1d MarkIII - Determining shutter count

Your joking, right? Your saying, against all the tutorials online and the Adobe docs, that the image count of a 1D file is not reliable? Well, I say it is, after testing innumerable 1D Classic files and watching the numbers increment as they should. Maybe your not looking in the right places? And what are people hiding that they say to email canon for a file. That is just too, too weird. All I wanted was a jpg or RAW from a Mk2 or 3 to test it with.

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'text/html'

This is the last time I will type it:

Photoshop cannot reliably determine shutter count.

It's been proven. I've seen it with my own eyes. Let it die. Got a 1 series camera to try it out with? Do I need to post yet ANOTHER test/demo on my blog? No, I won't waste my time.

PM me an e-mail address, and I'll send you a S JPG file, right out of the camera. They're about 1.2 meg.

But, its NOT there

As a matter of fact I do. As a matter of fact, I have. The EXIF info is as reliable as any other info, even canon says the shutter count is stored there. Have you actually tested it?

All I asked for was a file to test it. If it's really not there, I'll admit it, if it is, I'll show it.

canonloader wrote in post #4807160
Have you actually tested it?

You're kidding me right?

1Dcount/Cancount counts past 65535. The numbers from Photoshop do not. any many have seen that under 65535 Photoshop is still incorrect. Never use Photoshop to determine shutter count. Photoshop also cannot reliably read any Mk.III files.

So, Photoshop can not read the EXIF correctly? Assuming that the shutter count is stored in the EXIF. I have found a MkII with EXIF intact, and you were right, it's not the same as the MkI. So, where is cancount and the others finding the shutter count, and why trust their numbers? EXIF is EXIF, no?

Find a shutter count in a 20d Exif.

Exif is not Exif when it comes to shutter count. It's not part of the standard. Consider it a proprietary non-compatible extra. CS2/CS3 tries to interpret the hex data but fails miserably. Considering it's not hard to get the numbers right I would say Adboe has to pull up their socks on this.

http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Exif

As for the accuracy? Canon's software and 1Dcount have been dead on. Next time you send your camera back for service, ask for an actuation count and compare it to the first frame out of the box. They will match +1 (if the last image they took was to count).

Of course, you can only get a shutter count from Canon on the Mk.III bodies currently. CPS members should have little issue emailing a file to Canon and having them verify the actuations.

canonloader wrote in post #4806690
For the second time, I'd like to see for myself.

Ok...well for the third time, me and many other MkIII owners have tried it and it doesnt work.

And for the last time, I wanted to see for myself. Problems with that?

The only problem we've had is telling you we've done it and that we're trying to save you the hassle.

Your pursuit of it is naturally interpreted as "Yeah right". It's human nature.

cosworth wrote in post #4808569
The only problem we've had is telling you we've done it and that we're trying to save you the hassle.

Your pursuit of it is naturally interpreted as "Yeah right". It's human nature.

I dropped my wool in the pile when I quit living the life of the sheep. I like to see things for myself, just like you did. If you see no problem with everyone taking the word of others and never checking it, turn on the 5pm national news tonight for a reality check.

There are sheep that blindly follow, and there are those that are wise to build on the success, failures,and findings of others. Something this small on the scale of human endeavors and so technical and easy to prove/disprove would be the latter in my opinion.

But go ahead and try it out, change your filenames, check your exif data, etc, just for your own edification. I certainly appreciate that mentality. Then when you are done with that, try restoring old custom settings files back into the MKIII that were stored back several thousand photos ago and watch the numbers in the exif change yet again after which you think you found the holy grail of the exif data that gives you true shutter count. Please report back your findings.

canonloader wrote in post #4807087
Your joking, right? Your saying, against all the tutorials online and the Adobe docs, that the image count of a 1D file is not reliable? Well, I say it is, after testing innumerable 1D Classic files and watching the numbers increment as they should. Maybe your not looking in the right places? And what are people hiding that they say to email canon for a file. That is just too, too weird. All I wanted was a jpg or RAW from a Mk2 or 3 to test it with.

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'text/html'

Photoshop can give the accuations of a Mark1 or Mark II, but it will not work with the Mark III, believe me I have called Canon and Adobe........It can't be done.

JB

And a few years ago, a guy said he had found cold fusion, showed a glass of water with some bubbles in it and demanded everyone believe him. Did you? Did anyone? Of course not. They may have wanted to, free power would change the world, but they demanded proof, tell us how so we can duplicate it, they said. PPppfffftttt, and we all know the rest of the story.

All I asked for was a Mk3 RAW or jpg with the exif intact, so I could try a few things, prove or disprove it myself. Incredible.

JBF wrote in post #4808808
Photoshop can give the accuations of a Mark1 or Mark II,

At this point I am leaving the discussion. Enjoy!