Actually I think this is a matter of belief and to have a consistent argument.
I would like to have a way to correct the exif information but sure thing this modified the original data. Since writing exif is writing to the file it's a violation of the rules to never write to the raw file. If you wrote the exif then you could also write something else because you already write, so where is the difference - might be an upcoming argument for a new feature request and so step by step room would emerge for features that alter the original file. I mean yeah, changing the file might break the format of the file as specified by the manufacturer. It might lead to data loss. It might just work. It might look like it just works but something is broken that you cannot easily detect and find out painfully eventually. Because afaik the raw formats are more implemented by reverse engineering than implementing a full standard I agree that following the religious 'never write to the raw file' is the correct way to deal with it but in my heart I am wishing for a feature that modifies the exif information permanently (and so writes to the raw). Peter Harde <peter.harde.pri...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 14. Nov. 2021, 14:42: > exiftool changing the DateTimeOriginal *is* > altering the original raw file and may cause you lose of data by altering > the original. > > Changing a parameter which is definitely wrong is not a loss of data but a > correction. exiftool preserves the original file by adding "_original" to > the file name. No danger of loss of data until the new file, created by > exiftool, has been validated. > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to > darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org > ___________________________________________________________________________ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
