View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0001094 | libextractor | plugins | public | 2006-05-14 06:04 | 2006-05-17 01:43 |
| Reporter | Patrick BURNAND | Assigned To | Christian Grothoff | ||
| Priority | normal | Severity | tweak | Reproducibility | sometimes |
| Status | closed | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Product Version | 0.5.13 | ||||
| Summary | 0001094: resolution extraction of some jpeg files is wrong. | ||||
| Description | I inserted a large collection of jpeg files in gnunet directories. In some rare cases, the extracted resolution is completely wrong. Look at the picture uploaded. For pix 0078.jpg, the resolution is displayed as 30369382240x537067520. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
|
|
Note that we get the size twice for the image: size - -1258029056x537067520 <= here metering mode - Center weighted exposure mode - Auto iso speed - 160 focal length - 9.3 mm flash - Yes exposure bias - 0 aperture - F2.1 exposure - 1/50 s date - 2002:08:20 13:32:44 orientation - top, left camera model - CYBERSHOT camera make - SONY size - 1205x800 <= here again (and correct!) mimetype - image/jpeg I guess just one piece of the code is wrong ;-). Will try to find it. |
|
|
The problem comes from the exiv2 extractor (jpeg extractor is correct). I'll comment out size extraction from exiv2 for now (should be duplicate anyway) and contact the author of libexiv2 about this. |
|
|
Andreas Huggel writes: The size information in the image is wrong. More precisely, it looks like the correct information was written but recorded with the wrong byte order (little-endian instead of big-endian like the rest of the Exif data). It's not clear if that is the problem of the camera or some other software (tag Exif.Image.Software contains "Adobe Photoshop 7.0"). Note: It happens frequently that the size in the Exif data is not correct, e.g., if the picture is re-sized with software which doesn't update the Exif size. Maybe the tag name in libextractor should be something like "Exif size" rather than just "size". |
|
|
We'll just stop using the redundant exiv2 information (we get the size from the jpeg/png/tiff/etc. extractors anyway). Considering that this was technically not a bug in our code, this should be the perfect solution. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006-05-14 06:04 | Patrick BURNAND | New Issue | |
| 2006-05-14 06:04 | Patrick BURNAND | File Added: 0078.jpg | |
| 2006-05-14 12:00 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0002640 | |
| 2006-05-14 12:00 | Christian Grothoff | Status | new => assigned |
| 2006-05-14 12:00 | Christian Grothoff | Assigned To | => Christian Grothoff |
| 2006-05-14 12:16 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0002641 | |
| 2006-05-14 19:26 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0002643 | |
| 2006-05-14 19:27 | Christian Grothoff | Status | assigned => resolved |
| 2006-05-14 19:27 | Christian Grothoff | Resolution | open => fixed |
| 2006-05-14 19:27 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0002644 | |
| 2006-05-14 20:40 | Christian Grothoff | File Deleted: 0078.jpg | |
| 2006-05-17 01:43 | Christian Grothoff | Status | resolved => closed |
