P: JPEG format tripping up other programs

21 Votes
LEGEND ,
Apr 27, 2015 Apr 27, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Lightroom CC writes JPEGs in an atypical layout that trips up other programs. While they appear to be strictly conforming to industry standards, the unusual layout has caused problems for at least two users: one who had problems uploading photos to real-estate services, and another whose own software tripped over the layout.

LR writes the APP1 header as: TIFF header, 114 unused bytes, ExifIFD, IFD1, IFD0. Whereas Photoshop CC uses a more traditional layout: TIFF header, no unused bytes, IFD0, ExifIFD, IFD1. Here's an Exiftool dump of the beginning of a LR JPEG:

And here's a dump of the beginning of a Photoshop JPEG:

I've tested LR JPEGs with 12 Mac and Windows programs and 2 online services, all of which read them just fine:

Mac: Preview, Photoshop CC 2014, ColorSync Utility, Firefox, Chrome, Lattice, Paintbrush, Safari, Word
Windows 8.1: File Explorer Preview, Irfanview, Paint, Windows Photo Viewer
Online services: Flickr, Zenfolio

Even though LR's JPEGs may be strictly conforming, if it wrote the JPEGs without the unused header bytes and it put IFD0 immediately after the TIFF header, as Photoshop does, then there would be fewer problems with other programs choking on LR's JPEGs.

Bug Fixed
TOPICS
macOS

Views

91

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

correct answers 1 Correct answer

Adobe Employee , Oct 05, 2015 Oct 05, 2015
This has been fixed in Lightroom 6.2, which is available today. Thanks, Ben

Votes

Translate

Translate
63 Comments
LEGEND ,
Apr 27, 2015 Apr 27, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Also, I seem to recall that years ago, LR 4 Beta had a similar issue, and the final release changed the layouts of JPEGs to be more traditional.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Enthusiast ,
Apr 28, 2015 Apr 28, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I've encountered the very same issue: I publish a photo to Picasaweb/Google+ and the metadata isn't displayed. Been doing this for years via LR and it's always worked perfectly - stopped working as soon as I started using LR CC.

No metadata displayed in other applications is a BIG issue for me. The bugs are stacking up...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Enthusiast ,
Apr 28, 2015 Apr 28, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I just did some testing: if I use an exported JPEG created by LR CC or PS CC 2014 (so ACR 9) then the metadata seems to work OK and is displayed in Google+ as it should be. However, if I use a publish service then it still fails to display the camera metadata.

So what gives? Bug with the publish services?

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Apr 28, 2015 Apr 28, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Which publish service/plugin are you using?

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Enthusiast ,
Apr 28, 2015 Apr 28, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Jeffrey Friedl's "Export to PicasaWeb" plugin.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
Apr 28, 2015 Apr 28, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Unfortunately, I'm not able to reproduce the problem using that plugin, on either Mac or Windows. It would have been nice to narrow down the problem and confirm whether or not it is caused by the atypical JPEG format.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
Apr 29, 2015 Apr 29, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The problem seems to strike TIFF files as well (which use the same representation of metadata). In this thread:

https://forums.adobe.com/message/7493633

a user reports that HP MediaBin (HP's enterprise digital-asset management product) is not able to display the metadata of TIFFs exported from LR 6.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
May 02, 2015 May 02, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LR 6 can write invalid XMP metadata (a true bug), as described here: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

To distinguish that bug from the issue here, you'll have to use a photo with and without a large number of develop settings.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
May 03, 2015 May 03, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

To work around the problem described here, you can use the Run Any Command plugin: http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-good...

Use this command line in the Command To Execute box of the Run Any Command post-process action:

exiftool -all= -tagsfromfile @ -all:all -unsafe "{FILE}"

This idiom deletes all of the existing metadata from the image and rewrites it from scratch using a more typical layout that doesn't confuse software that doesn't strictly obey the industry standards. Make sure you have Exiftool version 9.94 or later -- earlier versions would choke on LR images containing large numbers of brush strokes from the adjustment brush.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
May 03, 2015 May 03, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

PHP's exif_read_data() appears to be incompatible with LR 6 JPEGs. PHP, of course, powers a huge number of Web sites. See this thread: https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1835290

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
May 03, 2015 May 03, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

This problem with Picasa is caused by the XMP bug: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh....

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
May 03, 2015 May 03, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

That user was using PHP 5.6.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
New Here ,
May 03, 2015 May 03, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Yes indeed, we use Lightroom 6.01 to export our photos as JPEG for Piwigo under PHP 5.6. Und here you can see http://s.edv-tipp.de/fpvth that

COMPUTED.Copyright: efan Uchrin, (C) by St
COMPUTED.Copyright.Photographer: efan Uchrin
COMPUTED.Copyright.Editor: (C) by St

are broken. OK, we go back to LR 5.7.1 and wait for a better LR 6!

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
May 04, 2015 May 04, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

That command line should have the "-m" option to handle XMP metadata with large numbers of brush strokes:

exiftool -m -all= -tagsfromfile @ -all:all -unsafe "{FILE}"

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
May 11, 2015 May 11, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Interesting. It seems that the unused bytes are an aborted attempt at IFD0. It contains most of the information from IFD0, except for the orientation (in my sample), then IFD0 is rewritten at the end of the EXIF APP1 segment.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
May 11, 2015 May 11, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The maintainer of Exiftool pointed out the command line should be:

exiftool -m -all= -tagsfromfile @ -all:all -icc_profile -unsafe "{FILE}"

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
May 12, 2015 May 12, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Another LR user can't upload LR 6 JPEGs to his client's Web site: https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1842441

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Enthusiast ,
May 12, 2015 May 12, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

This seems to look exactly like a similar problem some time ago in Lightroom 5 beta.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Enthusiast ,
May 12, 2015 May 12, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You are right - but I think it was LR 5 beta (or perhaps both?)

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
May 12, 2015 May 12, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I checked my email, and yes indeed it was the LR 5 beta. Unfortunately, Adobe has restricted access to the beta discussion forum, but one of the emails contains a link to a JPEG exported by LR 5 beta showing the exact same atypical layout. One of the users affected was complaining about Wordpress choking on LR 5 Beta JPEGs:

________________________________________
From: Les Bessant2 [mailto:forums_noreply@adobe.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 7:23 AM
To: John R. Ellis
Subject: [Photoshop Lightroom 5] Lightroom 5 exported images and EXIF information, Camera Make points to keywords instead

Re: Lightroom 5 exported images and EXIF information, Camera Make points to keywords instead
created by Les Bessant2 in Photoshop Lightroom 5 - View the full discussion

Thanks for following this up. This is a sample image exported from LR5:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/3sqj3nr66rg...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
May 13, 2015 May 13, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The latest version of the command line:

exiftool -m -all= -tagsfromfile @ -all:all -icc_profile -unsafe -overwrite_original "{FILE}"

This will avoid creating backup files of the originals, which aren't needed in this case.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
May 13, 2015 May 13, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Dave Palmetto reports that the JPEGrescan plugin also works around the problem:

http://www.capturemonkey.com/lrjpegre...

https://forums.adobe.com/message/7540...

You need to set the Strip Metadata option in the plugin, so this solution is only useful for those, like Dave, who were uploading to sites that choked on LR 6's JPEGs and don't care about transmitting the metadata.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
May 13, 2015 May 13, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'm the user who had the problem John R Ellis is reporting on May 13, 2015. When I switched from LR-5.7 to LR-CC, my jpgs began showing up very blurry after being uploaded into my client's reporting software. Apparently the client's report software that worked fine with my LR-5.7 jpgs was ignoring the full uploaded resolution from LR-CC jpgs, and instead magnifying the embedded thumbnail. This produced a low-resolution image that appeared out of focus. This is a high-volume client with multiple uploads daily and hundreds of photos every month, so a reliable, clerically simple solution that required minimal additional labor was needed.

Due to the assistance of the LR/PS/CC community, I can report four workarounds:

1. Export TIF files. For my user reports, these worked fine but of course were much larger than the JPEG files I had been using.

2. Use the Lightroom Web module to export, thereby producing classic jpgs in the "Large" folder. The jpgs created this way do not have the problem with mis-interpretation by my client's web reporting system. The disadvantage to this is that a multitude of unnecessary files are also created every time the jpg is exported.

3. Use the Run Any Command plug-in to execute an exiftool command line to edit the metadata back to classic style. The first command line I used created a duplicate copy of the original jpg with a ".original_jpg" suffix, but I am advised that using the command line

exiftool -m -all= -tagsfromfile @ -all:all -icc_profile -unsafe -overwrite_original "{FILE}"

would eliminate this unnecessary duplicate file, leaving only the LR-5.7-compliant jpg. This works but requires installing two pieces of software (exiftool and Run Any Command), plus having some expertise with scripting. On the plus side, this can be easily added to an export preset so it's very set-it-and-forget-it.

4. Use the JPEGrescan plugin. This requires installing only one piece of code, the plugin itself. Its disadvantages are that all metadata is stripped (not a concern in my situation) and there is a quirky pop-up every time the plug-in runs. This can also be included within an export preset.

I would like to see Adobe provide an export option that supports exporting in the "classic" format used by LR-5.7.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
May 14, 2015 May 14, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Here's another person whose Android app(s) on a Sony Xperia phone and tablet can't read metadata in LR-exported JPEGs:

https://forums.adobe.com/message/7544...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Enthusiast ,
May 14, 2015 May 14, 2015

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Some other users reporting issues relating to exported files and metadata:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report