2.34:Multiple shots per second are displayed out of sequence
Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 3:03 am
I use Xnview all the time, it's great. But for burst mode photos (multiple shots per second), it doesn't sort well. This means a fantastic sequence of photos is sometimes out of sequence and makes no sense.
I downloaded the latest Xnview for windows 7, 2.34, and saw that this problem has not been resolved.
To observe this problem:
- set your camera to a fast burst mode (in my case, Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 that can do 50 fps)
- take a few seconds of photos (e.g. with a moving object left to right)
- load them in XnView
- Set it up like this: View -> Sort by -> EXIF date, ascending
The resulting photos are not all in order. This makes for a headache situation.
There are multiple photos taken in the same second as seen in the EXIF date information. But XnView is ignoring key information that would display them in the proper order:
1) the sequence number in the EXIF data (first photo is 1, next is 2, etc.)
2) the number of the filename itself (IMG5247, IMG5248, etc.)
Question: Is there an existing method that solves this problem? If not, may I suggest implementing a sort algorithm that considers a second sort key (1 or 2 above) automatically, so that nobody expériences this problem any more.
Thanks to anybody who can help on this.
I downloaded the latest Xnview for windows 7, 2.34, and saw that this problem has not been resolved.
To observe this problem:
- set your camera to a fast burst mode (in my case, Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 that can do 50 fps)
- take a few seconds of photos (e.g. with a moving object left to right)
- load them in XnView
- Set it up like this: View -> Sort by -> EXIF date, ascending
The resulting photos are not all in order. This makes for a headache situation.
There are multiple photos taken in the same second as seen in the EXIF date information. But XnView is ignoring key information that would display them in the proper order:
1) the sequence number in the EXIF data (first photo is 1, next is 2, etc.)
2) the number of the filename itself (IMG5247, IMG5248, etc.)
Question: Is there an existing method that solves this problem? If not, may I suggest implementing a sort algorithm that considers a second sort key (1 or 2 above) automatically, so that nobody expériences this problem any more.
Thanks to anybody who can help on this.