Exif Data and Leopard

I switched over from Windows XP in May. I have quiet a collection of photographs that I have took and on these I have embedded keywords, title, comments, etc into the exif data using the right click > properties > Summary tab in WinXP. Is there anyway The picture will show you what I have been doing.
http://img338.imageshack.us/i/properties.tif/
Is there anyway I can keep doing this in Leopard? Or even search the keywords in them? Right now I am running XP through Fusion just to do this...

You can do this with iPhoto, Aperture or any serious Photo app - for instance Photoshop Elements or Graphic Coverter.
But a note of caution: Not every app on Windows actually writes these keywords and comments to the IPTC data of the photo (none actually write to the Exif - there is no area for Keywords and Comments in Exif) so best to be sure that this is actually being done before committing.
You can view the IPTC data of a file using Graphic Coverter - and you can download a free trial. Open one of the pics and see if it sees this data.
Regards
TD

Similar Messages

EXIF date and time data issues

I have several thousand images shot during the same trip, on two different cameras. The date and on one of the cameras was not correct. I corrected the date on the images using PhotoInfo 2.0.1
The problem is that Bridge CS3 is not recognizing the new date on all of the images. Most of the images show and can be sorted in Bridge by the new, correct date. However, any image that I altered in Bridge (rotated, cropped, opened in ACR, rated, etc...) prior to correcting the date in PhotoInfo is not showing the new, corrected date in Bridge.
Has anyone else experienced this problem?
Anyone know of a solution?
I have been struggling with this issue for quite a while so any input will be greatly appreciated!
Thanks.

Hi,
I have the exact same problem - corrected the EXIF date and time and still wrong sorting. The thing is that Bridge sorts the files by "Creation Date", the date and time you also see in the Finder. So I found an application that can change that, too. But still Bridge sorts the files in the wrong order! Displays the old time, too.
After several times of emptying the cache, sorting is now ALL messed up (without any kind of logic), I don't know how to fix it.
Regards,
Charles

Exif Date and hour data

How to change Date and Hour (Exif or IPTC IIM)with Adobe Bridge CS3?

Hi,
I have the exact same problem - corrected the EXIF date and time and still wrong sorting. The thing is that Bridge sorts the files by "Creation Date", the date and time you also see in the Finder. So I found an application that can change that, too. But still Bridge sorts the files in the wrong order! Displays the old time, too.
After several times of emptying the cache, sorting is now ALL messed up (without any kind of logic), I don't know how to fix it.
Regards,
Charles

Bridge CS6 overwrites EXIF data and changes image orientation.

Hi,
I seem to be having issue with Bridge CS6 overwriting or corrupting my image EXIF data.
The situation is this, while in Bridge CS6, I open a folder with some images in it. There I select one image. Right-click on it and select File Info. In the XMP dialogue box I fill in the fields I need and save this file as a template. Then, I select the rest of the images, go to Tools and choose Replace Metadata. In the fly-out, select and click the template I've just created and this is where I have the issue. All the updated images now have the the same date and time. I NEVER had this happen in Bridge CS5. In Bridge CS5, while all the IPTC data was overwritten, the EXIF data was left alone. This does not seem to be the case in Bridge CS6 where both the IPTC and EXIF data now seem to be overwritten. If this is the case, need to ask why?
Hope someone here can confirm and comment on this. Cheers.

Then, I select the rest of the images, go to Tools and choose Replace Metadata.
You have to choose 'Append Metadata' this adds the template to the already existing data instead of overwriting the already existing data.
And without knowing your needs or workflow, why don't you create a template (or some extra if you have specific difference you often use) with the most common and always used info (copyright etc) and add this to al your files.
Then when in Bridge choose the metadata panel with IPTC core section in view.
Select the files you want to alter and in the Metadata click on a field with the pencil icon (means you can add info to it) and fill in the fields you need the info in. If keywords needed switch to the keyword panel to add the wanted keywords to the selected files.
Just another approach that might be more suitable and faster.

DNG EXIF data and NEF

When importing to L2 and convert to DNG does ALL the EXIF data come across?
I ask this because if I open a NEF file with Capture NX2 I can see details
about my off camera flash groups that I have used.
L2 does not seem to show this which is OK, I'm more concerned that If I
convert to DNG then this information will be brought across in the hope that
a future version of Lightroom will display it.

You can do this with iPhoto, Aperture or any serious Photo app - for instance Photoshop Elements or Graphic Coverter.
But a note of caution: Not every app on Windows actually writes these keywords and comments to the IPTC data of the photo (none actually write to the Exif - there is no area for Keywords and Comments in Exif) so best to be sure that this is actually being done before committing.
You can view the IPTC data of a file using Graphic Coverter - and you can download a free trial. Open one of the pics and see if it sees this data.
Regards
TD

QuickView uses EXIF data for preview, even when bogus. A plist to turn that off?

We moved to MBPs with SnowLeopard recently and just found that many downloaded images usually from publicity or stock-photo sites - give distorted or no preview when we use QuickView (tapping the space-bar) on them in the Finder.
Some investigation showed that the distorted images have EXIF data tha has either been corrued or purposefully messed with. Here's an example where the QV preview widget opens to the width of the screen but at minimum height:
Image width          : 4992
Image height          : 6666
Number of bits per component          : {8,8,8}
Compression scheme          : uncompressed
Pixel composition          : RGB
Orientation of image          : 1
Unknown tag (0)          : 0,0,3,0
X resolution          : 0.0 ppi (pixel per inch)
Y resolution          : 300.0 ppi (pixel per inch)
Image data arrangement          : 1
Resolution unit          : inch
Software          : Adobe Photoshop CS3 Macintosh
File date and time          : 2009:02:20 15:47:58
-- Exif IFD --          :
Color Space          : Uncalibrated
Valid image width in pixel          : 2250
Valid image height in pixel          : 3000
-- Thumbnail IFD --          :
Compression scheme          : JPEG
X resolution          : 300.0 ppi (pixel per inch)
Y resolution          : 300.0 ppi (pixel per inch)
Resolution unit          : inch
Offset to JPEG SOI          : 394
Bytes of JPEG data          : 3933
The EXIF data says the X resolution is 0.0ppi.
These files all open fine in Photoshop or Graphic Converter. Sometimes GC's resolution tool shows that the horizontal & vertical resolutions are different (300 x 0.3 for example) and I can correct it, re-save the jpeg image. and QV then previews them just fine in the Finder.
Most, however only have this bogus resolution in the EXIF data and evidently QuickView preferentially uses that info.
There are tools that can be used to simply carpet bomb the EXIF data of a batch of files, but most of it is useful to us so we'd rathr not rsort to that. Is there a QV plist where clever folks can edit it so QV uses the actual image resolution rather than what's in the EXIF data?
Incidentally, QV in Leopard ignored this data which is why we only now began to encounter images where QV is useless. Bogus EXIF resolutions have probebly been in image headers for years and we did not realize it until we found SnowLeopard's Finder payed attention to them.

We moved to MBPs with SnowLeopard recently and just found that many downloaded images usually from publicity or stock-photo sites - give distorted or no preview when we use QuickView (tapping the space-bar) on them in the Finder.
Some investigation showed that the distorted images have EXIF data tha has either been corrued or purposefully messed with. Here's an example where the QV preview widget opens to the width of the screen but at minimum height:
Image width          : 4992
Image height          : 6666
Number of bits per component          : {8,8,8}
Compression scheme          : uncompressed
Pixel composition          : RGB
Orientation of image          : 1
Unknown tag (0)          : 0,0,3,0
X resolution          : 0.0 ppi (pixel per inch)
Y resolution          : 300.0 ppi (pixel per inch)
Image data arrangement          : 1
Resolution unit          : inch
Software          : Adobe Photoshop CS3 Macintosh
File date and time          : 2009:02:20 15:47:58
-- Exif IFD --          :
Color Space          : Uncalibrated
Valid image width in pixel          : 2250
Valid image height in pixel          : 3000
-- Thumbnail IFD --          :
Compression scheme          : JPEG
X resolution          : 300.0 ppi (pixel per inch)
Y resolution          : 300.0 ppi (pixel per inch)
Resolution unit          : inch
Offset to JPEG SOI          : 394
Bytes of JPEG data          : 3933
The EXIF data says the X resolution is 0.0ppi.
These files all open fine in Photoshop or Graphic Converter. Sometimes GC's resolution tool shows that the horizontal & vertical resolutions are different (300 x 0.3 for example) and I can correct it, re-save the jpeg image. and QV then previews them just fine in the Finder.
Most, however only have this bogus resolution in the EXIF data and evidently QuickView preferentially uses that info.
There are tools that can be used to simply carpet bomb the EXIF data of a batch of files, but most of it is useful to us so we'd rathr not rsort to that. Is there a QV plist where clever folks can edit it so QV uses the actual image resolution rather than what's in the EXIF data?
Incidentally, QV in Leopard ignored this data which is why we only now began to encounter images where QV is useless. Bogus EXIF resolutions have probebly been in image headers for years and we did not realize it until we found SnowLeopard's Finder payed attention to them.

Lightroom strips very valuable EXIF data - details

Hey everyone - I've just been playing around with some EXIF stuff, and I noticed something very concerning.
I do a lot of macro photography, specifically with Canon's MP-E 65mm 1x-5x Macro. This lens records its macro magnification factor in the EXIF data, and does so far more accurately and conveniently than I can.
I know that Lightroom and Photoshop strip out A LOT of obscure EXIF data when processed, but this magnification data is extremely valuable when reviewing my photos at a later date.
I can provide sample files if needed, and here is my observations so far:
- data stays intact when converting from .CR2 to .DNG
- data is stripped when converting to JPG, TIFF, and other formats
- data is stripped by both Lightroom and Photoshop
Here is the EXIF data (from exiftool) right from the Canon CR2 or DNG file (both are identical):
http://don.komarechka.com/exif/exif-original.txt
Here is the EXIF data (from exiftool) from a jpg that has gone through Lightroom:
http://don.komarechka.com/exif/exif-lightroom.txt
You'll notice a HUGE amount of extra data in the original raw file. It is certainly worth noting that the EXIF data in a JPG, unaltered from the camera, contains all of the same data as the RAW file.
So, is this something that has been overlooked, is there any way to change this behaviour? Even though Lightroom might not be able to decode this data, I don't see a reason why it cannot be left intact.
Thank you.
- Don Komarechka
http://don.komarechka.com

donkom wrote:
clvrmnky, thanks for your response.
Here's an example for you, the one I've been giving:
I shoot with a special macro lensm the Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro. This lens does not zoom, but the magnification can change from 1x to 5x.This lens communicates its magnification to one decimal point accuracy to the camera, which adds it to the maker notes.
This is important in reviewing images for a number of reasons, including calculating the effective aperture and depth fo field. This is a valuable piece of information that is stored within the makernotes that is removed from the image when sending it through LR, Photoshop, or ACR.
That isn't the only valuable information, however.
The makernotes will tell me if the image was captured using LiveView, if Mirror Lockup was used, if the shot is part of a bracketed set, what the internal camera temperature was, etc. etc.
I'm not sure you've justified your reasoning behind why this block of data shouldn't be blindly copied. If it is removed simply because it is not understood, I would like the option to understand this data on my own, using third-party tools, after the image has left LR.
I understand that this can be proprietary, but likely far less so than the RAW file formats that LR and ACR already understand. It would be trivial to understand where this block of data begins and ends and to leave it in the file on export.
I think this would allow for more in-depth searching based on metadata, for whoever wants to take up that torch. For example, what if I want to see all macro photos I took at a 4x magnification or higher. What if I want to see all photo I took using LiveView. Even if LR doesn't want to do this, stripping the data out prevents anyone else from doing it in the future.
Well, there is an SDK for metadata that has been around for awhile, which allows for custom metadata definitions. But, according to the SDK:
"Values stored in custom metadata fields are stored only in Lightroom's database. In the current release, a plug-in cannot link custom metadata fields to XMP values or save them with the image file."
So, this is more for searching and interfacing with tagset plugins.
Even so, using the SDK to get at maker notes is a losing proposition.
Note that some metadata is proprietary and will not be read into the database. This is to be expected. Lr is not an arbitrary metadata reading app, and there is no guarantee that any app could read all metadata. For example, Lr tries its best to get the serial number info, but this is because there is a lot of value in that for other Lr operations. So the contortions necessary to reliably get that is worth it. Another example is lens info (which is a twisty maze of passages; no app is ever guaranteed to actually retrieve lens info reliably in all cases) where there is a lot of value trying to extract the information that makers often store in very interesting ways. In some of those cases I think Lr will look in the maker notes, but only after exhausting other avenues, and with the caveat that it may never be able to get some information. The app does its best to get at the most valuable info it can get that fits with the standardized metadata models in place.
However, the key here is that maker note data is not in exported files that Lr makes, because it is not normalized data that belongs to the vendor. (This obviates the recommendation of using Metadata Wrangler, which can filter out only that metdata that exists in Lr; I had vaguely remembered a setting that referred to this section but was wrong.)
The field and data formats are not standardized, so you are asking Lr to understand most or all data from all or most lenses and bodies (all of it in varying degrees of similarity and difference) not just data from this lens and this body.
This is also not a trivial matter of "copying" the maker notes over, because copying implies parsing and duplicating what is essentially unknown formatted data containing proprietary data, possibly by custom serialization routines. Remember that maker notes were never intended to be editable, and could be composed of any number of data formats. Some cameras make maker notes that are megabytes of nulls and nothing else!
I think you are out of luck for this specific case. Perhaps with EXIF 3 we will have a more standardized interface cameras and software can more easily interoperate on shared data. Makers need to stop using the maker notes! It was always an egregious hack.
One workaround I can think of is to have a post-export action that uses EXIFTool to update exported images. For those cases where it matters, you could create your own "sidecar" file that has only the maker notes, and then shove those into the JPEG after they are created, or just read it from the on-disk copy and then put it in the new file (possibly in the same directory and added back into the catalogue for convenience.)

Batch Change "Date Modified" to match Exif Data After iPhoto Export

Among several other posts about similar situations, I have found none that directly and simply resolve this issue.
My wife imported a bunch of photos into iPhoto directly, but I wanted them in a folder on the hard drive.
I pulled them out of iPhoto into a folder, then deleted the ones in iPhoto so that I could sort them and reimport.
I then realized that the photos all now showed the date they were imported into iPhoto as their created/modified dates, which makes it impossible to easily sort them by the date of the pictures.
I checked the Exif data, and it has preserved the correct creation date event though checking "info" on the pictures shows create date the same as modified the same as iPhoto import.
Is there an easy way to batch change an entire folder of pictures to change the Created/Modified dates to match the Created date from the Exif data?
The only other similar posts had answers that reccomend a piece of software that does not seem to actually do this, and one that suggests some sort of confusing script that I don't really understand.
Please help - I have a bunch of family photos that I really need to fix.

shootShifter helps to redate and rename complete folders of images based on the EXIF data or Finder dates.
So it will do batches.
I also believe that exporting the Original (File -> Export: Kind Original) will make all of this unnecessary.
I don't like having them only in iPhoto so I organize the originals into folders by choronological event then import them so I have copies outside the iPhoto library to put elsewhere.
You understand that you're using twice the disk space there, right? And that it's quite unnecessary. All iPhoto does is to put them in folders too. Have you looked inside the iPhoto Library ever?
Go to your Pictures Folder and find the iPhoto Library there. Right (or Control-) Click on the icon and select 'Show Package Contents'. A finder window will open with the Library exposed. Your photos are in the Masters folder.
Standard warning: Don't change anything in the iPhoto Library Folder via the Finder or any other application. iPhoto depends on the structure as well as the contents of this folder. Moving things, renaming things,, deleting them or otherwise making changes will prevent iPhoto from working and could even cause you to damage or lose your photos.
Regards
TD

IPhoto '08 corrupts EXIF data on export

Hello All,
In using iPhoto '08 (including the latest update to 7.1) I am noticing the when I export files the EXIF data is getting corrupted.
My original files are fine--all EXIF data shows up properly, and galleries which I post to that are capable of displaying EXIF data display it just fine. However, when I export a file from iPhoto to JPG format, the galleries are unable to display the EXIF data. Using the Firefox extension, 'EXIF Viwer' ( https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3905 ), I see there are errors in the data (screenshot here: http://jaaulde.com/exif_viewer.png )
Thanks for any help you can provide.
Jim

Jim:
It may be the server side software that's causing the problems. Another thread went thru something like this extensively and we found that files from some cameras, Canons for one, are not read properly by the software. We've downloaded the files and read the EXIF data and it was all there. I have a gallery of files from various cameras as an example: http://gallery.mac.com/toad.hall/100196. Click on the "i" button in the slideshow and you'll see those that get the EXIF data correct, primarily the shutter speed, and those that do not. I don't remember the thread but you can search this forum for "EXIF web gallery" or similar.
Do you Twango?
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance. iPhoto doesn't not have to be closed to run it, just idle.
I've written an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. It's compatible with iPhoto 08 libraries. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.

EXIF data - Why is so much is missing in LRx but in RAW / DNG / CR2 images

I've seen the limitations in the EXIF data as shown in LR. I've seen the comments that it would be SO useful to sort / filter by all the EXIF data available in LR.
However LR shows a small proportion of the information that is available in the Meta data but there is missing EXIF data, that is of use to users, not every day, but it is there and with the aforementioned improvement of searching / sorting / grouping / stacking, I'd like this data to be accessible.
I was looking to find all the correctly exposed images in sets of 3 auto bracketted images -2, 0, +2 from todays shoot but this info is not listed in LR
So I looked in PhotoGrok, and it told me that the image I was looking at was AEBBracketValue -2, ie 2 stops under exposed in a set of auto bracket.
It also told me my camera was 37º when I was shooting in Cape Town this morning. It most certainly was not that warm outside.
My reason for finding the correctly exposed images in the sets was to see if they had sufficient exposure data to be used as one image rather than combining the 3 bracketted images using fusion / enBlend software to rescue the shadow detail and highlight detail in my shoot.
If you do play with PhotoGrok, you see more info than may be / is / could possibly be useful. But it does list a great deal.
I do get the basics
exposure
aperture
focal length
35mm equivalent
focal distance
hyperfocal distance
colour balance
AEBBracketValue
and the list goes on.
More importantly, this data has been extracted by LR from Canon 5DII CR2 files to DNG, so LR can see all this info.
Anyway, that is my request.
There is limited EXIF data displayed in LR, there are requests for sorting / searching / listing / stacking by more of the meta data that LR accesses.
I would like to see much more of this data available to be sorted / searched / stacked, so I can find amongst all the EXIF data, the AEBBracketValue = 0, ie correctly exposed images.
Rob Cole - Does your anyfilter access more of this info?
Hillrdg- you asked me to give my motivations for making suggestions, so I''ve taken your advise on board and to substantiate my argument.
yes, there is a workaround - It is to sort all the photos by capture time or file number and arrange them into 3 images in a grid view and just select the correct column, but this is slow. More importantly, this request is about vastly improving access to EXIF data and for other uses of the vast amount of EXIF data available in images.
hamish NIVEN Photography

EricInsalaco wrote:
Now I was under the impression Preview/Versions only take up a miniscule space on the HD since they don't FULLY copy the master file, they more create a bridge between the two that amounts to a few MB. Is it possible that it's taking up a much larger amount than intended here (a la the same basic mail attachment problem, but with Preview)? If so, what directory would that be located in?
Apple's documentation on Versions and what is kept in the Versions database is misleading, in my experience, though others will argue to the contrary.
In any case, all the Versions files and the database that keeps track of them are in an invisible folder in the root directory called
.DocumentRevisions-V100
The easiset way to check its size is to show invisible files by pasting the following command in Terminal:
defaults write com.apple.finder AppleShowAllFiles TRUE; killall Finder
press 'return' on the keyboard.
Now navigate to the hard disk in Finder and you should see DocumentRevisions and its size.
To turn off invisible files, use the same command as above but replace TRUE with FALSE.
Message was edited by: softwater

EXIF data stripped on export??

Why on earth would FW strip a photo's exif data when exporting? Web graphics are sometimes contractually required to retain metadata. This opens users up to liability if they don't realize that a photographer's credit is removed during compression.
Is there any way to have this reversed??

I'm aware of the fact that image copying is widespread. This is why exif data is often a requirement to inclusion in web-displayed images; it reduces liability of web publishers, because we've done all we can to prevent copyright attribution from being removed from the image. Are you aware that many photographers' contracts stipulate harsh penalties for publishers who remove metadata from provided files?
Photoshop has 2 problems. The first is that it seems impossible to automate a batch to export a folder of images with "save for web" settings. All my research suggests that it's impossible without digging into actual scripting, rather than relying on actions.
The second problem is that the fireworks "save for web" option is roughly 40% more efficient than the photoshop method, for comparable compression artifacts. I have no idea why photoshop wouldn't use the more efficient fireworks algorithm, but it simply doesn't.
In the past I've used imageready, which provided slightly better compression ratios than photoshop, retained all exif data, and allowed the creation of droplets. With the nonsensical removal of imageready from photoshop, and its replacement with the comparatively crippled fireworks (the compression efficiency is nice, no droplets is tolerable, but exif stripping is unforgivable in this day and age), I'm left searching for a product that will serve my needs.

Removing Exif Data with out using "Save for Web"

I have very large files. I need to remove thw EXIF data. I do not want to use "save for web" because it impacts the quality and size (recompresses) of the files. I need the files to remain un changed except for the removal of the EXIF data.
I have a large number of files to do this to.
Can anyone help?
Thanks

Thanks Tai Lao for the shortcuts.
I have RAW files to start. I "process" them and convert to jpg. Then send them to the client. But there are times the client doesn't need to be able to view the EXIF data, soooo....
1. I'm working on seting up an action to convert the processed RAW files to TIFF first,
2. then, using the shortcuts you listed, set up an action to take the tiff files through the process to strip them of the EXIF data and,
3. then convert the resulting "EXIF-less" TIFF files to jpg - also using an action. I'm going to try to build one action to do the whole thing but so far I'm still experimenting... I have to keep the file names...
Anyway, I'll post my findings.
Thanks
To whomever left the info about Exiftool - Thanks for that info as well. I'll check it out but is seems a bit too complicated for large numbers of files.

Changing date and time on photos

I changed the date and time of some of my photos in iPhoto, and I kept the original date/time for others. When I merged the two in iPhoto, they fell chronologically, which is what I wanted. But when I created a generic file on my desktop and moved the files from my iPhoto to this folder, the photos got mixed up.
How can I sort these photos--that are now out of iPhoto--by the date that I gave them in iPhoto? Do these changes made in iPhoto not permanently stay with each picture?

avarda
Actually you can't.
It's quite possible to have a photo taken on January 1 2000 in a file created yesterday.
When iPhoto sorts the photos on date and time it is reading the Exif data in the file about the Photo.
When the Finder sorts on date and time it's reading the Date Created and Modified of the file. The Finder does not know about Exif data.
Yes the Exif data (and the changes you made) travel with the Photo, but that's only of use in applications that know about Exif data - which is just about every photo application on the Planet - but the Finder is not a Photo app.
To do what you want: Now that you have the photos arranged in iPhoto, select them and go File -> Export: Kind: jpeg and look at the naming options in the dialogue box: Explore Fiename -> Sequential. Then, in the Finder, sort on Filename.
Regards
TD

How to get Final Cut to honor EXIF data of photos? (Specifically: rotation)

I've got a ton of photos I need to drop into FCE. The camera automatically rotates the photos via EXIF data. When I insert them into FCE, it makes my portrait photos show up as landscape. Adobe Bridge, Photoshop, iPhoto... all honor the EXIF data and display the photos properly.
I've got a ~15 minute piece to put together, mostly photos of about 4 seconds in duration. Rotating them manually is extremely tedious.
Is there any way to get FCE to honor EXIF data?
On a side note, in FCE, is there any easy way to do ken burns effects? The motion editor is tedious compared to other apps.
Thanks

So even Final Cut Pro isn't able to do this yet?
I just discovered that iMovie supports it if you import from iPhoto. I might just do these sections in iMovie, then export it, drop it into FCE... not using the XML feature, as I found it really doesn't work as advertised.
The Past Attributes function may work, thanks. I saw that in other threads too. Just wanted to make sure there wasn't some way to get the EXIF data to be read.
Thanks Tom, you're always very helpful.

Inconsistent import of EXIF data for RAW images

As of the last month or so I have started to notice import issues related to EXIF data within Aperture. When I import images from a card into a new album, some of the images import EXIF data and others do not. This behavior is seemingly random and affects a subset of all images. Even images taken on the same card with the same camera seconds apart can have differing behavior. At first I presumed that it was a faulty CF card but I now see this behavior across multiple cards (CF, SDHC). Even more perplexing is that the EXIF data will be associated to some images when I import once, and after reimporting the same images once agin from the same source, some do not have the EXIF data. This inconsistent behavior leads me to believe there may be a bug in the import process.
Has anyone had a problem like this? Any advice?

Yes, it is weird. My experience matches zeroorone's. No EXIF inf. showed. I wasn't using a metadata preset that showed _all_ EXIF, but a lot of it, and all the "important ones". It seems reasonable to assume that none of the EXIF was showing.
Brand new installation of everything, less than 1 week old, all up-to-date (I am re-installing everything, slowly; porting nothing except some pref and support files, and data files). Only happened once so far (but on three consecutive imports).

Exif Data and Leopard

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for