Created attachment 105961 [details] Screenshot (Dolphin) I am running KDE Plasma version 5.10.0 on Manjaro Linux and version 5.10.1 on KRevenge Linux (an Arch derivative). Using "Details view mode" in Dolphin and adding the column Image -> Image size, Dolphin returns the wrong image size of RAW (.RAF image files produced using Fujifilm cameras). It reports 1920 x 1080 even though the RAW image full size is, in the case of 16 MP images (for instance, Fujifilm X100S and X100T cameras), 4992 x 3296. I am making one of my Fujifilm RAW files available so that the KDE developers can reproduce the bug. It can be obtained at https://www.dropbox.com/s/2w8x91i44kvgtgg/_FFX4030.RAF?dl=0 When I run exiftool on this file I see the following in the output: Raw Image Full Size : 4992x3296 I am attaching a screenshot. Notice the information in the "Image Size" column.
Is there any further information I can provide?
Fujifilm RAW files are probably not supported. What it shows is the embedded JPEG image.
(In reply to Christoph Feck from comment #2) > Fujifilm RAW files are probably not supported. What it shows is the embedded > JPEG image. Is it possible to add support for Fujifilm RAW files? Fujifilm cameras are now used by a large number of professional and amateur photographers.
Unfortunately, the sample file is not available anymore. Could you please re-upload if this is still an issue?
(In reply to Alexander Stippich from comment #4) > Unfortunately, the sample file is not available anymore. Could you please > re-upload if this is still an issue? The problem remains. I uploaded the file again: https://www.dropbox.com/s/4m9hc92ix5jqfmi/_FFX4030.RAF?dl=0
Thanks. I will have a look to see what is going wrong.
Unfortunately, that looks like a bug in exiv2, which KFileMetaData uses to get the data. So it is not something we can easily change on our side. There is already an open bug on http://dev.exiv2.org/issues/1076
(In reply to Alexander Stippich from comment #7) > Unfortunately, that looks like a bug in exiv2, which KFileMetaData uses to > get the data. So it is not something we can easily change on our side. There > is already an open bug on > http://dev.exiv2.org/issues/1076 The exiv2 bug was filed nearly 4 years ago and there is not indication that it will be fixed. Is there a way to use exiftool for .RAF images, which reports the correct resolution?
That would require writing a new extractor based on exiftool, which is probably also a lot of work (Patches always welcome :)). Maybe I find some time to investigate the issue in exiv2, but I do not know if I will be able to solve this. This will probably also take a some time.
I managed to implement support for exiv2 (https://github.com/Exiv2/exiv2/pull/810). It is not yet ready for inclusion, but I should eventually get there. However, I need a test file which I can upload to the exiv2 project. Could you do me a favor and create a RAF image with worst quality, lowest resolution and smallest file size, which is okay to upload? Please also check that there is no sensitive data in the metadata.
(In reply to Alexander Stippich from comment #10) > I managed to implement support for exiv2 > (https://github.com/Exiv2/exiv2/pull/810). It is not yet ready for > inclusion, but I should eventually get there. > However, I need a test file which I can upload to the exiv2 project. Could > you do me a favor and create a RAF image with worst quality, lowest > resolution and smallest file size, which is okay to upload? Please also > check that there is no sensitive data in the metadata. Thank you! Unlike JPG images, RAW images are single resolution images (max. resolution). The file sizes are thus large. You may use the following .RAF image: https://www.dropbox.com/s/9c5369piq52jnar/_DSF2372.RAF?dl=0 It was produced by me and I give you authorization to use it as you wish. Again, thank you for working on this bug.
Exiv2 library has finally got the required fix. It will probably be released as part of exiv2 0.28 and the distributions will have to pick it up.