EXIF.....

DekHog

DekHog

Messages
2,803
Name
Derek
Edit My Images
Yes
For a bunch of so-called togs, trying to critique each others work, we sure are miserly with EXIF information. I've just been through a random 15 posts from the first page of 'People & Portraits' trying to find an image with EXIF data to try an EXIF viewer plugin - nada; zilch; nothing.

I always leave EXIF in when I post, so is this intentional, or do people just not realise that they are stripping the EXIF out of their images?
 
If it's missing from any of mine it's purely accidental and down to using Noiseware.
 
I have no idea if mine is present or not - I upload pics to flickr and then link the BB code here. Would that strip out the exif info?
 
Shouldnt do, you can still see it via flickr.
 
i some times save for web from ps2
but never intentionally post to hide the exif
 
I always leave mine intact. But I have noticed there are a lot of posts that have it stripped.


Kev.
 
Didnt someone say on another thread that if you link to an image on flickr, flickr will display a smaller version that strips the exif, but the original will keep it. I cant imagine most people intentionally stripping exif data, its seems like an added hastle to me, could be wrong though.
 
I know if you use save for web with PS that it strips the EXIF, but I can't see the majority of people posting images using that, so just wondered what the reason was. I guess between Flickr and things like Noiseware that's how it happens.

I find the fact that the free version of Noiseware strips the EXIF really strange - what's stripping the EXIF got to do with noise reduction in any way? Is it just a punishment for using the free version? :shrug:
 
DekHog said:
Is it just a punishment for using the free version? :shrug:
Click to expand...

Quite possibly. If you view it in the terms that anyone who vaguely values their images is going to want the IPTC fields left intact with © info, usage details etc etc, then it effectively blocks any commercial use, or so they think..... because, of course, you'd just reimport the image to Bridge, LR or PS and reapply one of your presets. The Exif's gone, but the important stuff is included.
Then there's other software such as ExifToolGui that will allow you to back up your entire metadata set and then reapply it from an Mei file.

As for hosting, it seems to be Flickr that's the biggest culprit as they don't apply metadata to what are effectively their thumbnails. Facebook strips it entirely.

Then there's also the point that some people do actively strip it, so that their audience concentrates on the image rather than the kit.
 
I always thought that where exif was stripped, it was a deliberate choice, in the same way some members plaster their kit details - others do minimalist.
I now realise that in many cases, it's incidental. However, sometimes it's irritating when you try to get a view on speed / aperture/ focal length etc and it's blank.
It would be interesting to get feedback from those that deliberately expunge with their reasoning.
 
DekHog said:
I know if you use save for web with PS that it strips the EXIF
Click to expand...

That used to be true with Photoshop versions prior to CS4. With CS4 and CS5 you have the choice of:-
No Metadata
All Metadata
Copyright
Copyright and Contact Info
All Except Camera Info
 
DekHog said:
For a bunch of so-called togs, trying to critique each others work, we sure are miserly with EXIF information. I've just been through a random 15 posts from the first page of 'People & Portraits' trying to find an image with EXIF data to try an EXIF viewer plugin - nada; zilch; nothing.

I always leave EXIF in when I post, so is this intentional, or do people just not realise that they are stripping the EXIF out of their images?
Click to expand...

Did you check mine?

I always leave the exif data in, so if it's missing I'd like to know.
 
Yours is fine, Ed. It was just a random selection I picked and got nothing with EXIF....
 
Adey said:
Didnt someone say on another thread that if you link to an image on flickr, flickr will display a smaller version that strips the exif, but the original will keep it. I cant imagine most people intentionally stripping exif data, its seems like an added hastle to me, could be wrong though.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is true. The original size keeps the Exif, so if you link to the original JPG, all data will be in tact, link to any of the smaller sizes and it will be stripped. I only noticed this about a month or so ago.

Steve
 
So, with CS5 which of the folowing should I enable to ensure EXIF data remains?

No Metadata
All Metadata
Copyright
Copyright and Contact Info
All Except Camera Info
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top