Return-Path: <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>
X-Original-To: info@awaresystems.be
Delivered-To: info@awaresystems.be
Received: from mx-l.b-one.net (mx-l.one.com [91.198.169.59])
	by mail9.b-one.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A842D400125
	for <info@awaresystems.be>; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:31:49 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: by one.com
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=0 required=6 tests=[none]
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
Received: from lists.maptools.org (lists.maptools.org [65.39.174.144])
	by mx-l.b-one.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9C8A1D1D414
	for <info@awaresystems.be>; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:31:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by lists.maptools.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF631D18FB24;
	Mon, 16 Feb 2009 07:29:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from zynlfw01.zylab.com (mx.zylab.com [194.178.9.130])
	by lists.maptools.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5AEC1D18F47C
	for <tiff@lists.maptools.org>; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 07:04:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from zynlms01.ZyLAB.WAN (zynlms01.zylab.wan [192.168.1.10])
	by zynlfw01.zylab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FC868C0;
	Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:04:09 +0100 (CET)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:03:43 +0100
Message-ID: <FC840EC0BF7BFA45A0F94548AF36920D0626DB70@zynlms01.ZyLAB.WAN>
In-Reply-To: <22014001.post@talk.nabble.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: [Tiff] Different output with the same image???
Thread-Index: AcmOwLGCInB7k6JiT9q6gjkHen3YgwBbO8mw
References: <22011012.post@talk.nabble.com> <22014001.post@talk.nabble.com>
From: "Gerben Vos" <Gerben@ZyLAB.COM>
To: <tiff@lists.maptools.org>
Cc: blp330 <blp330@msn.com>
Subject: Re: [Tiff] Different output with the same image???
X-BeenThere: tiff@lists.maptools.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TIFF and libtiff discussion <tiff.lists.maptools.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/private/tiff>
List-Post: <mailto:tiff@lists.maptools.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
Errors-To: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org

blp330 wrote:

> Here is two tiff that generated by the same image but different
> output:

> The only one byte different is in position 0x5d0d One is 0x5C, another
> one is 0x00

This is a padding byte, after the image data but before the IFD
(directory), because the IFD must always start at a two-byte-aligned
offset. Its value does not affect the meaning of the TIFF.

Did you write this image using libtiff? It would be best if libtiff
would always write bytes like this with a zero value, so I would
consider this a (minor) bug. (Never write data from uninitialized
buffers, to prevent data leakage and security/privacy issues and all
that stuff.)

					Gerben Vos.
_______________________________________________
Tiff mailing list: Tiff@lists.maptools.org
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff
http://www.remotesensing.org/libtiff/
