On 3 Jan 2003 15:48:21 -0600, Darksaint <darksaintforever@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>Hejsa
>Jeg har et Nikon D100
>Når jeg i Photoshop 7.01 eller ACDSee 5.0
>forsøger at se mine ISO informationer i exif
>detaljerne så er den der ikke. Underligt
>Alt andet er der tilsyneladende.
>
>Problemet er konstateret på originalfilerne,
>såå jeg har ikke omdøbt dem eller lignende!
>
>Nu kører jeg på WindowsXP - SP1 - jeg har
>hørt at XP kan slette exif informationerne,
>hvis man "kiggede" på filerne i det indbyggede
>image program. Det har jeg ikke gjort.
>
>Det skal lige siges at jeg også har et coolpix990
>Der er INGEN problemer der vises ISO informationerne
>uden problemer.
>
>Nogle der har været ude for problemet og evt har en løsning?
>
>Hilsen
>Thomas
Nåh fandt selv lidt info om det på dpreview i deres forum:
Har pastet lidt af informationen ind:
I tilfælde af at der er andre der har spekuleret.
Hilsen
Thomas
I am currently working with some photo cataloging software and when
setting up the "display
EXIF" funtion found that the ISO from D100 was not showing up. In
Nikon Browser and Capture
the ISO setting shows up. I thought maybe it was the cataloging
software. In Capture I
"sent" an image to Photoshop. I went to file "file info" and the ISO
is not there in the
EXIF either.
Anyone have any thought on why it's not exporting?
Answer:
Nikon puts the ISO information into a non-standard, Nikon EXIF
extension.
Only programs that know and understand Nikon extensions will be able
to read ISO settings
from D100 images.
If you're a developer you can find out the Nikon makernote information
by searching google
for - guess what - "Nikon Makernote"
-jeremiah
ISO setting is usually part of the 'official' standard EXIF fields.
Unfortunately some
camera vendors recently started to move fields out of the standard
EXIF field into the
so-called 'maker notes'. Maker notes are a way for camera vendors to
store proprietary data
into an EXIF record.
The bad thing is, most camera vendors don't release documentation
about these proprietary
maker notes, which makes it hard for software vendors like my to
decode everything that's in
the non-standard part of the EXIF record.
During my research I have identified over 100 (!) different maker note
formats, some of them
undocumented, and some of them only partially documented. This is
nothing I would call an
"EXIF Standard" anymore.
Keeping the maker note fields undocumented serves a purpose,
of course
One of the upcoming releases of IMatch will contain a generic EXIF
maker note support
module, which allows me (and other users) to add new maker note
formats on the fly, when new
camera models come out, or maker notes are decoded