Author Topic: PM metadata different than OEM software  (Read 399 times)

Offline bazography

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 252
    • View Profile
PM metadata different than OEM software
« on: January 07, 2024, 03:17:51 PM »
I’m wondering why some metadata viewed with PM is different than what I see in the OEM software.

Example: With an OM System OM-1, when reading metadata in the proprietary OM Workspace software, focus mode might be listed as “Continuous AF+MF” or “Single AF+MF” which is correct when the manual focus override option is switched on. In PM, both of the above focus modes are listed as just “MF”.

I can comprehend some matadata maybe not showing up at all, but can’t understand how a line of metadata can change from one program to the next. What is causing this, and is there anything that can be done about it?

Offline Kirk Baker

  • Senior Software Engineer
  • Camera Bits Staff
  • Superhero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24691
    • View Profile
    • Camera Bits, Inc.
Re: PM metadata different than OEM software
« Reply #1 on: January 08, 2024, 12:00:20 PM »
I’m wondering why some metadata viewed with PM is different than what I see in the OEM software.

Example: With an OM System OM-1, when reading metadata in the proprietary OM Workspace software, focus mode might be listed as “Continuous AF+MF” or “Single AF+MF” which is correct when the manual focus override option is switched on. In PM, both of the above focus modes are listed as just “MF”.

I can comprehend some matadata maybe not showing up at all, but can’t understand how a line of metadata can change from one program to the next. What is causing this, and is there anything that can be done about it?

It happens because the values in the metadata are not in a human-readable form.  They're just numbers.  Various software packages like PM map those numbers to a human-readable message.  Moreover, often these numbers are completely undocumented and developers have to reverse-engineer (educated guess) as to what they mean.

HTH,

-Kirk

Offline bazography

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 252
    • View Profile
Re: PM metadata different than OEM software
« Reply #2 on: January 08, 2024, 03:21:19 PM »
It happens because the values in the metadata are not in a human-readable form.  They're just numbers.  Various software packages like PM map those numbers to a human-readable message.  Moreover, often these numbers are completely undocumented and developers have to reverse-engineer (educated guess) as to what they mean.

HTH,

-Kirk

Got it, makes sense. So any chance of getting this corrected then in PM? Happy to help if you need someone with an OM-1 to provide a sample or test anything.
It's quite common to leave the MF override option on all the time, which means I have no way of checking what AF mode I was in since PM displays "MF" regardless.

Offline Kirk Baker

  • Senior Software Engineer
  • Camera Bits Staff
  • Superhero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24691
    • View Profile
    • Camera Bits, Inc.
Re: PM metadata different than OEM software
« Reply #3 on: January 08, 2024, 03:43:45 PM »
It happens because the values in the metadata are not in a human-readable form.  They're just numbers.  Various software packages like PM map those numbers to a human-readable message.  Moreover, often these numbers are completely undocumented and developers have to reverse-engineer (educated guess) as to what they mean.

Got it, makes sense. So any chance of getting this corrected then in PM? Happy to help if you need someone with an OM-1 to provide a sample or test anything.
It's quite common to leave the MF override option on all the time, which means I have no way of checking what AF mode I was in since PM displays "MF" regardless.

Please make a feature request.  We'll likely need your help in obtaining sample images that have the various AF modes set and documented in the filenames of the samples themselves.

-Kirk

Offline bazography

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 252
    • View Profile
Re: PM metadata different than OEM software
« Reply #4 on: January 08, 2024, 05:03:31 PM »
Will do, thanks Kirk.