On 16 Dez., 00:11, Bruno Postle <[email protected]> wrote: > > EXIF isn't used at the stitching stage, stitching happens at a lower > pixel-data level, e.g. a 'landscape format' photo relates to the way > the pixels are stored, even if the camera was held in portrait > orientation.
I suppose what happens and what gives me grief is tha fact that (some?) raw converters in (some?) situations take the information in (some?) EXIF tags as a reason to actually rotate the pixel matrix and store the rotated data, while (some?) others keep the pixel matrix intact and merely store (some?) EXIF tags to reflect what orientation should be displayed, and maybe some other EXIF tags keeping a record of the camera orientation the image was taken with. This feels like a mess. A mess one can work around by tricking one or the other bit of software into doing the wanted thing by manipulating the EXIF tags in the raw files or the files the raw converter produces, but it's quite unsatisfactory. Isn't there a better way? Kay -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
