Re: CALL for DISCUSSION: eXIf 20170115

John Bowler <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.graphics.png.general
Message-ID <CAP7U39_6zM5CVxW0KQWWs4BZE=JPLARwzWXwGwvE1er9v6741A@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 7:41 PM, Willem van Schaik <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> meant to say ...
>
> EXIF chunk of 100k versus 50k in a 10 MB image file ??

The maximum chunk size we will see from digital cameras is 64kbyte,
because this is the size JPEG restricts the chunk to (CIPA 2016 makes
this observation).

The reason EXIF can be compressed at this point is because the
manufacturers haven't exceeded that limit; what I was compressing was
"padding" (up to 2006 bytes) and the MakerNote; more pixels more
MakerNote.  Once they hit the 64k limit (this will happen) they will
compress, or rather encode more efficiently, the MakerNote and reclaim
the padding.

If anyone starts generating EXIF ab-initio (without starting from a
DCIM) any MakerNote (any undocumented application specific data) they
generate will be up to them and they probably won't include "padding".

-- 
John Bowler <[email protected]>
+1 (541) 450-9885
PO BOX 3151
KERBY OR 97531-3151
USA

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.