Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Q of EXIF data (landscape pic) in PSP8.1

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Reckless

unread,
Oct 18, 2003, 7:12:58 AM10/18/03
to
I grabbed the 8.1 update a couple of days back so I'm up to date!

I took a couple of snaps with my camera (Canon IXUS 400) in landscape mode.
PSP8.01 had some issues with the JPGs created by my camera but 8.1 is able
to open them OK. However, it doesn't seem to read the EXIF data and show the
picture as it's supposed to be: Orientation - Landscape (Top Left). So the
picture displays as a rotated image and I have to manually rotate it. Is
this expected?

Thanks in advance!


Uni

unread,
Oct 18, 2003, 12:26:59 PM10/18/03
to
Reckless wrote:
> I grabbed the 8.1 update a couple of days back so I'm up to date!
>
> I took a couple of snaps with my camera (Canon IXUS 400) in landscape mode.
> PSP8.01 had some issues with the JPGs created by my camera but 8.1 is able
> to open them OK. However, it doesn't seem to read the EXIF data and show the
> picture as it's supposed to be: Orientation - Landscape (Top Left).


Let's get this straight. You're "up to date" with your graphics
software, the third release, but you continue to have problems with it?

Uni

Xalinai

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 4:11:13 AM10/19/03
to

PSP does not provide automatic rotation for images according to the
EXIF information.

But: Landscape is the usual format (wider than high) for pictures -
there should be no need to rotate. Is it possible that you took the
pictures in portrait mode (higher than wide) and your camera has no
alignment sensor to know what angle you used?

For our HP850 we get that information and the images are rotated when
the HP software transfers them to the PC - my D60 images OTOH always
say orientation top left.

Michael

Reckless

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 6:27:27 AM10/19/03
to
Yes the picture was taken as a 'portrait' .... my camera obviously knows
this as it puts the right value into the EXIF structure. It is also 'smart'
enough to read and use the EXIF data to display the picture (with the
correct orientation) when in preview mode on the LCD. When downloaded to the
PC though, neither the camera or the download program modify the image -
it's the 'raw' JPG complete with EXIF data - I guess they expected other
products to use the EXIF data appropriately as well ?

"Xalinai" <xalin...@xalinai.de> wrote in message
news:3f9244b1....@news.t-online.de...

Trev

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 6:44:59 AM10/19/03
to

"Reckless" <reck...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:bmtouf$caf$1...@sparta.btinternet.com...

> Yes the picture was taken as a 'portrait' .... my camera obviously
knows
> this as it puts the right value into the EXIF structure. It is also
'smart'
> enough to read and use the EXIF data to display the picture (with the
> correct orientation) when in preview mode on the LCD. When downloaded
to the
> PC though, neither the camera or the download program modify the
image -
> it's the 'raw' JPG complete with EXIF data - I guess they expected
other
> products to use the EXIF data appropriately as well ?

My cameras downloader will automatically rotate But portrait orientated
images still have "Landscape top left" in the exif (and display as
portrait) so that may mean something different to what you think


Xalinai

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 11:04:56 AM10/19/03
to
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 10:27:27 +0000 (UTC), "Reckless"
<reck...@nospam.com> wrote:

>Yes the picture was taken as a 'portrait' .... my camera obviously knows
>this as it puts the right value into the EXIF structure. It is also 'smart'
>enough to read and use the EXIF data to display the picture (with the
>correct orientation) when in preview mode on the LCD. When downloaded to the
>PC though, neither the camera or the download program modify the image -
>it's the 'raw' JPG complete with EXIF data - I guess they expected other
>products to use the EXIF data appropriately as well ?

So the camera has a sensor for orientation and is able to rotate the
image for display. Next question:

Is the orientation flag different for your portrait images and the
landscape images?

Michael

Jules

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 4:33:39 PM10/19/03
to
Reckless wrote:

>Yes the picture was taken as a 'portrait' .... my camera obviously knows
>this as it puts the right value into the EXIF structure. It is also 'smart'
>enough to read and use the EXIF data to display the picture (with the
>correct orientation) when in preview mode on the LCD. When downloaded to the
>PC though, neither the camera or the download program modify the image -
>it's the 'raw' JPG complete with EXIF data - I guess they expected other
>products to use the EXIF data appropriately as well ?

Are you using Canon's ZoomBrowser to pull your pictures off the camera
and onto the PC? And if so, are you using version 4.x of it? (I'd guess
that you probably are if your camera is an IXUS 400.)

I found that the ZoomBrowser version 3 software which came with my IXUS
330 autorotated the pictures quite happily, but when I rebuilt my PC
recently I tried putting version 4 of the ZoomBrowser software on
instead and hit exactly the same problem. From Googling the web, it
seemed that I wasn't alone in this.

I couldn't get it to work at all on my Win2K machine. On the WinMe one I
did better, but it appears the current version of ZoomBrowser has
changed the way it does rotation of the portrait images. It now keeps
the unrotated image and creates a rotated copy of it with a slightly
different name. See this:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/viewtopic.php?TopicID=7249#31131

My solution was to go hunting for an alternative program to do my
downloading and rotating with so that I could ditch ZoomBrowser, which I
hated anyway, and I found this:

http://www.breezesys.com/Downloader/index.htm

As far as I can see it does non-lossy rotation pretty well, and it's
much more flexible with its file renaming options. I don't know if it's
in your budget, but it's one way of solving the problem if you get no
joy out of ZoomBrowser... and there are probably other programs out
there that do the same thing as well.

--
Jules

Reckless

unread,
Oct 19, 2003, 8:20:27 PM10/19/03
to
A great post thanks! You are correct in all your assumptions!

Agreed, Zoombrowser is a load of old **** isn't it! I'll check out the links
you posted.

Thanks again.

"Jules" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:8+vwmbOjUvk$Ew...@tenzil.demon.co.uk...

0 new messages