Hi Luc, Your explanation of Shotwell's behavior:
> I double-checked and this is not entirely true. > Both fields (F2 & F3) get correctly written to > metadata tags into the original JPEG when it > was imported as a single JPEG. Apparently > this is not the case when importing RAW+JPEG > pairs. They get properly stored in the DB and > displayed appropriately, and also they find their > way out to exported JPEG (when exporting with > the "export metadata" flag on). is entirely correct. Right now, Shotwell can only write metadata to JPEG files. Writing to RAW files is a definite possibility in an upcoming release and is ticketed here: http://redmine.yorba.org/issues/2622. Cheers, Lucas On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Luc More <[email protected]> wrote: > Lucas, > > I double-checked and this is not entirely true. Both fields (F2 & F3) get > correctly written to metadata tags into the original JPEG when it was > imported as a single JPEG. Apparently this is not the case when importing > RAW+JPEG pairs. They get properly stored in the DB and displayed > appropriately, and also they find their way out to exported JPEG (when > exporting with the "export metadata" flag on). > > Luc > > ________________________________ > De : Lucas Beeler <[email protected]> > À : Luc More <[email protected]> > Cc : Jim Nelson <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Envoyé le : Mardi 26 mars 2013 21h07 > > Objet : Re: [Shotwell] Re : Re: Call for Testing: Shotwell 0.14 > >> Moreover, these metadata are no longer >> written to the JPEG (not for RAW+JPEG >> and not for simple JPEG). > > By "these metadata" do you mean the comment field? > > Lucas > _______________________________________________ Shotwell mailing list [email protected] http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
