P: "There was an error parsing the file" when attempting to convert SRW images fromSamsung models

Explorer ,
May 26, 2016 May 26, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

DNG converter says "There was an error parsing the file" when attempting to convert SRW images from some Samsung models after metadata has been edited with ExifTool.  Here are 3 sample images with this problem:

http://130.15.24.88/~phil/tmp/SamsungNX2000.srw
http://130.15.24.88/~phil/tmp/SamsungNX300.srw
http://130.15.24.88/~phil/tmp/SamsungNX30.srw

Also, the following image is not recognized by the converter after a similar edit with ExifTool:

http://130.15.24.88/~phil/tmp/SamsungEK-GN120.srw

TOPICS
macOS , Windows

Views

630

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Employee ,
May 27, 2016 May 27, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi Phil and Steve, 

I can reproduce this. We will investigate and follow up.

Thanks,

- Chris

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
May 26, 2016 May 26, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Also, it is worth noting that this problem does not occur for SRW images from the following models: EX1, EX2F, NX1, NX10, NX100, NX11, NX20, NX200, NX3000, NX500, NXmini and WB2000

- Phil

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
May 26, 2016 May 26, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thanks for your response.  Here are the original files:

http://130.15.24.88/~phil/tmp/SamsungNX2000_orig.srw
http://130.15.24.88/~phil/tmp/SamsungNX300_orig.srw
http://130.15.24.88/~phil/tmp/SamsungNX30_orig.srw
http://130.15.24.88/~phil/tmp/SamsungEK-GN120_orig.srw

And the ExifTool command was:

exiftool -artist=Phil FILE

where FILE is any of the original files.

- Phil

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
May 26, 2016 May 26, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

These particular raw files also don't work in Lightroom or the Adobe Camera Raw plug-in for Photoshop.

That ExifTool can be told to do things to a raw file that make it unrecognizable to Adobe products isn't necessarily a bug in either set of programs.

For diagnostic purposes, it would be useful to have a pre-ExifTool version of the same raw files, as well as the ExifTool command line that was used to edit the raw files' metadata, so the situation can be replicated by others.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Aug 18, 2016 Aug 18, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST
Wow.  That's just wrong.  I suggest you ignore what Samsung is telling you and decode the maker notes properly.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Employee ,
Aug 11, 2016 Aug 11, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi Phil,

Another bit of information from my colleague.

"That's not what we were told by Samsung.
The private MakerNote really is a binary blob and they gave us specific offsets to use to extract their data.
We've never had any problems with Samsung firmware updates.
External tools should never rearrange private MakerNote data for this reason."

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Aug 10, 2016 Aug 10, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi Chris,

Thanks for replying.

Yes, your colleague is correct, but the maker notes are stored in a TIFF IFD format.  The information is all still there if the IFD is parsed properly.  You can't just look at the maker notes as a black box of binary data if you expect to extract information consistently.  If you do this, then your code will easily break with camera firmware updates (among other things).

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Employee ,
Aug 09, 2016 Aug 09, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi Phil,

Following is a note from my colleague who has been investigating this issue.

"...the original sample file shows MakerNote tag length is 268182  bytes.  When I run exiftool on the sample file, the result has MakerNote tag length 268100, which is 82 bytes shorter.  Furthermore, when I diff the contents of the MakerNote tags (before/after), I see very different values."

- Chris

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Jul 28, 2016 Jul 28, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Sorry for the delay.  Yes.  ExifTool rewrites the MakerNote tag.  It uses a standard TIFF format so the information may move around when rewritten, but all of the same information is there.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Employee ,
Jun 20, 2016 Jun 20, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi Phil,

Apologies for the delay.

As far as we have been able to determine, exiftool appears to be modifying the private MakerNote tag which causes Camera Raw to reject the files.

Can you confirm whether exiftool is inadvertently changing the MakerNote tag?

Thanks,

- Chris

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Jun 13, 2016 Jun 13, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Any News?

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Employee ,
May 27, 2016 May 27, 2016

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Bug 4158567 for your reference.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines