How to add EXIF date from file-date

Matt Ion wrote:
l v wrote:
Lars-Erik Østerud wrote:
I have a huge amount JPG photos WITHOUT EXIF date indo.
But it seens like the PS3 only uses EXIF date for sorting.

Så all images without EXIF date ends up in the current
year and month (like "FEB 2008" or "2008") when sorting.

I have the original date in the files "date modified",
but need a program then can create the EXIF date info
from the file-date. But I can only find the opposite :-(

Anyone know how to copy the file-date to the EXIF date
for several 1000 JPG files in an easy way? Please?

What operating system?

I find that almost universally, it's the non-Windows users who are
intelligent enough to provide OS information. Your typical Windows
(l)user doesn't understand that not all computers run on Windows. Thus
it's safe to assume that we're dealing with some version of Windows here.

Usually the headers give it away too. The OP's headers did not reveal
anything definitive.

--

Len

H.S. wrote:
John Navas wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:26:18 -0800, Matt Ion wrote
in :

l v wrote:
Lars-Erik Østerud wrote:
I have a huge amount JPG photos WITHOUT EXIF date indo.
But it seens like the PS3 only uses EXIF date for sorting.

Så all images without EXIF date ends up in the current
year and month (like "FEB 2008" or "2008") when sorting.

I have the original date in the files "date modified",
but need a program then can create the EXIF date info
from the file-date. But I can only find the opposite :-(

Anyone know how to copy the file-date to the EXIF date
for several 1000 JPG files in an easy way? Please?
What operating system?
I find that almost universally, it's the non-Windows users who are
intelligent enough to provide OS information. Your typical Windows
(l)user doesn't understand that not all computers run on Windows.
Thus it's safe to assume that we're dealing with some version of
Windows here.

It's a matter of market share, not intelligence.
Insulting Windows users does you no credit.


Rephrased:
Non-windows users are more aware of what they are dealing with and tend
to provide relevant information when asking questions here. Most Windows
users, however, take it for guaranteed that everyone else is using
Windows too. They are as likely to be completely ignorant of any other
kinds of OSes as well.

Not true. I recently responded to a post where the OP was looking for
image cataloging software. After I responded with my windows centric
answer, the OP replied that he was a Mac user.

This is something *people* just assume but forget to include it in the
question.

--

Len

Lars-Erik Østerud wrote:
I have a huge amount JPG photos WITHOUT EXIF date indo.
But it seens like the PS3 only uses EXIF date for sorting.

Så all images without EXIF date ends up in the current
year and month (like "FEB 2008" or "2008") when sorting.

I have the original date in the files "date modified",
but need a program then can create the EXIF date info
from the file-date. But I can only find the opposite :-(

Anyone know how to copy the file-date to the EXIF date
for several 1000 JPG files in an easy way? Please?

jhead from http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/jhead has a -dsft option.

--

Len

Usually the headers give it away too. The OP's headers did not reveal
anything definitive.

If they use MS Outlook :-)
But I use Forte Agent :-)

Anyway, I bought AttributeMagic Pro.
Can batch-change all attributes I need.
Also copy from the file-date to EXIF dates.
--
Lars-Erik - http://www.osterud.name - ICQ 7297605

l v wrote:
H.S. wrote:
John Navas wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:26:18 -0800, Matt Ion wrote
in :

l v wrote:
Lars-Erik Østerud wrote:
I have a huge amount JPG photos WITHOUT EXIF date indo.
But it seens like the PS3 only uses EXIF date for sorting.

Så all images without EXIF date ends up in the current
year and month (like "FEB 2008" or "2008") when sorting.

I have the original date in the files "date modified",
but need a program then can create the EXIF date info
from the file-date. But I can only find the opposite :-(

Anyone know how to copy the file-date to the EXIF date
for several 1000 JPG files in an easy way? Please?
What operating system?
I find that almost universally, it's the non-Windows users who are
intelligent enough to provide OS information. Your typical Windows
(l)user doesn't understand that not all computers run on Windows.
Thus it's safe to assume that we're dealing with some version of
Windows here.

It's a matter of market share, not intelligence.
Insulting Windows users does you no credit.


Rephrased:
Non-windows users are more aware of what they are dealing with and
tend to provide relevant information when asking questions here. Most
Windows users, however, take it for guaranteed that everyone else is
using Windows too. They are as likely to be completely ignorant of any
other kinds of OSes as well.

Not true. I recently responded to a post where the OP was looking for
image cataloging software. After I responded with my windows centric
answer, the OP replied that he was a Mac user.

Still true: note such qualifiers as "most", "typical", "likely", etc.

There are exceptions both ways, but the overwhelming majority of cases
hold to the generalizations above.

Matt Ion wrote:
John Navas wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:26:18 -0800, Matt Ion wrote
in :

l v wrote:
Lars-Erik Østerud wrote:
I have a huge amount JPG photos WITHOUT EXIF date indo.
But it seens like the PS3 only uses EXIF date for sorting.

Så all images without EXIF date ends up in the current
year and month (like "FEB 2008" or "2008") when sorting.

I have the original date in the files "date modified",
but need a program then can create the EXIF date info
from the file-date. But I can only find the opposite :-(

Anyone know how to copy the file-date to the EXIF date
for several 1000 JPG files in an easy way? Please?
What operating system?
I find that almost universally, it's the non-Windows users who are
intelligent enough to provide OS information. Your typical Windows
(l)user doesn't understand that not all computers run on Windows.
Thus it's safe to assume that we're dealing with some version of
Windows here.

It's a matter of market share, not intelligence.

Why can't it be both?

I'll say it again: Your typical Windows (l)user doesn't understand that
not all computers run on Windows.

Insulting Windows users does you no credit.

Good thing I'm not looking for credit.


Typically, Windows users assume that everyone IS using Windows, probably
because 95% of computer users ARE using Windows. It is a reasonable, if
not always correct, assumption, if the OS in use is not stated.
Hardly an insult, in any case.

Ron Hunter wrote:
Matt Ion wrote:

I'll say it again: Your typical Windows (l)user doesn't understand that
not all computers run on Windows.

Insulting Windows users does you no credit.

Good thing I'm not looking for credit.

Typically, Windows users assume that everyone IS using Windows, probably
because 95% of computer users ARE using Windows. It is a reasonable, if
not always correct, assumption, if the OS in use is not stated. Hardly
an insult, in any case.


And, of course, they naively assume that it's never relevant what
*version* of Windows they're using. And I'm being kind by using
"naively".


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:58:29 -0800, Blinky the Shark
wrote in
.net:

Ron Hunter wrote:

Typically, Windows users assume that everyone IS using Windows, probably
because 95% of computer users ARE using Windows. It is a reasonable, if
not always correct, assumption, if the OS in use is not stated. Hardly
an insult, in any case.

And, of course, they naively assume that it's never relevant what
*version* of Windows they're using. And I'm being kind by using
"naively".

It often isn't relevant, in part because the great majority are using
2000/XP/Vista in any event.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

Matt Ion wrote:
l v wrote:
H.S. wrote:
John Navas wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:26:18 -0800, Matt Ion
wrote
in :

l v wrote:
Lars-Erik Østerud wrote:
I have a huge amount JPG photos WITHOUT EXIF date indo.
But it seens like the PS3 only uses EXIF date for sorting.

Så all images without EXIF date ends up in the current
year and month (like "FEB 2008" or "2008") when sorting.

I have the original date in the files "date modified",
but need a program then can create the EXIF date info
from the file-date. But I can only find the opposite :-(

Anyone know how to copy the file-date to the EXIF date
for several 1000 JPG files in an easy way? Please?
What operating system?
I find that almost universally, it's the non-Windows users who are
intelligent enough to provide OS information. Your typical Windows
(l)user doesn't understand that not all computers run on Windows.
Thus it's safe to assume that we're dealing with some version of
Windows here.

It's a matter of market share, not intelligence.
Insulting Windows users does you no credit.


Rephrased:
Non-windows users are more aware of what they are dealing with and
tend to provide relevant information when asking questions here. Most
Windows users, however, take it for guaranteed that everyone else is
using Windows too. They are as likely to be completely ignorant of
any other kinds of OSes as well.

Not true. I recently responded to a post where the OP was looking for
image cataloging software. After I responded with my windows centric
answer, the OP replied that he was a Mac user.

Still true: note such qualifiers as "most", "typical", "likely", etc.

There are exceptions both ways, but the overwhelming majority of cases
hold to the generalizations above.


That would be the difference between stereotyping and generalizing. By
using qualifiers you stay away from the absolutes which is always wrong.

--

Len

John Navas wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:58:29 -0800, Blinky the Shark
wrote in
.net:

Ron Hunter wrote:

Typically, Windows users assume that everyone IS using Windows, probably
because 95% of computer users ARE using Windows. It is a reasonable, if
not always correct, assumption, if the OS in use is not stated. Hardly
an insult, in any case.

And, of course, they naively assume that it's never relevant what
*version* of Windows they're using. And I'm being kind by using
"naively".

It often isn't relevant, in part because the great majority are using
2000/XP/Vista in any event.

Often isn't the same as never. And in more computer-technical-oriented
groups I see people using Win98SE pretty much every day. And plenty of
issues specific to versions. Granted, not in this group.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net