Issue with LR, lenses, & exif data

Bill W wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 21:01:35 -0800, (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

Bill W wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:07:32 -0800, (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

Bill W wrote:
Okay, I checked with exiftool. If I click on exif, the lens data is
not there. If I click on Maker, or All, it's there. Any ideas?

The lens data is contained in the MakerNotes (which is
proprietary to the camera manufacturer), and is not
strictly speaking Exif data. Exiftool will show both,
and also IPTC data and some data (such as date stamps
and image size) that is available from the image file.
It also "creates" some data by heuristics combining
other data.

The lens data in the MakerNotes is not the full text
description of the lens. There is a "Lens ID Number"
and another number called "Lens Data Version". Other
fields are "Lens Type", which with Nikon will show
things like "G", "VR", and "D". Who knows what a Nikon
camera might list for a Sigma lens! :-)

The lens data fields labeled "Lens ID" and "Lens" are
created by Exiftool and are not specifically what the
camera has put in the metadata. They have text that
Exiftool decides should be there, given other data such
as what the numbers are in the "Lens ID Number", "Lens
Type", and "Lens Data Version" tags. Obviously a
different Exif reader might present less information.
Exiftool is probably the best...

Well then it looks like LR & PS don't read the MakerNotes initially,

But if they get it right with a Nikon lens, they must be
reading the Makernotes.

It appears they only look through their Nikon lens data
to get a match, unless you tell it the lens is some
brand other than that of the camera.

When I have a Pentax lens on the Pentax body, everything appears in
the exif data.

Nope. I just downloaded an JPEG made with a Pentax K-1.
Just as with Nikon the lens data is in the MakerNotes.
There simply is no place to put it in Exif data!

But there was a significant difference. There is no
"Lens ID Number" field, and instead it is a "Lens Type"
field that has the full ASCII text name of the lens.
The exiftool created "Lens ID" field is just a copy of
the MakerNotes "Lens Type" field.

I have to assume that the camera body writes the data
differently depending on whether it's their lens or not. What you're
saying there makes sense, except that it makes no sense from the
user's standpoint. It's just a choice Adobe made for some unknown
reason.

I do have a couple of other brand lenses. Maybe I'll dig those out and
experiment, but I believe that they are all pre-digital age. I'm
guessing those lenses don't transfer any data at all.

If they don't have electrical contacts they can't. If
they do, they still might not.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 22:01:10 -0800, (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

Bill W wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 21:01:35 -0800, (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

Bill W wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:07:32 -0800, (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

Bill W wrote:
Okay, I checked with exiftool. If I click on exif, the lens data is
not there. If I click on Maker, or All, it's there. Any ideas?

The lens data is contained in the MakerNotes (which is
proprietary to the camera manufacturer), and is not
strictly speaking Exif data. Exiftool will show both,
and also IPTC data and some data (such as date stamps
and image size) that is available from the image file.
It also "creates" some data by heuristics combining
other data.

The lens data in the MakerNotes is not the full text
description of the lens. There is a "Lens ID Number"
and another number called "Lens Data Version". Other
fields are "Lens Type", which with Nikon will show
things like "G", "VR", and "D". Who knows what a Nikon
camera might list for a Sigma lens! :-)

The lens data fields labeled "Lens ID" and "Lens" are
created by Exiftool and are not specifically what the
camera has put in the metadata. They have text that
Exiftool decides should be there, given other data such
as what the numbers are in the "Lens ID Number", "Lens
Type", and "Lens Data Version" tags. Obviously a
different Exif reader might present less information.
Exiftool is probably the best...

Well then it looks like LR & PS don't read the MakerNotes initially,

But if they get it right with a Nikon lens, they must be
reading the Makernotes.

It appears they only look through their Nikon lens data
to get a match, unless you tell it the lens is some
brand other than that of the camera.

When I have a Pentax lens on the Pentax body, everything appears in
the exif data.

Nope. I just downloaded an JPEG made with a Pentax K-1.
Just as with Nikon the lens data is in the MakerNotes.
There simply is no place to put it in Exif data!

Okay, but what I meant is that it appears under the exif data in LR &
PS. So this has something to do with the way Adobe reads, and then
displays and uses all of the data from the camera. All I really need
to know is that I can't do anything about it., I guess. And regardless
of whether it's a Pentax lens, Windows doesn't display the lens type
either, even though you can add a column in file explorer, or right
click on the raw file and look at properties. Lens info is blank.

This all started because I wanted to search for all photos with a
certain lens. The search works if I search for "Pentax", but not for
"Sigma". So it appears that there is no way to quickly find all
existing photos taken with any of my non-Pentax lenses. It just
doesn't make sense that Adobe would do things this way.

But there was a significant difference. There is no
"Lens ID Number" field, and instead it is a "Lens Type"
field that has the full ASCII text name of the lens.
The exiftool created "Lens ID" field is just a copy of
the MakerNotes "Lens Type" field.

I have to assume that the camera body writes the data
differently depending on whether it's their lens or not. What you're
saying there makes sense, except that it makes no sense from the
user's standpoint. It's just a choice Adobe made for some unknown
reason.

I do have a couple of other brand lenses. Maybe I'll dig those out and
experiment, but I believe that they are all pre-digital age. I'm
guessing those lenses don't transfer any data at all.

If they don't have electrical contacts they can't. If
they do, they still might not.

On 2016-07-12 16:56:14 +0000, Bill W said:


This all started because I wanted to search for all photos with a
certain lens. The search works if I search for "Pentax", but not for
"Sigma". So it appears that there is no way to quickly find all
existing photos taken with any of my non-Pentax lenses. It just
doesn't make sense that Adobe would do things this way.

That type of search works better in Bridge.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 10:17:39 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-07-12 16:56:14 +0000, Bill W said:


This all started because I wanted to search for all photos with a
certain lens. The search works if I search for "Pentax", but not for
"Sigma". So it appears that there is no way to quickly find all
existing photos taken with any of my non-Pentax lenses. It just
doesn't make sense that Adobe would do things this way.

That type of search works better in Bridge.

Well I hope you're happy, you've now made things worse.

I have a folder with 4 photos, sequential photos, all taken under
identical conditions within minutes of each other with a Sigma lens.
If I search within "all metadata" for "sigma", the search returns 2 of
those 4 photos. So I look in the metadata, and "sigma" does not appear
anywhere in any of the 4 photos. If I search a folder with all Pentax
lens shots, there are no search returns with "sigma".

To add to the confusion, there is a list of filters you can use on the
lower left. There are twice as many filters to choose from when the
shots are with a Pentax lens.

I'm reminded of when I used to think Adobe sucks, but I suspect this
might have something more to do with the way Pentax writes its
metadata. Or maybe it's a combination of Pentax & Adobe. Either way,
one of them sucks.

Again, DXO seems to be the only software that has no issues with the
metadata. After all these years of digital photography, you wouldn't
expect this sort of thing.

On 2016-07-12 22:37:55 +0000, Bill W said:

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 10:17:39 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-07-12 16:56:14 +0000, Bill W said:


This all started because I wanted to search for all photos with a
certain lens. The search works if I search for "Pentax", but not for
"Sigma". So it appears that there is no way to quickly find all
existing photos taken with any of my non-Pentax lenses. It just
doesn't make sense that Adobe would do things this way.

That type of search works better in Bridge.

Well I hope you're happy, you've now made things worse.

Sorry about that.

I have a folder with 4 photos, sequential photos, all taken under
identical conditions within minutes of each other with a Sigma lens.
If I search within "all metadata" for "sigma", the search returns 2 of
those 4 photos. So I look in the metadata, and "sigma" does not appear
anywhere in any of the 4 photos. If I search a folder with all Pentax
lens shots, there are no search returns with "sigma".

What do you get with a focal length search?

To add to the confusion, there is a list of filters you can use on the
lower left. There are twice as many filters to choose from when the
shots are with a Pentax lens.

That sounds like a Pentax/Sigma issue.

I'm reminded of when I used to think Adobe sucks, but I suspect this
might have something more to do with the way Pentax writes its
metadata. Or maybe it's a combination of Pentax & Adobe. Either way,
one of them sucks.

With Fujicon FX lenses the Fujifilm "Lens Modulation Optimizer" is used
in-camera to apply CF, and distortion corrections. Fuji ad Adobe have
coordiated, so LR/ACR does not expect to see a lens profile applied in
the Lens Correction panel.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_198e.png

Again, DXO seems to be the only software that has no issues with the
metadata. After all these years of digital photography, you wouldn't
expect this sort of thing.

The only issues I have had with LR/ACR Lens profiles have been with my
old Nikkor 80-400mm where I have never found a profile and the EXIF
reports it as 82-400mm; and my Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 which also had no
profile when I got the lens, so I had to build my own. A few months
later Adobe and Tokina got their act together and the proprietary
profiles arrived with a LR/ACR update.



--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 16:07:04 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-07-12 22:37:55 +0000, Bill W said:

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 10:17:39 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-07-12 16:56:14 +0000, Bill W said:


This all started because I wanted to search for all photos with a
certain lens. The search works if I search for "Pentax", but not for
"Sigma". So it appears that there is no way to quickly find all
existing photos taken with any of my non-Pentax lenses. It just
doesn't make sense that Adobe would do things this way.

That type of search works better in Bridge.

Well I hope you're happy, you've now made things worse.

Sorry about that.

I have a folder with 4 photos, sequential photos, all taken under
identical conditions within minutes of each other with a Sigma lens.
If I search within "all metadata" for "sigma", the search returns 2 of
those 4 photos. So I look in the metadata, and "sigma" does not appear
anywhere in any of the 4 photos. If I search a folder with all Pentax
lens shots, there are no search returns with "sigma".

What do you get with a focal length search?

To add to the confusion, there is a list of filters you can use on the
lower left. There are twice as many filters to choose from when the
shots are with a Pentax lens.

That sounds like a Pentax/Sigma issue.

I'm reminded of when I used to think Adobe sucks, but I suspect this
might have something more to do with the way Pentax writes its
metadata. Or maybe it's a combination of Pentax & Adobe. Either way,
one of them sucks.

With Fujicon FX lenses the Fujifilm "Lens Modulation Optimizer" is used
in-camera to apply CF, and distortion corrections. Fuji ad Adobe have
coordiated, so LR/ACR does not expect to see a lens profile applied in
the Lens Correction panel.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_198e.png

Again, DXO seems to be the only software that has no issues with the
metadata. After all these years of digital photography, you wouldn't
expect this sort of thing.

The only issues I have had with LR/ACR Lens profiles have been with my
old Nikkor 80-400mm where I have never found a profile and the EXIF
reports it as 82-400mm; and my Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 which also had no
profile when I got the lens, so I had to build my own. A few months
later Adobe and Tokina got their act together and the proprietary
profiles arrived with a LR/ACR update.

After reading all of nospam's and Floyd's comments, it's pretty clear
that there is blame to spread around. And it turns out that LR does
recognize one of my Sigma lenses, but not the others. I guess metadata
isn't written and read consistently through the hardware and software
that use it. But what it really means is that a photo search based on
any metadata is pretty treacherous. You should never assume you're
getting accurate results.

In article , Bill W
wrote:


The only issues I have had with LR/ACR Lens profiles have been with my
old Nikkor 80-400mm where I have never found a profile and the EXIF
reports it as 82-400mm; and my Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 which also had no
profile when I got the lens, so I had to build my own. A few months
later Adobe and Tokina got their act together and the proprietary
profiles arrived with a LR/ACR update.

After reading all of nospam's and Floyd's comments, it's pretty clear
that there is blame to spread around. And it turns out that LR does
recognize one of my Sigma lenses, but not the others. I guess metadata
isn't written and read consistently through the hardware and software
that use it. But what it really means is that a photo search based on
any metadata is pretty treacherous. You should never assume you're
getting accurate results.

don't blame the technology just because sigma screws it up.

nospam wrote:
In article , Bill W
wrote:


The only issues I have had with LR/ACR Lens profiles have been with my
old Nikkor 80-400mm where I have never found a profile and the EXIF
reports it as 82-400mm; and my Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 which also had no
profile when I got the lens, so I had to build my own. A few months
later Adobe and Tokina got their act together and the proprietary
profiles arrived with a LR/ACR update.

After reading all of nospam's and Floyd's comments, it's pretty clear
that there is blame to spread around. And it turns out that LR does
recognize one of my Sigma lenses, but not the others. I guess metadata
isn't written and read consistently through the hardware and software
that use it. But what it really means is that a photo search based on
any metadata is pretty treacherous. You should never assume you're
getting accurate results.

don't blame the technology just because sigma screws it up.

What does Sigma have to do with this? Pentax writes the metadata.
And Adobe reads the metadata. Sigma has nothing to do with it!

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:


After reading all of nospam's and Floyd's comments, it's pretty clear
that there is blame to spread around. And it turns out that LR does
recognize one of my Sigma lenses, but not the others. I guess metadata
isn't written and read consistently through the hardware and software
that use it. But what it really means is that a photo search based on
any metadata is pretty treacherous. You should never assume you're
getting accurate results.

don't blame the technology just because sigma screws it up.

What does Sigma have to do with this? Pentax writes the metadata.
And Adobe reads the metadata. Sigma has nothing to do with it!

he's having problems with sigma lenses, not pentax lenses.

pentax just writes whatever the lens reports.

sigma is well known for reusing rom chips among their lenses, resulting
in lenses reporting as a different lens or sometimes reporting totally
invalid data.

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 22:16:41 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Bill W
wrote:


The only issues I have had with LR/ACR Lens profiles have been with my
old Nikkor 80-400mm where I have never found a profile and the EXIF
reports it as 82-400mm; and my Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 which also had no
profile when I got the lens, so I had to build my own. A few months
later Adobe and Tokina got their act together and the proprietary
profiles arrived with a LR/ACR update.

After reading all of nospam's and Floyd's comments, it's pretty clear
that there is blame to spread around. And it turns out that LR does
recognize one of my Sigma lenses, but not the others. I guess metadata
isn't written and read consistently through the hardware and software
that use it. But what it really means is that a photo search based on
any metadata is pretty treacherous. You should never assume you're
getting accurate results.

don't blame the technology just because sigma screws it up.

I think there's more to it than Sigma. After all, the correct info is
there for every lens. It's Adobe's software that is not reading it,
except in different areas of the software. If I click to enable a lens
profile, and then select the brand in the dropdown, the correct lens
always fills in, so the data is there, and Adobe can get to it. For
some reason, they don't automatically locate it, even though they can.
So all of the correct data is available to any software, and DXO has
no trouble at all with any of my cameras/lenses. In fairness, it's not
just Adobe, though.