commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Damjan Jovanovic <damjan....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [IMAGING] Getting EXIF and IPTC metadata using metadata and image format neutral code
Date Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:02:10 GMT
There's also http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/commons/ which does TIFF
and PNG parsing among other things.

I'll have to investigate all of those after the 1.0 release.

Regards
Damjan

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Ray Gauss II <ray.gauss@alfresco.com> wrote:
> In case you're not aware, much has been done around EXIF, IPTC, and XMP in Apache Tika
which uses the Drew Noakes library [1] for some of its work and there's a parser which wraps
ExifTool [2].
>
> Perhaps there's some opportunity to combine efforts?
>
> Regards,
>
> Ray
>
> [1] http://www.drewnoakes.com/code/exif/
> [2] https://github.com/Alfresco/tika-exiftool
>
>
> On Jul 8, 2012, at 8:59 PM, Farrukh Najmi wrote:
>
>>
>> There are two specs:
>>
>> 1. IPTC Standard Photo Metadata 2008 IPTC Core Specification Version 1.1
>>   IPTC Extension Specification Version 1.0
>>   Document Revision 2
>>   <http://www.iptc.org/std/photometadata/2008/specification/IPTC-PhotoMetadata-2008.pdf>
>>   (IPTC-PhotoMetadata-2008 spec)
>> 2. IPTC - NAA Information Interchange Model Version 4
>>   <http://www.iptc.org/std/IIM/4.1/specification/IIMV4.1.pdf> (IIM spec)
>>
>>
>> The IPTC-PhotoMetadata-2008 spec suprecedes the IIM spec from what I have read. We
should therefor be implementing the IPTC-PhotoMetadata-2008 (the spec) and not the IIM spec.
>>
>> The TODO comment is about the properties that are in IIM spec but not in IPTC-PhotoMetadata-2008.
I have chosen to leave them there for now. All the IptcTypes.name field values are aligned
with the XMP property id values from the spec. That was the main change in the patch. I think
we should change IptcTypes.name field to IptcTypes.propertyId field and perhaps later add
a name field that aligns with the Name field values from the spec. BTW, I would be happy to
have a skype (skype id: farrukh_najmi) call to discuss this if you would like.
>>
>>
>> On 07/08/2012 11:34 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
>>> You ask "TODO: What to do about properties not seen in
>>> IPTC-PhotoMetadata-2008 (e.g. "Record Version"))"
>>>
>>> Look at http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/TagNames/IPTC.html
>>> Scroll down to "IPTC ApplicationRecord Tags"
>>> Those names seem to resemble what is in
>>> http://www.iptc.org/std/IIM/4.1/specification/IIMV4.1.pdf page 24
>>> onwards.
>>>
>>> The names in your patch differ from that list.
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Farrukh Najmi
>>> <farrukh@wellfleetsoftware.com> wrote:
>>>> Oops. Here is the correct file this time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 07/07/2012 01:39 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
>>>>> Hi Farrukh
>>>>>
>>>>> Your patch is just an empty file.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Damjan
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Farrukh Najmi
>>>>> <farrukh@wellfleetsoftware.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Damjan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Attached is the patch for implementing the proposed change outlined
in
>>>>>> bullets below.
>>>>>> Please review and then commit if satisfied or discuss further. Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 07/06/2012 02:29 PM, Farrukh Najmi wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> An example of a metadata property that has no IIM mapping defined
is
>>>>>>> Name:
>>>>>>> Scene Code, XMP property id: Scene (page 15 of 55 in spec)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 07/06/2012 02:25 PM, Farrukh Najmi wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Damjan,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks for the +1. As I started on this patch I made some
observations
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> the IPTC-PhotoMetadata-2008.pdfspec:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    * Not all metadata properties have an IIM mapping defined.
For these
>>>>>>>>      we will have to invent a type code. I propose we assign
codes
>>>>>>>>      starting at 10000 arbitrarily in such cases
>>>>>>>>    * Every field does have an XMP property id at present.
I am not sure
>>>>>>>>      if there is any guarantee that future fields will have
an XMP
>>>>>>>>      property id. I think we should continue with XMP property
id for
>>>>>>>>      IptcTypes.name field but if in future versions there
is no XMP
>>>>>>>>      property id then the backup would be to use the Name
field from
>>>>>>>>      the spec
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The only other alternative I can think of for IptcTypes.name
field
>>>>>>>> issue
>>>>>>>> is to use the Name field from the spec which is guaranteed
to be
>>>>>>>> present,
>>>>>>>> will never be translated but has the issue that it has white
space in
>>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>> content. My preference is to do what is proposed in bullets
above.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Comments? Thanks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Farrukh
>>
>> Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message