Exiv2

The image Photo2-beforemodif-tagCuisine.JPG has a weird JPEG structure: It contains two APP1 segments with XMP data (when there should be only one) and two APP13 Photoshop 3.0 segments, both of which are "invalid or incomplete" but (at least) one of them contains valid IPTC metadata. The worst is that it says 'digiKam' in all of the metadata, so I wonder whether Exiv2 was involved in creating this... but I'm not sure and have certainly never seen Exiv2 create such a mess.

Marcel, do you have any idea what happened to that picture? Any way to reproduce this?

I have checked-in a quick "fix", with which the command in the bug report works and which doesn't break any existing tests. As a result, the two APP13 segments are concatenated and written to only one APP13, but it still has invalid IRB data. Both Exiv2 and Exiftool seem to be able to deal with the resulting image.

Michael, Volker, could you please review whether that simple change is acceptable?

Thanks!

Hi Andreas, all,

the original Photo1-beforemodif-tagLyon.JPG and Photo2-beforemodif-tagCuisine.JPG in https://bugs.kde.org/attachment.cgi?id=38951 both basically contain the same - "weird" as Andreas says, and I second that - metadata structure:

APP0, APP1 (EXIF), APP1 (XMP), APP13 (only IPTC IRB), APP13 (only IPTC IRB), APP1 (XMP).

APP13 / IRB / IPTC-Tag structure and lengths of both APP13 markers in Photo1 are correct, while IRB length of the first APP13 marker in Photo2 is wrong, which is the reason for the trunk version of exiv2 bailing out on this one. A fixed version Photo2-beforemodif-tagCuisine_corr.JPG is attached.

But that's a minor problem, the real problem IMHO lies in the "magic" duplication of APP markers.

Before we start to find a way how to gracefully modify this metadata structure, we should try to find out where and why this data originated. The situation is promising: Why not ask the author of the original report at bugs.kde.org about the particular steps of his workflow. If - and that's my assumption - after camera download these images' metadata has only been modified by digicam/exiv2, it should be fairly straight forward to find the bug in the software packages involved.

So much for now ... Michael

I haven't studied this matter. I'd dumped it in "Review", however I'm going to move it to Target 1.0. It might get attention in v0.27. I haven't opened target v0.27 yet. I'm hoping to close most of the review items, however this issue deserves attention.