Joe Morris (NTM) wrote: > On 01/22/2008 08:59 AM, Jim Sabatke wrote: >> I did not try Pascal's version. I checked the files for gimp in yast >> before deleting it and they go into the same places that ./configure >> --prefix=/opt/gnome put them. Of course, I would rather have an RPM >> version. >> >> For me, the EXIF data show up on my photo website, which is where I >> noticed it was missing. I don't think I'm going to go back and re-edit >> the 100, or so, photos I've added before I noticed. >> >> You can also see the EXIF data in ufraw, but only in later versions. >> The 10.2 version is about 4 versions behind current and I don't believe >> it has EXIF support. I also hand compiled that one, which is no big >> deal as I believe it only produces one lib file. >> >> If you have ufraw available, then gimp will open raw files directly into >> ufraw and "OK" will take that file into gimp with EXIF data intact. It >> then writes it to jpeg files, but again only with the newer version if >> ufraw. >> >> Hope this all makes sense. >> > Well, I think I learned enough to be able to check. I saw that some > pictures had exif info, some did not. So I took one that did, edited it > in Gimp24, saved a cropped version, and the saved version also had exif > info. So IIANM, that should mean Pascal's version on Packman DOES > support exif. HTH. BTW, I do have ufraw and ufraw-gimp also installed. >
I removed my hand-made gimp and installed the packman version. Everything seems to work fine on it. I'll have to remember to d/l the rpms in the future as yast picks up another, non-EXIF version first. Thanks for the info, Jim -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
