We ran into problematic TIFF a couple of weeks ago. It can be opened and successfully displayed by Photoshop and LeadTools. LibTIFF on the other hand doesn't like the image for two reasons. The first is the value associated with ExtraSamples is not correct. The other reasons is that BitsPerSample doesn't correlate with SamplesPerPixel.
I have a patch for this problem issue. I've sent a message to the LibTIFF mailing group without any responses. Is Image Magick interested in this patch. If so how do I you want it sent.
David
LibTiff Patch
Re: LibTiff Patch
If the patch is against ImageMagick, we're interested. If its against the TIFF delegate library, only the TIFF development team can make use of it.
Re: LibTiff Patch
I understand. I did send this to tiff@remotesensing.org (see http://www.libtiff.org) but didn't get a reply. Subscribing to the E-mail list is disabled. If you look at http://www.remotesensing.org it says that the communities are no longer actively maintained.
Do you get your TIFF library from somewhere else?
David
Do you get your TIFF library from somewhere else?
David
Re: LibTiff Patch
We got the library from libtiff.org. Wish we could help but we can barely keep up with supporting ImageMagick let alone all the delegate library distributions.
Re: LibTiff Patch
I completely understand. Unfortunately, we (Image Magick developers and my client) are in a tough position. Since it appears that the LibTIFF folks have gone dormant, we (the collective WE again) may be obligated to support the TIFF implementation.
I'm just looking at the reality of the situation and not trying to force the position.
It's really sad that when someone comes up with a standard file format they are not required to provide a "file validator" application and perhaps a library that will read/write the standard file format. I know that writing a library that would read/write a file format is an expensive thing to produce but it certainly would help to solidify the standard.
I'll get off my soap box now.
Warmest regards,
David
I'm just looking at the reality of the situation and not trying to force the position.
It's really sad that when someone comes up with a standard file format they are not required to provide a "file validator" application and perhaps a library that will read/write the standard file format. I know that writing a library that would read/write a file format is an expensive thing to produce but it certainly would help to solidify the standard.
I'll get off my soap box now.
Warmest regards,
David