2006.02.07 10:26 "[Tiff] Re: Mega newbie question", by Dermot Paikkos

2006.02.07 16:27 "Re: [Tiff] Re: Mega newbie question", by Joris Van Damme

I'm not too sure why count is declared uint16 here... It should be if you ask me. Plenty of tags have potentially over 64K of uint32 data,

and in any case, the count in tags in actual file normal TIFF (not is unsigned 32bit. I'm also unsure why BigTIFF) datatype is not

BTFW libtiff 3.8.0 has a dreadful bug in that several of these tags are treated like the length value is 16 bit when it should actually be 32 bit. I can't recommend that anyone use libtiff 3.8.0. CVS libtiff has the fix, and libtiff 3.7.4 does not exhibit the symptom.

Yes, I seem to remember something about that... Though I've missed a final conclusion. There was a question as to whether we should use 3.8.0 + patch (http://www.asmail.be/msg0054784395.html), or wait for 3.8.1, but I missed an answer to that question.

I wish to make clear that the problem I'm talking about is not that the Photoshop tag can have a count >64K. Thus, the problem is not fixed by redefining the Photoshop tag handling. Instead, the problem I'm talking about is that *any* so-called auto-registered tag can have a count >64K. Thus, the problem can only be fixed by redefining that count to uint32 for all so-called auto-registered tag, and preferably not redefining any specific tags like Photoshop tag at all.

This may not be relevant, and/or fixed already, I haven't been paying much attention lately.

Joris Van Damme
Download your free TIFF tag viewer for windows here: