Loss of Exif

[MJ224]

[peak4]

Re: Loss of Exif

Personally I wouldn't know, never having used Photoshop, however I would have thought a possibility would be to use Phil Harvey's EXIFTOOL to cope the exif data from one file in the pre-stack and paste/write it into the final stacked photo.

Off out to prune some bushes now, so don't have time to look up the syntax myself, but it's a very powerful program.

Also look up Exiftool GUI in your favourite search engine, for a more accessible interface.

[MJ224]

[wornish]

Re: Loss of Exif

Unfortunately, I think you do lose most of it. In fact, in Photoshop if you select File > File Info it will show you what's left.

[MJ224]

Re: Loss of Exif

Agapantha with exif

by Mark Johnson

[wornish]

Re: Loss of Exif

by Mark Johnson

Lovely colours and very nice dof. As you say stacked with CombineZP it keeps the Exif info. Will remember that for future use.

[blu-by-u]

[Harold Gough]

Re: Loss of Exif

Maybe it will be there but inaccessible. I can't access EXIF data, although it gives a date, in stereo pairs.

Harold

[Harold Gough]

Re: Loss of Exif

Unfortunately, I think you do lose most of it. In fact, in Photoshop if you select File > File Info it will show you what's left.

I read mine in FastStone Viewer.

Harold

[Angelica]

Re: Loss of Exif

I never tried stacking and not sure I understand what it's about but your results inspire me to find out more.

[MikeOxon]

Re: Loss of Exif

Usually, one stacks photos in order to change something throughout the stack, so the photo data will not be the same for each individual shot. It seems that Photoshop always 'loses' some EXIF data, even on a single shot. Try comparing the results from the EXIF Tool before and after Photoshop. I find, for example, that focus distance information is removed.

[OM USer]

Re: Loss of Exif

If one opened up the first image in a new Photoshop session and then just copied in the stacked image over the top as a second layer then will all the EXIF from the first image (background/base layer) be retained when you save as JPEG??

[Petrochemist]

Re: Loss of Exif

Usually, one stacks photos in order to change something throughout the stack, so the photo data will not be the same for each individual shot. It seems that Photoshop always 'loses' some EXIF data, even on a single shot. Try comparing the results from the EXIF Tool before and after Photoshop. I find, for example, that focus distance information is removed.

At least one value will change every time you do a stack.


Focus distance or focal length will change for focus stacking.
Aperture/effective ISO/shutter speed will change for HDR type stacking.
Most of the time the time/date stamp will change (doing HDR for a single raw file is the only exception I know) this covers panoramas, astro type noise stacking & pseudo ND stacking...


Unfortunately I've found most stacking software will remove far more EXIF than just the values that are changing. Copying the data back form one of the original files is the best method I've found to get it roughly right, perhaps followed by manual editing to alter the values changed by the stacking operation.

[blu-by-u]

Re: Loss of Exif

I never tried stacking and not sure I understand what it's about but your results inspire me to find out more.

I was experimenting into stacking as an alternative to using an ND or some light cutting filter to get that smooth silky waterfall look.

As it was a bright day, harsh light and all, and bummer me, did not bring any ND or CPL with me, But I did bring my tripod. so set, frame and shot off 10 images.

What I noticed was the leaves are more visible instead of blurred from long exposure. The water was not that smooth as with long exposure but white enough for the flowing effect.

It seems that this could also be done with the Super High Resolution mode. But unfortunately I did not try that then.