(OT?): EXIF information in Nikon extracted EXIF thumbnail images. (D7000, EXIF image plugin ???)

[Linuxguy123]

I've used a Canon 40D for the last 3 years.  I shoot everything in raw
format.

To get jpegs from most of my raws, I extracted a large thumbnail from
the raw file via "exiv2 -ep2 *.CR2".  If I needed something more than
that, I manually generated a jpeg from the raw file.

Today I got a Nikon D7000.  I can still generate my jpegs from images
embedded in the raw file.  To do this, I use  "exiv2 -ep3 *.NEF"

This works well, except that the Nikon extracted images DO NOT contain
EXIF data, whereas the Canon extracted images did.

Why ?  How would one easily get around this ?

This brings me to my next question... how many people extract images
from their raw files and does it warrant someone writing a plugin to do
this within Digikam ?

Thanks

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Photonoxx]

Hi,

I answer to the second question first : Personally I generally don't  
extract Jpeg from NEF. So I never ask myself the first question, but I  
guess exiftool (may be exiv2 has the same ?) could help cause it has a  
function which copy metadata from a picture to another one. It's possible  
to do that in a directory with subdirectory, but for that, NEF and JPG  
have to be same named.

Regards

Nicolas

Le Thu, 04 Nov 2010 01:20:59 +0100, Linuxguy123 <[hidden email]> a  
écrit:

> I've used a Canon 40D for the last 3 years.  I shoot everything in raw
> format.
>
> To get jpegs from most of my raws, I extracted a large thumbnail from
> the raw file via "exiv2 -ep2 *.CR2".  If I needed something more than
> that, I manually generated a jpeg from the raw file.
>
> Today I got a Nikon D7000.  I can still generate my jpegs from images
> embedded in the raw file.  To do this, I use  "exiv2 -ep3 *.NEF"
>
> This works well, except that the Nikon extracted images DO NOT contain
> EXIF data, whereas the Canon extracted images did.
>
> Why ?  How would one easily get around this ?
>
> This brings me to my next question... how many people extract images
> from their raw files and does it warrant someone writing a plugin to do
> this within Digikam ?
>
> Thanks
>
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

--
Utilisant le client e-mail révolutionnaire d'Opera :  
http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Gilles Caulier-4]

2010/11/4 Photonoxx <[hidden email]>:
> Hi,
>
> I answer to the second question first : Personally I generally don't
> extract Jpeg from NEF. So I never ask myself the first question, but I
> guess exiftool (may be exiv2 has the same ?) could help cause it has a
> function which copy metadata from a picture to another one. It's possible
> to do that in a directory with subdirectory, but for that, NEF and JPG
> have to be same named.

yes Exiv2 can copy metadata from RAW to extracted JPEG.

Gilles Caulier

>
> Regards
>
> Nicolas
>
> Le Thu, 04 Nov 2010 01:20:59 +0100, Linuxguy123 <[hidden email]> a
> écrit:
>
>> I've used a Canon 40D for the last 3 years.  I shoot everything in raw
>> format.
>>
>> To get jpegs from most of my raws, I extracted a large thumbnail from
>> the raw file via "exiv2 -ep2 *.CR2".  If I needed something more than
>> that, I manually generated a jpeg from the raw file.
>>
>> Today I got a Nikon D7000.  I can still generate my jpegs from images
>> embedded in the raw file.  To do this, I use  "exiv2 -ep3 *.NEF"
>>
>> This works well, except that the Nikon extracted images DO NOT contain
>> EXIF data, whereas the Canon extracted images did.
>>
>> Why ?  How would one easily get around this ?
>>
>> This brings me to my next question... how many people extract images
>> from their raw files and does it warrant someone writing a plugin to do
>> this within Digikam ?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Digikam-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>
>
> --
> Utilisant le client e-mail révolutionnaire d'Opera :
> http://www.opera.com/mail/
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Gilles Caulier-4]

2010/11/4 Linuxguy123 <[hidden email]>:

> I've used a Canon 40D for the last 3 years.  I shoot everything in raw
> format.
>
> To get jpegs from most of my raws, I extracted a large thumbnail from
> the raw file via "exiv2 -ep2 *.CR2".  If I needed something more than
> that, I manually generated a jpeg from the raw file.
>
> Today I got a Nikon D7000.  I can still generate my jpegs from images
> embedded in the raw file.  To do this, I use  "exiv2 -ep3 *.NEF"
>
> This works well, except that the Nikon extracted images DO NOT contain
> EXIF data, whereas the Canon extracted images did.
>
> Why ?  How would one easily get around this ?

Because image is extracted as well from a makernotes section. The
image data are alone. the image do not contains metadata. In fact the
metadata are already here in RAW image . why to duplicates it in a sub
section...

Why not to shot in RAW+JPEG ?

Gilles Caulier
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[gerlos]

In data giovedì 04 novembre 2010 08:56:16, Gilles Caulier ha scritto:

> 2010/11/4 Linuxguy123 <[hidden email]>:
> > Today I got a Nikon D7000.  I can still generate my jpegs from images
> > embedded in the raw file.  To do this, I use  "exiv2 -ep3 *.NEF"
> >
> > This works well, except that the Nikon extracted images DO NOT contain
> > EXIF data, whereas the Canon extracted images did.
> >
> > Why ?  How would one easily get around this ?
>
> Because image is extracted as well from a makernotes section. The
> image data are alone. the image do not contains metadata. In fact the
> metadata are already here in RAW image . why to duplicates it in a sub
> section...
>
> Why not to shot in RAW+JPEG ?

I'm guessing: because he wants to save space on the memory card, and don't
want duplicates? :-)

bye
gerlos

--
"Life is pretty simple: You do some stuff. Most fails. Some works. You do
more of what works. If it works big, others quickly copy it. Then you do
something else. The trick is the doing something else."
           < http://gerlos.altervista.org >
 gerlos  +- - - >  gnu/linux registred user #311588
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Linuxguy123]

On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 08:56 +0100, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> 2010/11/4 Linuxguy123 <[hidden email]>:

> Why not to shot in RAW+JPEG ?

Because it takes more memory space on the camera storage card and its
slower.

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users