Bug #637
Weird error "Directory Canon with 7168 entries considered invalid; not read."
0%
Description
I use gthumb, and it uses exiv2.
Some photos I shot with my canon powershot a530 give this error in the
terminal:
Error: Directory Canon with 7168 entries considered invalid; not read.
"7158 entries": it seems weird.
I submitted the bug to gthumb developers http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=584919 but they say it's a exiv2 problem.
History
Updated by Andreas Huggel over 12 years ago
Paolo,
I use gthumb, and it uses exiv2.
Error: Directory Canon with 7168 entries considered invalid; not read.
"7158 entries": it seems weird.
Right. With this message, exiv2 is trying to say this: "I've encountered a directory (IFD) "Canon" (which is the makernote IFD) in the TIFF/Exif structure of the image, which claims to have 7168 entries. That doesn't look right, I'll ignore this entire directory with all its tags."
This situation is usually encountered in images with corrupted Exif data, and in this case the message means just that: there is something not right with the Exif data in the image.
I'll need an image to investigate what is the reason for this message in your particular image, and if there is really something wrong with Exiv2 (since you opened a bug). Please attach one here or send it to me at ahuggel at gmx dot net.
Updated by Andreas Huggel over 12 years ago
- Status changed from New to Resolved
The image that gives error was downloaded to a window system, possibly
resized it with some windows software and then sent to me.
According to the Exif data, the sample was taken with a Canon PowerShot SX100 IS and edited with Microsoft Windows Photo Gallery 6.0.6000.16386.
It has indeed a corrupted Makernote which causes the observed error but it looks like the Makernote could be recovered if necessary (by intelligently guessing the correct offset to use, see #543).
I'm closing this issue now as Exiv2 doesn't do anything wrong ("not a bug").
Updated by paolo - over 12 years ago
I suggest that exiv2 gives a warning instead of an error. That's would be more coherent with the decision not to consider this a bug.