Exify

[pcs]

Exify on Firefox doesn't seem to work, even on my own photos which I'm sure have exif(and forum software shows the exif under the photo).

 

[Levina]

Yes, that's my experience also and this has been the case ever since I installed the EXIF add-on on FoP last year. I told the developer of that add-on about it back then (I ordered and paid for the development) but she said there was no correlation. So had a lot of doubt about that but I was happy with the EXIF below the images so I left it at that.

However, we are now on XenForo 2.3 and there are new problems with the add-on: some data is missing from some EXIF's. Below the images on the board I mean. The EXIF below Jan's photo's miss the lens and the ISO. And I also saw this somewhere:

So the decimals don't always work correctly.

And there is yet another problem, caused by the add-on: text wrapping doesn't work any more. I need it for articles and it won't work, or rather it works in edit mode, but as soon as I submit it, the wrapping goes away. And it's a problem. I turned off all add-ons, turned them on one by one and it was the EXIF add-on causing it.

So I am going to contact the developer and ask her to fix it. If she can't I will hire another dev to fix it. It may take a bit of time though as she just took over another developer's business and she is working round the clock to modify all his paid add-ons so they work properly in XF 2.3. In other words we have to be a bit patient, annoying as it is.

 

[CraigMcM]

I've had no issues with ExImageInfo, even though it hasn't had an update for a few years.

 

[Levina]

I've had no issues with ExImageInfo, even though it hasn't had an update for a few years.

I'm going to install that. Try it out.

 

[Levina]

Pity but it too says "no metadata found" when it is clearly present as it's below the image. The EXIF add-on is somehow messing with it.

 

[CraigMcM]

Pity but it too says "no metadata found" when it is clearly present as it's below the image. The EXIF add-on is somehow messing with it.

That's surprising to me.
It returns full EXIF on my own images which are thrid-party hosted.

 

[Levina]

That's surprising to me.
It returns full EXIF on my own images which are thrid-party hosted.

I don't get it either, Craig. Because the EXIF is clearly present. So something is messing with it and everything point to the EXIF add-on. I will contact her tomorrow.

It's one minute to midnight. Time for me to turn in.

 

[CraigMcM]

Curiouser and curiouser...

My own images, third-party hosted, get all available EXIF pulled from them.
It is NOT the same for many other members' posted images.

I understand that some may prefer to remove EXIF, while I wouldn't expect all eight to ten
of the members' images I checked on to have done so.

 

[Levina]

Some do prefer to strip the EXIF, but what we have here is a part of the EXIF missing, while the whole EXIF is present in the file, so we need find out why that is so.
And why the browser extension tools say "no metadata found" when it is clearly embedded in the file. Something is off and we need to find a fix for it.

 

[pcs]

Yes, that's my experience also and this has been the case ever since I installed the EXIF add-on on FoP last year. I told the developer of that add-on about it back then (I ordered and paid for the development) but she said there was no correlation. So had a lot of doubt about that but I was happy with the EXIF below the images so I left it at that.

However, we are now on XenForo 2.3 and there are new problems with the add-on: some data is missing from some EXIF's. Below the images on the board I mean. The EXIF below Jan's photo's miss the lens and the ISO. And I also saw this somewhere:

View attachment 661
So the decimals don't always work correctly.

And there is yet another problem, caused by the add-on: text wrapping doesn't work any more. I need it for articles and it won't work, or rather it works in edit mode, but as soon as I submit it, the wrapping goes away. And it's a problem. I turned off all add-ons, turned them on one by one and it was the EXIF add-on causing it.

So I am going to contact the developer and ask her to fix it. If she can't I will hire another dev to fix it. It may take a bit of time though as she just took over another developer's business and she is working round the clock to modify all his paid add-ons so they work properly in XF 2.3. In other words we have to be a bit patient, annoying as it is.

Strange, on the other FoP about half of the photos(with exif) show in Exify while here I've found one, maybe there are more but certainly a lot less??

 

[Levina]

Strange, on the other FoP about half of the photos(with exif) show in Exify while here I've found one, maybe there are more but certainly a lot less??

Yeah? On my Mac most pics with EXIF are empty in Exify, on either forum. Maybe it also depends on the OS? I know e.g. that Windows users can see the metadata when hovering over a pic where I saw none. Seems to be something OS native, I think, although not sure about that (I know nothing of Windows).

I've contacted the dev, explained the problem(s) and hope to hear back from her.

Hopefully the next update will be to say that it's all been fixed. Fingers crossed.

 

[Levina]

Hold on, I don't use Exify. I use xIFr!

Same results though: no metadata found.

The flickr embeds show the EXIF just fine in xIFr (in Firefox) though.

 

[Bryn]

Firefox user here, and I can see the EXIF data underneath people's photos just fine...

 

[Jan1977]

Like Levina mentioned, exif showing beneath my photos is complete and I also had some exifviewer add-on in Firefox showing up empty. If I drag my photo into the browser, the exif add-on shows all metadata. When I attach the photo to in a post from the same file on my hard drive, exif data gets lost.
To make some posts here I downloaded some previous post from a similar forum having the same issues with the exif data, it looks like the metadata is still in the photo.

My best guess is that there is a field in the metadata somehow that is not recognized by the code that is reading the exif data to show it (like the add-on for the forum and the exif viewer extension in my browser) and that to prevent an error message, the code stops doing its thing and therefore does not retrieve the metadata.
It might be that the add-on of the forum somehow amends the metadata in a way, that there is a field pretty high in the hierarchy, that leads to the browser add-on to bail out, resulting in no exif data shown.
Linked photos are not 'imported' to the forum itself and would therefore not be 'harmed' by the forum add-on. The exif viewer I use in my browser does not show exif data for photos which are on Flickr, but once I follow the link to Flickr I can see metadata there. That might have to do with the specific browser add-on I use and the way it tries to obtain/ read the actual metadata from the photo.

But it is all just guessing based on general principles since I do not know the pattern and logic used by the add-ons nor do I know the exact steps involved in uploading a photo as an attachement in a post.

But we will have patience and enjoy all the nice photos here on the forum untill the real expert, a.k.a. the developer, can fix it

 

[Levina]

I haven't heard back from the dev yet, but I had an idea and changed a setting in the ACP and look what I have here:

I also checked on some of my own images where the browser said: no metadata found. It's there in full now.

 

[pcs]

Now Exify works on more but not all photos, it's like on the other FoP now.

 

[Levina]

Is that also on new uploads, Patrick?

 

[pcs]

Is that also on new uploads, Patrick?

Newest(last 1-2 days) seem to work when exif is available.

 

[Levina]

The changed settings doesn't correct the metadata of images posted before that. But after making the adjustment I uploaded a few images of myself that I posted in December, that didn't show the exif in the browser. They now do. I just replaced the Grebe in the opening post of WBoE. It now has the exif in the browser where before it said "no metadata found". Pretty cool eh?

 

[pcs]

Looks like you won't need the developer!