as it
    >is. No need to change anything.
    >There are some exceptions when the new width/height gets updated or when the
    >thumbnail needs to be changed.
    >
    >EXIF (EXchangable Image Format) and JFIF (JPEG File Interchange Format)
    >specifies how a JPEG stream is organized as a file. Both have the file
    >extension .jpg (or .jpeg/.jpe)
    >A picture stored as JFIF has a very small header which identifies the file
    >containing JPEG data. So first the small header and then the JPEG data.
    >For EXIF, a more structured header is defined containing lots of shooting
    >data (like f-stop, exposure time, date, ...) and a thumbnail.
    >The shooting data is stored in an information block "IFD0". The thumbnail is
    >in "IFD1".
    >
    >In your case, the information header contains only a date entry. The
    >thumbnail section is OK for this file.
    >And then, after the "EXIF", a "JFIF" is followed ;)
    >You see, quite messed up, but the JPEG decoder skips all these APP segments
    >anyway when decoding the image data.
    >(Each information block is written as an APP segment. For example, an ICC
    >profile is also stored in an APP. They all have different numbers from 0 to
    >15 and can be used multiple times.)


    Thanks for that helpful follow up Jürgen. But I was really now
    focusing on the 'correct' files, not that one bad file. IOW, I'm
    asking about all my original DSC000xx.JPG files, just copied from Sony
    DSC-1 digicam to HD, and unedited. Is the EXIF data for these confined
    to only those 7 entries, coloured lilac, in the box bottom left? As I
    said, I see 31 EXIF entries in IrfanView, 30 in PSP.

    --
    Terry, West Sussex, UK
     
    Terry Pinnell, Dec 11, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    8
    Views:
    535
    Steve Franklin
    Nov 14, 2004
  2. Richard Owlett
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    903
    Wilhelm Tell
    Jul 27, 2004
  3. Michael Schnell

    Anybody using Thumbs Plus 2000 ?

    Michael Schnell, Sep 13, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    477
    Michael Schnell
    Sep 14, 2003
  4. Gordon MacPherson

    Thumbs plus

    Gordon MacPherson, Mar 3, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    653
    David Arnstein
    Mar 7, 2006
  5. (PeteCresswell)

    Thumbs Plus's Photo Viewer: Standalone Execution?

    (PeteCresswell), Apr 11, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    478
    Douglas W Hoyt
    Apr 11, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page