Where Did my EXIF data go?

[Jason Dunn]

[I've done a bit of searching in this forum and can't seem to find this question having been asked before, although that surprises me so perhaps I didn't search using the same keywords and others. Regardless, here we go...]

The issue is that Smugmug seems to be stripping my images of EXIF/IPTC information when it generates the smaller sizes. I want to have the EXIF/IPTC embedded in the file so when someone downloads one of my images they can at least see who took it. I don't want to watermark my images - I'm not a professional and I don't mind people taking my images, but I do want to know that they can look at the file properties and see the URL of the person who took the image.

Let's take this image for instance:
http://photos.jasondunn.com/gallery/3688300#211056319-A-LB

If I download that image and right-click on it to check the properties (I'm using Vista), here's what I see:

http://www.jasondunn.com/images/jasondunn-noexif.gif
[zero EXIF/IPTC information, it's all been stripped - there's nothing left identifying this as my photo]

The original image is chock full of EXIF/IPTC data:
http://www.jasondunn.com/images/jasondunn-originalexif.gif (http://www.jasondunn.com/images/jasondunn-noexif.gif)

Isn't is possible to maintain EXIF/IPTC tags on resizing an image? I can do it locally so I'm sure Smugmug can do it on their servers.

So...am I missing something here?

[bwg]

[I've done a bit of searching in this forum and can't seem to find this question having been asked before, although that surprises me so perhaps I didn't search using the same keywords and others. Regardless, here we go...]

The issue is that Smugmug seems to be stripping my images of EXIF/IPTC information when it generates the smaller sizes. I want to have the EXIF/IPTC embedded in the file so when someone downloads one of my images they can at least see who took it. I don't want to watermark my images - I'm not a professional and I don't mind people taking my images, but I do want to know that they can look at the file properties and see the URL of the person who took the image.

Let's take this image for instance:
http://photos.jasondunn.com/gallery/3688300#211056319-A-LB

If I download that image and right-click on it to check the properties (I'm using Vista), here's what I see:

http://www.jasondunn.com/images/jasondunn-noexif.gif
[zero EXIF/IPTC information, it's all been stripped - there's nothing left identifying this as my photo]

The original image is chock full of EXIF/IPTC data:
http://www.jasondunn.com/images/jasondunn-originalexif.gif (http://www.jasondunn.com/images/jasondunn-noexif.gif)

Isn't is possible to maintain EXIF/IPTC tags on resizing an image? I can do it locally so I'm sure Smugmug can do it on their servers.

So...am I missing something here?We strip exif info on display sizes to save on file size. The logic is that people would rather have their images quicker (especially smaller file sizes; thumbs, small etc.) than have a bigger file that contains exif which only a very small percentage of people care about.

[Andy]

A useful link:

http://smugmug.jot.com/WikiHome/HowToSeeExif

[Jason Dunn]

We strip exif info on display sizes to save on file size. The logic is that people would rather have their images quicker (especially smaller file sizes; thumbs, small etc.) than have a bigger file that contains exif which only a very small percentage of people care about.
Interesting. Thanks for the explanation. How much file size are we talking about here? It's embedded text, so what, 2-3 KB on average? That seems like a drop in the bucket for a broadband user looking at 80+ KB images, so I don't really understand that explanation. :scratch Or am I way off on the file size increase with EXIF?

The "very small percentage of people" that care about EXIF would probably be the photographers, your customers, no? As a photographer, even a non-professional one, I want my photos to carry identifying information wherever they go. Yes, someone could manually strip it out of they wanted to, but most people would leave it. Watermarks are intrusive, and really only needed if you're a professional selling your photos (or an amateur who doesn't want to share his/her work without permission).

EXIF information being maintained is the middle ground between no information at all and watermarking images.

[Jason Dunn]

A useful link:
http://smugmug.jot.com/WikiHome/HowToSeeExif

Thanks Andy, but that's not what I'm talking about. My concern is that while I don't mind people taking images off my site (I'm using X2 Large sizes at the very minimum for most albums), I do want some record to exist in the file that I'm the one that took that image. Right now Smugmug is stripping that information from the file, and that's troubling to me - unless I'm way off base with the file size increase that the EXIF/IPTC data would create, it seems like a poor decision on Smugmug's part.

[Andy]

Thanks Andy, but that's not what I'm talking about. My concern is that while I don't mind people taking images off my site (I'm using X2 Large sizes at the very minimum for most albums), I do want some record to exist in the file that I'm the one that took that image. Right now Smugmug is stripping that information from the file, and that's troubling to me - unless I'm way off base with the file size increase that the EXIF/IPTC data would create, it seems like a poor decision on Smugmug's part.
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=664056#post664056