Jump to content

Recommended Posts

For several years I have used an extension to Mac Safari to enable me to view a photos exif data, sadly this extension has now stopped doing its stuff. 

 

So I'm asking what others use?

 

I have OSX Sierra installed and I wonder if that is the cause of the extension not working?

Link to post
Share on other sites

the cause is sierra, there will be more software which is not working under sierra, always the same story, I am still running Yosemite because of this.

 

Anyway, what is the data that you are missing?

 

A lot , such as: focal length , shutter speed, type of film simulation date and many more things....,  is simply contained in the other info, outline the file press  command I (information works with any fil on a mac), if you load pics in Flickr at the bottom of each file, unless you hide it, it will tell you and anyone else every possible data.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Milandro, it not about what info I'm missing but a case of putting the cursor into the picture area and pressing command e and the EXIF data is superimposed on the picture in a box. Very handy when those who post do not give the camera settings as it allows me to see those EXIF details.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Milandro, thanks for the tip regarding "command + I" obviously I didn't know that!

 

Now I need a command to do that with any image, not the the image file but an on Safari screen image as one is able to do ExifExt when it worked, I hope that makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that you might not have known that.

 

Anyway, I advise you to be less eager to update software.

 

Sierra has all sorts of programs which no longer work with the new OS.

 

The way these days Apple (and everyone else, even Fuji) works is to put out the software, we test it ( for free) and slowly they release system or firmware update following the complaints albeit automatic ( your system sends feedback) or not.

 

Good Luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A screenshot of what ExifExt extension to Safari could have done if it was working !

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

This worked on any image shown in a Safari browser window not just mine!

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it wouldn't! As the ExifExt relies upon another resource and that sight is down due it seems to a problem with the host server!

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

No problems. From your enquiries it looks like the tool uses an Internet resource, same exiftool as above link, and that's down. Perhaps it will come back up.

 

I've not used the tool myself but have used the standalone (not a web resource) LR plugin from the same site. It's been there for quite a few years so I expect it's a short term site down. Perhaps he's not paid his hosting fees!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Thank you. I will research it.
    • Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...