On Sat 24 Sep 2022 at 10:43:04 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 03:17:31PM +0200, hede wrote: > > Am 21.09.2022 14:46, schrieb Emanuel Berg: > > > Maybe related to the '-o f f' part as your imagination > > > tells you ... > > > > The "-o" means: "Write output image to FILE". And it does so, as far as I > > can see. > > The question is whether specifying "-o f f" where the output file > has the same name as the input file actually overwrites the original > input file. Another person reported that it does *not* -- that you get > a *.modified.jpeg file as output instead.
That was me, and I think I used the wrong file to test (IFD had been stripped already), and I think I confused the output from several runs (I hadn't used exif before, excepting a while back, when I determined that it couldn't read the photos off my Samsung Gusto2 mobile, which means it's useless for me). > If I had the first inkling of a clue what an exif tag actually *was* I > might try testing it myself. I'm gathering that it has something to do > with JPEG images, based on the *.modified.jpeg default output filename. > Beyond that, I know nothing. > > One of you people who knows this software and has a testable input file > should (please!) try it, and show us the results. Make an empty > directory. Copy the JPEG file into it. Show "ls -l" output. Run the > exif command. Show "ls -l" again. I showed the EXIF itself instead. Cheers, David.