Repair broken jpg files












10














Hi I'm sure there were a lot of similar questions asked, but after searching a lot I didn't find any post describing my situation.



I have some jpg files which have some colours wrong after a certain point and also every pixel is shifted to the left. I think this is because of some missing bytes at the point where it changes. I tried to edit the file with vi but it seems impossible to find out where the missing bytes are, also vi is very complicated to use. I also tried nano but it's not binary-safe.



This is one of the images in question:



enter image description here



So I want to ask you two questions:




  1. How can I repair such images in Linux?

  2. How could I safely open and edit the file in a binary text editor under Linux?


Edit:
using hexedit I discovered that from position 0x27F000 to 0x27F403 there are only ones 0xff, and from 0x27F404 to 0x27FFFF there are only zeroes 0x00.
This makes something like this:



    0027EFF0   F8 83 C3 E2  09 35 AF 13  44 6E C5 FD  C7 EF 23 E8  .....5..Dn....#.
0027F000 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF ................
[...]
0027F400 FF FF FF FF 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
[...]
0027FFF0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
00280000 8F 39 6E 47 4F 43 5F 36 7C 73 66 F1 0D AE AD AF .9nGOC_6|sf.....


Changing these bytes with random numbers I was able to unshift the image, but there is still the colour problem.



Could someone point me to some documentation about jpeg encoding so I can figure out how to know where an 8x8 block ends.



I'm wondering why the positions are so precise (0x27F000 to 0x27FFFF), could this be a bug of my cam or the memory card I used?










share|improve this question
























  • I had this happen once to a large set of images. I just ended up deleting them, a shame really. I'd be interested to know if you succeed in repairing these, you've got a tough job ahead of you.
    – dtmland
    Jun 24 '13 at 20:16










  • Yes it is it's a shame, I'm trying to figure out how this jpeg files are encoded, it's just one 8x4000px line which I will have to delete. In this file there are exactly 4KB damaged in a file of 4.4MB It's less then 0.1%!!!
    – Falk
    Jun 25 '13 at 14:23
















10














Hi I'm sure there were a lot of similar questions asked, but after searching a lot I didn't find any post describing my situation.



I have some jpg files which have some colours wrong after a certain point and also every pixel is shifted to the left. I think this is because of some missing bytes at the point where it changes. I tried to edit the file with vi but it seems impossible to find out where the missing bytes are, also vi is very complicated to use. I also tried nano but it's not binary-safe.



This is one of the images in question:



enter image description here



So I want to ask you two questions:




  1. How can I repair such images in Linux?

  2. How could I safely open and edit the file in a binary text editor under Linux?


Edit:
using hexedit I discovered that from position 0x27F000 to 0x27F403 there are only ones 0xff, and from 0x27F404 to 0x27FFFF there are only zeroes 0x00.
This makes something like this:



    0027EFF0   F8 83 C3 E2  09 35 AF 13  44 6E C5 FD  C7 EF 23 E8  .....5..Dn....#.
0027F000 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF ................
[...]
0027F400 FF FF FF FF 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
[...]
0027FFF0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
00280000 8F 39 6E 47 4F 43 5F 36 7C 73 66 F1 0D AE AD AF .9nGOC_6|sf.....


Changing these bytes with random numbers I was able to unshift the image, but there is still the colour problem.



Could someone point me to some documentation about jpeg encoding so I can figure out how to know where an 8x8 block ends.



I'm wondering why the positions are so precise (0x27F000 to 0x27FFFF), could this be a bug of my cam or the memory card I used?










share|improve this question
























  • I had this happen once to a large set of images. I just ended up deleting them, a shame really. I'd be interested to know if you succeed in repairing these, you've got a tough job ahead of you.
    – dtmland
    Jun 24 '13 at 20:16










  • Yes it is it's a shame, I'm trying to figure out how this jpeg files are encoded, it's just one 8x4000px line which I will have to delete. In this file there are exactly 4KB damaged in a file of 4.4MB It's less then 0.1%!!!
    – Falk
    Jun 25 '13 at 14:23














10












10








10


4





Hi I'm sure there were a lot of similar questions asked, but after searching a lot I didn't find any post describing my situation.



I have some jpg files which have some colours wrong after a certain point and also every pixel is shifted to the left. I think this is because of some missing bytes at the point where it changes. I tried to edit the file with vi but it seems impossible to find out where the missing bytes are, also vi is very complicated to use. I also tried nano but it's not binary-safe.



This is one of the images in question:



enter image description here



So I want to ask you two questions:




  1. How can I repair such images in Linux?

  2. How could I safely open and edit the file in a binary text editor under Linux?


Edit:
using hexedit I discovered that from position 0x27F000 to 0x27F403 there are only ones 0xff, and from 0x27F404 to 0x27FFFF there are only zeroes 0x00.
This makes something like this:



    0027EFF0   F8 83 C3 E2  09 35 AF 13  44 6E C5 FD  C7 EF 23 E8  .....5..Dn....#.
0027F000 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF ................
[...]
0027F400 FF FF FF FF 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
[...]
0027FFF0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
00280000 8F 39 6E 47 4F 43 5F 36 7C 73 66 F1 0D AE AD AF .9nGOC_6|sf.....


Changing these bytes with random numbers I was able to unshift the image, but there is still the colour problem.



Could someone point me to some documentation about jpeg encoding so I can figure out how to know where an 8x8 block ends.



I'm wondering why the positions are so precise (0x27F000 to 0x27FFFF), could this be a bug of my cam or the memory card I used?










share|improve this question















Hi I'm sure there were a lot of similar questions asked, but after searching a lot I didn't find any post describing my situation.



I have some jpg files which have some colours wrong after a certain point and also every pixel is shifted to the left. I think this is because of some missing bytes at the point where it changes. I tried to edit the file with vi but it seems impossible to find out where the missing bytes are, also vi is very complicated to use. I also tried nano but it's not binary-safe.



This is one of the images in question:



enter image description here



So I want to ask you two questions:




  1. How can I repair such images in Linux?

  2. How could I safely open and edit the file in a binary text editor under Linux?


Edit:
using hexedit I discovered that from position 0x27F000 to 0x27F403 there are only ones 0xff, and from 0x27F404 to 0x27FFFF there are only zeroes 0x00.
This makes something like this:



    0027EFF0   F8 83 C3 E2  09 35 AF 13  44 6E C5 FD  C7 EF 23 E8  .....5..Dn....#.
0027F000 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF ................
[...]
0027F400 FF FF FF FF 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
[...]
0027FFF0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
00280000 8F 39 6E 47 4F 43 5F 36 7C 73 66 F1 0D AE AD AF .9nGOC_6|sf.....


Changing these bytes with random numbers I was able to unshift the image, but there is still the colour problem.



Could someone point me to some documentation about jpeg encoding so I can figure out how to know where an 8x8 block ends.



I'm wondering why the positions are so precise (0x27F000 to 0x27FFFF), could this be a bug of my cam or the memory card I used?







linux jpeg






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Jun 24 '13 at 18:38

























asked Jun 23 '13 at 13:23









Falk

21439




21439












  • I had this happen once to a large set of images. I just ended up deleting them, a shame really. I'd be interested to know if you succeed in repairing these, you've got a tough job ahead of you.
    – dtmland
    Jun 24 '13 at 20:16










  • Yes it is it's a shame, I'm trying to figure out how this jpeg files are encoded, it's just one 8x4000px line which I will have to delete. In this file there are exactly 4KB damaged in a file of 4.4MB It's less then 0.1%!!!
    – Falk
    Jun 25 '13 at 14:23


















  • I had this happen once to a large set of images. I just ended up deleting them, a shame really. I'd be interested to know if you succeed in repairing these, you've got a tough job ahead of you.
    – dtmland
    Jun 24 '13 at 20:16










  • Yes it is it's a shame, I'm trying to figure out how this jpeg files are encoded, it's just one 8x4000px line which I will have to delete. In this file there are exactly 4KB damaged in a file of 4.4MB It's less then 0.1%!!!
    – Falk
    Jun 25 '13 at 14:23
















I had this happen once to a large set of images. I just ended up deleting them, a shame really. I'd be interested to know if you succeed in repairing these, you've got a tough job ahead of you.
– dtmland
Jun 24 '13 at 20:16




I had this happen once to a large set of images. I just ended up deleting them, a shame really. I'd be interested to know if you succeed in repairing these, you've got a tough job ahead of you.
– dtmland
Jun 24 '13 at 20:16












Yes it is it's a shame, I'm trying to figure out how this jpeg files are encoded, it's just one 8x4000px line which I will have to delete. In this file there are exactly 4KB damaged in a file of 4.4MB It's less then 0.1%!!!
– Falk
Jun 25 '13 at 14:23




Yes it is it's a shame, I'm trying to figure out how this jpeg files are encoded, it's just one 8x4000px line which I will have to delete. In this file there are exactly 4KB damaged in a file of 4.4MB It's less then 0.1%!!!
– Falk
Jun 25 '13 at 14:23










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















1















2) How could I safely open and edit the file in a binary text editor under Linux?




Lots of great binary editors can be found here:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/839227/how-to-edit-binary-file-on-the-unix-systems



My personal favorites are vim with :%!xxd hack and hexedit






share|improve this answer



















  • 2




    Ok, and something easier to use? like nano.
    – Falk
    Jun 24 '13 at 14:17












  • something easy like shed?
    – Attie
    Oct 24 '17 at 19:33



















1














The wikipedia article on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG#Entropy_coding has a lot of information - the most relevant to your current problem is this one:




The previous quantized DC coefficient is used to predict the current quantized DC coefficient. The difference between the two is encoded rather than the actual value. The encoding of the 63 quantized AC coefficients does not use such prediction differencing.




The color shifting in the remainder of the image is caused by a single bad DC coefficient that cascades to all the rest. You might be able to find a small area (maybe one byte, maybe two - it's probably actually some sequence of bits) that reliably affects the colors, and try a large number of different values for that.



It may be easier to simply fix the image in a graphic editor - it looks like the one you posted, other than the shift (and wraparound), may simply have a lower brightness, you could select the area and use the Levels tool. Others that have more involved color shifts, you might be able to get a good enough result by looking at the decomposition in color channels (JPGs may be in RGB or Y'CbCr) and fixing each channel separately, possibly swapping channels.



EDIT: Oops, I didn't see how old your question was. Well, maybe this will be useful to you or someone else.






share|improve this answer





















  • Lots of thanks,don’t care about the age of the question, is still have the image and some more.
    – Falk
    Jan 2 '15 at 22:49










  • I think it's a shame that the camera didn't expect such a situation, they should put some key blocks every n (say 32) rows of blocks. the other problem is that I even don't know if there is a lossless compression applied after the lossy one, like Huffman. I'd rather play around with some bytes than open the image with graphic editors: first most of them don't want to open these images, second I don't think that I could find the exact correction playing around with some sliders. @Random832 thanks and please tell me if You know something more.
    – Falk
    Jan 2 '15 at 23:09



















0














Have you tried photorec?
You can install it on Ubuntu like this:



sudo apt-get install testdisk


Check the manual with:



man photorec


and just run photorec from the terminal like so:



photorec


It will ask you to select the source and a destination and try to recover jpg files automatically.



To prevent damaging the original, I recommend making a copy with the dd command.
Good luck!






share|improve this answer























  • Hi, photorec is designed to recover files from a corrupted filesystem, in my case the filesystem is fine, but the image is corrupted so it's a totally different situation.
    – Falk
    Oct 24 '17 at 22:27










  • Hi, you can use fsck to check and repair the filesystem. I am not sure whether it is designed for it, but I got 1000+ recovered jpg files and others on a microSD card with damaged files that had an fsck run, so I would say give it a try if you care about the files :). Also, I stumbled upon this post because I had a similar error opening the image.
    – Vincent Gerris
    Oct 25 '17 at 12:05








  • 2




    Hi, as I wrote earlier there is nothing wrong with the filesystem, it's the JPEG file which has the error, thanks anyway.
    – Falk
    Oct 25 '17 at 13:03










  • as I wrote before, it works regardless. It's also mentioned in the man page: linux.die.net/man/1/photorec
    – Vincent Gerris
    Nov 1 '17 at 11:02






  • 1




    I'm just trying to help. You type would, so you didn't try? I actually ran it on an SD card and yes it copies them but it fixed them too. Can't hurt to try, right? If it's not worth trying, fine, good luck. All I am saying is that it did repair it for me. I will not respond any further to avoid endless discussion.
    – Vincent Gerris
    Nov 1 '17 at 15:24











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f611058%2frepair-broken-jpg-files%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









1















2) How could I safely open and edit the file in a binary text editor under Linux?




Lots of great binary editors can be found here:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/839227/how-to-edit-binary-file-on-the-unix-systems



My personal favorites are vim with :%!xxd hack and hexedit






share|improve this answer



















  • 2




    Ok, and something easier to use? like nano.
    – Falk
    Jun 24 '13 at 14:17












  • something easy like shed?
    – Attie
    Oct 24 '17 at 19:33
















1















2) How could I safely open and edit the file in a binary text editor under Linux?




Lots of great binary editors can be found here:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/839227/how-to-edit-binary-file-on-the-unix-systems



My personal favorites are vim with :%!xxd hack and hexedit






share|improve this answer



















  • 2




    Ok, and something easier to use? like nano.
    – Falk
    Jun 24 '13 at 14:17












  • something easy like shed?
    – Attie
    Oct 24 '17 at 19:33














1












1








1







2) How could I safely open and edit the file in a binary text editor under Linux?




Lots of great binary editors can be found here:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/839227/how-to-edit-binary-file-on-the-unix-systems



My personal favorites are vim with :%!xxd hack and hexedit






share|improve this answer















2) How could I safely open and edit the file in a binary text editor under Linux?




Lots of great binary editors can be found here:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/839227/how-to-edit-binary-file-on-the-unix-systems



My personal favorites are vim with :%!xxd hack and hexedit







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited May 23 '17 at 12:41









Community

1




1










answered Jun 24 '13 at 13:08









Viacheslav Rodionov

19616




19616








  • 2




    Ok, and something easier to use? like nano.
    – Falk
    Jun 24 '13 at 14:17












  • something easy like shed?
    – Attie
    Oct 24 '17 at 19:33














  • 2




    Ok, and something easier to use? like nano.
    – Falk
    Jun 24 '13 at 14:17












  • something easy like shed?
    – Attie
    Oct 24 '17 at 19:33








2




2




Ok, and something easier to use? like nano.
– Falk
Jun 24 '13 at 14:17






Ok, and something easier to use? like nano.
– Falk
Jun 24 '13 at 14:17














something easy like shed?
– Attie
Oct 24 '17 at 19:33




something easy like shed?
– Attie
Oct 24 '17 at 19:33













1














The wikipedia article on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG#Entropy_coding has a lot of information - the most relevant to your current problem is this one:




The previous quantized DC coefficient is used to predict the current quantized DC coefficient. The difference between the two is encoded rather than the actual value. The encoding of the 63 quantized AC coefficients does not use such prediction differencing.




The color shifting in the remainder of the image is caused by a single bad DC coefficient that cascades to all the rest. You might be able to find a small area (maybe one byte, maybe two - it's probably actually some sequence of bits) that reliably affects the colors, and try a large number of different values for that.



It may be easier to simply fix the image in a graphic editor - it looks like the one you posted, other than the shift (and wraparound), may simply have a lower brightness, you could select the area and use the Levels tool. Others that have more involved color shifts, you might be able to get a good enough result by looking at the decomposition in color channels (JPGs may be in RGB or Y'CbCr) and fixing each channel separately, possibly swapping channels.



EDIT: Oops, I didn't see how old your question was. Well, maybe this will be useful to you or someone else.






share|improve this answer





















  • Lots of thanks,don’t care about the age of the question, is still have the image and some more.
    – Falk
    Jan 2 '15 at 22:49










  • I think it's a shame that the camera didn't expect such a situation, they should put some key blocks every n (say 32) rows of blocks. the other problem is that I even don't know if there is a lossless compression applied after the lossy one, like Huffman. I'd rather play around with some bytes than open the image with graphic editors: first most of them don't want to open these images, second I don't think that I could find the exact correction playing around with some sliders. @Random832 thanks and please tell me if You know something more.
    – Falk
    Jan 2 '15 at 23:09
















1














The wikipedia article on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG#Entropy_coding has a lot of information - the most relevant to your current problem is this one:




The previous quantized DC coefficient is used to predict the current quantized DC coefficient. The difference between the two is encoded rather than the actual value. The encoding of the 63 quantized AC coefficients does not use such prediction differencing.




The color shifting in the remainder of the image is caused by a single bad DC coefficient that cascades to all the rest. You might be able to find a small area (maybe one byte, maybe two - it's probably actually some sequence of bits) that reliably affects the colors, and try a large number of different values for that.



It may be easier to simply fix the image in a graphic editor - it looks like the one you posted, other than the shift (and wraparound), may simply have a lower brightness, you could select the area and use the Levels tool. Others that have more involved color shifts, you might be able to get a good enough result by looking at the decomposition in color channels (JPGs may be in RGB or Y'CbCr) and fixing each channel separately, possibly swapping channels.



EDIT: Oops, I didn't see how old your question was. Well, maybe this will be useful to you or someone else.






share|improve this answer





















  • Lots of thanks,don’t care about the age of the question, is still have the image and some more.
    – Falk
    Jan 2 '15 at 22:49










  • I think it's a shame that the camera didn't expect such a situation, they should put some key blocks every n (say 32) rows of blocks. the other problem is that I even don't know if there is a lossless compression applied after the lossy one, like Huffman. I'd rather play around with some bytes than open the image with graphic editors: first most of them don't want to open these images, second I don't think that I could find the exact correction playing around with some sliders. @Random832 thanks and please tell me if You know something more.
    – Falk
    Jan 2 '15 at 23:09














1












1








1






The wikipedia article on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG#Entropy_coding has a lot of information - the most relevant to your current problem is this one:




The previous quantized DC coefficient is used to predict the current quantized DC coefficient. The difference between the two is encoded rather than the actual value. The encoding of the 63 quantized AC coefficients does not use such prediction differencing.




The color shifting in the remainder of the image is caused by a single bad DC coefficient that cascades to all the rest. You might be able to find a small area (maybe one byte, maybe two - it's probably actually some sequence of bits) that reliably affects the colors, and try a large number of different values for that.



It may be easier to simply fix the image in a graphic editor - it looks like the one you posted, other than the shift (and wraparound), may simply have a lower brightness, you could select the area and use the Levels tool. Others that have more involved color shifts, you might be able to get a good enough result by looking at the decomposition in color channels (JPGs may be in RGB or Y'CbCr) and fixing each channel separately, possibly swapping channels.



EDIT: Oops, I didn't see how old your question was. Well, maybe this will be useful to you or someone else.






share|improve this answer












The wikipedia article on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG#Entropy_coding has a lot of information - the most relevant to your current problem is this one:




The previous quantized DC coefficient is used to predict the current quantized DC coefficient. The difference between the two is encoded rather than the actual value. The encoding of the 63 quantized AC coefficients does not use such prediction differencing.




The color shifting in the remainder of the image is caused by a single bad DC coefficient that cascades to all the rest. You might be able to find a small area (maybe one byte, maybe two - it's probably actually some sequence of bits) that reliably affects the colors, and try a large number of different values for that.



It may be easier to simply fix the image in a graphic editor - it looks like the one you posted, other than the shift (and wraparound), may simply have a lower brightness, you could select the area and use the Levels tool. Others that have more involved color shifts, you might be able to get a good enough result by looking at the decomposition in color channels (JPGs may be in RGB or Y'CbCr) and fixing each channel separately, possibly swapping channels.



EDIT: Oops, I didn't see how old your question was. Well, maybe this will be useful to you or someone else.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Jan 1 '15 at 6:57









Random832

58139




58139












  • Lots of thanks,don’t care about the age of the question, is still have the image and some more.
    – Falk
    Jan 2 '15 at 22:49










  • I think it's a shame that the camera didn't expect such a situation, they should put some key blocks every n (say 32) rows of blocks. the other problem is that I even don't know if there is a lossless compression applied after the lossy one, like Huffman. I'd rather play around with some bytes than open the image with graphic editors: first most of them don't want to open these images, second I don't think that I could find the exact correction playing around with some sliders. @Random832 thanks and please tell me if You know something more.
    – Falk
    Jan 2 '15 at 23:09


















  • Lots of thanks,don’t care about the age of the question, is still have the image and some more.
    – Falk
    Jan 2 '15 at 22:49










  • I think it's a shame that the camera didn't expect such a situation, they should put some key blocks every n (say 32) rows of blocks. the other problem is that I even don't know if there is a lossless compression applied after the lossy one, like Huffman. I'd rather play around with some bytes than open the image with graphic editors: first most of them don't want to open these images, second I don't think that I could find the exact correction playing around with some sliders. @Random832 thanks and please tell me if You know something more.
    – Falk
    Jan 2 '15 at 23:09
















Lots of thanks,don’t care about the age of the question, is still have the image and some more.
– Falk
Jan 2 '15 at 22:49




Lots of thanks,don’t care about the age of the question, is still have the image and some more.
– Falk
Jan 2 '15 at 22:49












I think it's a shame that the camera didn't expect such a situation, they should put some key blocks every n (say 32) rows of blocks. the other problem is that I even don't know if there is a lossless compression applied after the lossy one, like Huffman. I'd rather play around with some bytes than open the image with graphic editors: first most of them don't want to open these images, second I don't think that I could find the exact correction playing around with some sliders. @Random832 thanks and please tell me if You know something more.
– Falk
Jan 2 '15 at 23:09




I think it's a shame that the camera didn't expect such a situation, they should put some key blocks every n (say 32) rows of blocks. the other problem is that I even don't know if there is a lossless compression applied after the lossy one, like Huffman. I'd rather play around with some bytes than open the image with graphic editors: first most of them don't want to open these images, second I don't think that I could find the exact correction playing around with some sliders. @Random832 thanks and please tell me if You know something more.
– Falk
Jan 2 '15 at 23:09











0














Have you tried photorec?
You can install it on Ubuntu like this:



sudo apt-get install testdisk


Check the manual with:



man photorec


and just run photorec from the terminal like so:



photorec


It will ask you to select the source and a destination and try to recover jpg files automatically.



To prevent damaging the original, I recommend making a copy with the dd command.
Good luck!






share|improve this answer























  • Hi, photorec is designed to recover files from a corrupted filesystem, in my case the filesystem is fine, but the image is corrupted so it's a totally different situation.
    – Falk
    Oct 24 '17 at 22:27










  • Hi, you can use fsck to check and repair the filesystem. I am not sure whether it is designed for it, but I got 1000+ recovered jpg files and others on a microSD card with damaged files that had an fsck run, so I would say give it a try if you care about the files :). Also, I stumbled upon this post because I had a similar error opening the image.
    – Vincent Gerris
    Oct 25 '17 at 12:05








  • 2




    Hi, as I wrote earlier there is nothing wrong with the filesystem, it's the JPEG file which has the error, thanks anyway.
    – Falk
    Oct 25 '17 at 13:03










  • as I wrote before, it works regardless. It's also mentioned in the man page: linux.die.net/man/1/photorec
    – Vincent Gerris
    Nov 1 '17 at 11:02






  • 1




    I'm just trying to help. You type would, so you didn't try? I actually ran it on an SD card and yes it copies them but it fixed them too. Can't hurt to try, right? If it's not worth trying, fine, good luck. All I am saying is that it did repair it for me. I will not respond any further to avoid endless discussion.
    – Vincent Gerris
    Nov 1 '17 at 15:24
















0














Have you tried photorec?
You can install it on Ubuntu like this:



sudo apt-get install testdisk


Check the manual with:



man photorec


and just run photorec from the terminal like so:



photorec


It will ask you to select the source and a destination and try to recover jpg files automatically.



To prevent damaging the original, I recommend making a copy with the dd command.
Good luck!






share|improve this answer























  • Hi, photorec is designed to recover files from a corrupted filesystem, in my case the filesystem is fine, but the image is corrupted so it's a totally different situation.
    – Falk
    Oct 24 '17 at 22:27










  • Hi, you can use fsck to check and repair the filesystem. I am not sure whether it is designed for it, but I got 1000+ recovered jpg files and others on a microSD card with damaged files that had an fsck run, so I would say give it a try if you care about the files :). Also, I stumbled upon this post because I had a similar error opening the image.
    – Vincent Gerris
    Oct 25 '17 at 12:05








  • 2




    Hi, as I wrote earlier there is nothing wrong with the filesystem, it's the JPEG file which has the error, thanks anyway.
    – Falk
    Oct 25 '17 at 13:03










  • as I wrote before, it works regardless. It's also mentioned in the man page: linux.die.net/man/1/photorec
    – Vincent Gerris
    Nov 1 '17 at 11:02






  • 1




    I'm just trying to help. You type would, so you didn't try? I actually ran it on an SD card and yes it copies them but it fixed them too. Can't hurt to try, right? If it's not worth trying, fine, good luck. All I am saying is that it did repair it for me. I will not respond any further to avoid endless discussion.
    – Vincent Gerris
    Nov 1 '17 at 15:24














0












0








0






Have you tried photorec?
You can install it on Ubuntu like this:



sudo apt-get install testdisk


Check the manual with:



man photorec


and just run photorec from the terminal like so:



photorec


It will ask you to select the source and a destination and try to recover jpg files automatically.



To prevent damaging the original, I recommend making a copy with the dd command.
Good luck!






share|improve this answer














Have you tried photorec?
You can install it on Ubuntu like this:



sudo apt-get install testdisk


Check the manual with:



man photorec


and just run photorec from the terminal like so:



photorec


It will ask you to select the source and a destination and try to recover jpg files automatically.



To prevent damaging the original, I recommend making a copy with the dd command.
Good luck!







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Dec 8 at 15:22









Itai Steinherz

32




32










answered Oct 24 '17 at 19:29









Vincent Gerris

1111




1111












  • Hi, photorec is designed to recover files from a corrupted filesystem, in my case the filesystem is fine, but the image is corrupted so it's a totally different situation.
    – Falk
    Oct 24 '17 at 22:27










  • Hi, you can use fsck to check and repair the filesystem. I am not sure whether it is designed for it, but I got 1000+ recovered jpg files and others on a microSD card with damaged files that had an fsck run, so I would say give it a try if you care about the files :). Also, I stumbled upon this post because I had a similar error opening the image.
    – Vincent Gerris
    Oct 25 '17 at 12:05








  • 2




    Hi, as I wrote earlier there is nothing wrong with the filesystem, it's the JPEG file which has the error, thanks anyway.
    – Falk
    Oct 25 '17 at 13:03










  • as I wrote before, it works regardless. It's also mentioned in the man page: linux.die.net/man/1/photorec
    – Vincent Gerris
    Nov 1 '17 at 11:02






  • 1




    I'm just trying to help. You type would, so you didn't try? I actually ran it on an SD card and yes it copies them but it fixed them too. Can't hurt to try, right? If it's not worth trying, fine, good luck. All I am saying is that it did repair it for me. I will not respond any further to avoid endless discussion.
    – Vincent Gerris
    Nov 1 '17 at 15:24


















  • Hi, photorec is designed to recover files from a corrupted filesystem, in my case the filesystem is fine, but the image is corrupted so it's a totally different situation.
    – Falk
    Oct 24 '17 at 22:27










  • Hi, you can use fsck to check and repair the filesystem. I am not sure whether it is designed for it, but I got 1000+ recovered jpg files and others on a microSD card with damaged files that had an fsck run, so I would say give it a try if you care about the files :). Also, I stumbled upon this post because I had a similar error opening the image.
    – Vincent Gerris
    Oct 25 '17 at 12:05








  • 2




    Hi, as I wrote earlier there is nothing wrong with the filesystem, it's the JPEG file which has the error, thanks anyway.
    – Falk
    Oct 25 '17 at 13:03










  • as I wrote before, it works regardless. It's also mentioned in the man page: linux.die.net/man/1/photorec
    – Vincent Gerris
    Nov 1 '17 at 11:02






  • 1




    I'm just trying to help. You type would, so you didn't try? I actually ran it on an SD card and yes it copies them but it fixed them too. Can't hurt to try, right? If it's not worth trying, fine, good luck. All I am saying is that it did repair it for me. I will not respond any further to avoid endless discussion.
    – Vincent Gerris
    Nov 1 '17 at 15:24
















Hi, photorec is designed to recover files from a corrupted filesystem, in my case the filesystem is fine, but the image is corrupted so it's a totally different situation.
– Falk
Oct 24 '17 at 22:27




Hi, photorec is designed to recover files from a corrupted filesystem, in my case the filesystem is fine, but the image is corrupted so it's a totally different situation.
– Falk
Oct 24 '17 at 22:27












Hi, you can use fsck to check and repair the filesystem. I am not sure whether it is designed for it, but I got 1000+ recovered jpg files and others on a microSD card with damaged files that had an fsck run, so I would say give it a try if you care about the files :). Also, I stumbled upon this post because I had a similar error opening the image.
– Vincent Gerris
Oct 25 '17 at 12:05






Hi, you can use fsck to check and repair the filesystem. I am not sure whether it is designed for it, but I got 1000+ recovered jpg files and others on a microSD card with damaged files that had an fsck run, so I would say give it a try if you care about the files :). Also, I stumbled upon this post because I had a similar error opening the image.
– Vincent Gerris
Oct 25 '17 at 12:05






2




2




Hi, as I wrote earlier there is nothing wrong with the filesystem, it's the JPEG file which has the error, thanks anyway.
– Falk
Oct 25 '17 at 13:03




Hi, as I wrote earlier there is nothing wrong with the filesystem, it's the JPEG file which has the error, thanks anyway.
– Falk
Oct 25 '17 at 13:03












as I wrote before, it works regardless. It's also mentioned in the man page: linux.die.net/man/1/photorec
– Vincent Gerris
Nov 1 '17 at 11:02




as I wrote before, it works regardless. It's also mentioned in the man page: linux.die.net/man/1/photorec
– Vincent Gerris
Nov 1 '17 at 11:02




1




1




I'm just trying to help. You type would, so you didn't try? I actually ran it on an SD card and yes it copies them but it fixed them too. Can't hurt to try, right? If it's not worth trying, fine, good luck. All I am saying is that it did repair it for me. I will not respond any further to avoid endless discussion.
– Vincent Gerris
Nov 1 '17 at 15:24




I'm just trying to help. You type would, so you didn't try? I actually ran it on an SD card and yes it copies them but it fixed them too. Can't hurt to try, right? If it's not worth trying, fine, good luck. All I am saying is that it did repair it for me. I will not respond any further to avoid endless discussion.
– Vincent Gerris
Nov 1 '17 at 15:24


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f611058%2frepair-broken-jpg-files%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Plaza Victoria

Puebla de Zaragoza

Musa