some more 'quick exif info' fields

[Beep6581]

Originally reported on Google Code with ID 218

Open a raw and type 'i' to show quick exif info.
In my case it says:

NIKON CORPORATION NIKON D40
F/4.0 1/60 sec
ISO: 200
Focal length: 26 mm
Lens: AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II

This overlaps part of the image. 

I suggest to leave out some fields and add three new fields, and not to use linebreaks
(editorpanel.cc, line 472), so we get just one line:
f/4.0 - 1/60s - 200 iso - ev 0 - 26mm (39mm eq) - flash off - Nikon D40 - 18-55mm

For me especially the EV +/- is important, plus flash used or not. I tried to fiddle
around with editorpanel.cc, but was unable to inject an EV field. 

Reported by paul.matthijsse4 on 2010-09-12 09:49:52

[Beep6581]

Reported by rinni@gmx.net on 2010-09-12 10:46:27

• Status changed: Accepted
• Labels added: Type-Enhancement, Component-UI
• Labels removed: Type-Defect

[Beep6581]

I just redesigned a bit this info label, made it a bit more compact and somehow more
clear, but i did not added any new fields yet. Revision db476038c0.

Feel free to post comments or make changes.

Reported by iliaworld@yandex.ru on 2010-09-18 10:41:51

[Beep6581]

Hello Ilia, this is already better, as it doesn't overlap the image anymore. Nice to
have the basic info very clear displayed (bigger font), but a little bit less big looks
more professional imo. 

Isn't it an idea to put this info in it's smallest form somewhere in the statusbar
under or the iconbar above, always visible? 

Reported by paul.matthijsse4 on 2010-09-18 12:17:27

[Beep6581]

I like the new format, but agree that the fonts for speed, aperture, ISO number, and
focal length should be a bit smaller.  In fact I would be fine with having them the
same size (or maybe 1 - 2 points larger) than the rest of the text.

Seeing as how you are working on this now, I thought I would point out a bug in the
exif-reading portion of the code.  The lens information differs between raw and jpg,
even when I shoot raw + jpg at the same time.  (See attachments).  I can provide you
with the sample raw and jpg if you desire.

Also a question: do you know where I can add new lens information?  I have some Sigma
lenses which don't show up in the EXIF at all, which I would like to add.

Thanks

Reported by wyatt.olson on 2010-09-18 15:19:08

[Beep6581]

I like your change but, agree for a bit smaller font.
Also that infos are enough for me.

To add an Olympus lens add a proper line in olympusattribs.cc inside
class OLLensTypeInterpreter, but usually lensID for compatible lens conflicts with
brand ones and so you are in trouble ... can look at Sony and Pentax for my changes.

Reported by ffsup2@yahoo.it on 2010-09-18 16:12:10

[Beep6581]

Ok, I decreased the font size. Is it ok now?

Actually i am not familiar with exif info extraction code at all.
It seems that extracion of these data is done in file "rtengine/imagedata.cc" in function
"ImageData::extractInfo()". For Olympus it uses EXIF field "LensType". You can have
a look at this code.

Reported by iliaworld@yandex.ru on 2010-09-18 18:34:59

[Beep6581]

I like the new font size -- very clean, yet readable.

As for the exif, I am a bit confused.  It appears that there are a few problems:

1) The lens is missing from olympusattribs.cc (this is easy to fix)
2) For some modern cameras, the OLLensTypeInterpreter is not even being run.  For instance,
a known lens on my E-500 (an old camera) shows up properly, but when on the E-30 (a
newer camera) it reads as Unknown.  This tells me that the logic is wrong in ImageData::extractInfo*().
 By inserting printf()'s I seem to see what is happening (although reading the console
on a Mac application is quite annoying and not consistent, as it seems there is some
buffering happening somewhere, so printf()s dont always show up right away).  It looks
like if (exif->getTag ("MakerNote"))  (about line 189 in imagedata.cc) is returning
false for newer cameras, so the entire lens discovery routine doesn't run.  Looking
at the data in exiftool it is clear that it is actually there, so my guess is that
the format / tag name / something has changed slightly and RT doesn't know how to deal
with it.  Unfortunately this is about the extent of my abilities for tonight, at least.

If someone with better skills than I have any insights I would love to hear some more
pointers.  Likewise I can provide sample raws if someone feels ambitious.

Cheers

Reported by wyatt.olson on 2010-09-19 04:23:19

[Beep6581]

Deleting attachment images as we are running out of space.

Reported by wyatt.olson on 2010-12-06 16:04:53

[Beep6581]

Reported by entertheyoni on 2012-01-02 18:36:26

• Status changed: Fixed