Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
We sued over the "high resolution" cd and the magistrate awarded us $400 or so because the cd was far from high resolution.
Something's missing here....If the files are all corrupted, how would anyone know what resolution they are (or were)? I would think you would have had to demonstrate what kind of files you had been given before anyone would award you anything.
Regardless, assuming that you got an award because---for example--he just admitted they were low-res, the fact that the files proved not readable at all would still be "actionable"**.
Someone also mentioned potentially taking my concern to another blog. I am far from computer savy and have little experience with tech blogs. However, I did post other places but I think they are largely inactive. If you have suggestions for other blogs, or want to direct people to my files on other blogs feel free. Thanks again for all of your help.
That would be me. I used to heavily use the forums at DPChallenge. There are people there just chomping at the bit to help out anyone having any kinds of issues with photography, including this. I'm sure there are many other forums, like maybe Flickr that are very active.
It just occurred to me that I while I have 125 corrupt files, there are 1300 that were viewable that we got as part of our original agreement. The 125 corrupt were just off of one card that wrote corrupt images. Therefore, I have now loaded about four of the images that can be successfully opened. They are on the 4shared site with the corrupt files: http://www.4shared.com/dir/24915904/...3/sharing.html
Perhaps being able to see the files that have successfully written will be helpful. That way you can compare data to see how closely they are written. Thanks again folks.
Independent of this new info, I have looked a bit more at one of the "bad" files. I can find NONE of the tags specified in the jpeg file spec---including the one for end of file. This does not bode well for recovery.
So---125 bad, and 1300 good: Sounds like there is not quite the crisis that we had thought....
Well, in that case it looks like they were indeed jpegs at one point.
One thing you can try, because all images seem to be at the same resolution, is you can use 'dd' to cut off the header plus some more of one jpeg that works, and attach it to one of the jpegs that doesn't work. This is hit or miss, because if the offset is wrong, the image will not show up. So, it's going to be really difficult. I don't think it's worth the effort, unless you think it is.
I've tried this technique myself and once in a while it actually works ... but it's rare.
It just occurred to me that I while I have 125 corrupt files, there are 1300 that were viewable that we got as part of our original agreement. The 125 corrupt were just off of one card that wrote corrupt images.
The photographer refused to give us the SD card that had been in the camera that had the corrupt files. Instead, I watched him directly copy and paste the file onto a cd burning program. What I have uploaded online are the files off of the burned cd.
With all of this talk, I am beginning to wonder if these files are truly JPEG. They say JPEG, but I'm not sure what a Cannon initially records the image as. I don't have any reason to believe that he had already started converting the file to JPEG from whatever it was originally shot as. The corrupt files should be exactly what the Cannon was set at. With that in mind, all I can say is that I know he was bragging about how advanced and costly the Cannon camera was that he was using. This was in November of 2007.
I don't know if any of this helps but this is what I got. Thanks.
The only thing I can think of at this point is to try searching for tags or data structures that are associated with some other plausible formats--eg RAW. As I stated before, I could see no hint of non-random structures, and I also could not find any of the tags mentioned in the JPEG specs.
I dont think you understand...You see RAW image format has no header.
Do you have an example of a RAW file? And/Or, do you have the actual file format spec.? I have been using "header" to include the information required to read the stream of random pixel values. As an absolute minimum, the pixel format must be known (eg 640x480, 1024x768, etc.) otherwise, there is no way to know how the values are to be laid out. I would regard that info to be part of the header.