Introducing EXIF Data

PanAm_DC10 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 1:26 am

Hi All,

We're currently introducing EXIF data as an option for photographers to display such data. It is optional and you can elect to tick a checkbox upon uploading as to whether you want to display the data or not. Irrespective the screeners will still see it during screening for double dates etc.

The data is displayed at the bottom of the photo and consists of the following;

Camera make and model
Exposure time
ISOSpeedratings
FocalLength
FNumber
DateTimeOriginal

Again it is optional as to whether you display this but it has been asked for by many for a long time and we finally have introduced it. Any feedback is welcome and we're still working on whether to add the lens as a data field as well.

We hope you find this to be helpful and take advantage of it and again it is optional so we're not making you display it if you don't want too. You can see how the data is displayed in the linked shot below;

https://www.airliners.net/photo/British- ... ER/4505757

We hope you enjoy it

Thanks and regards

Paul

Moose135 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:30 am

Thanks! This has been something that comes up all the time, and I'm glad the staff was able to put this in place.

Joshu · Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:42 am

This is huge and something that will be a great teaching tool for many photographers. A huge shout out goes to Matt who really made all of this happen! This helps make the story of the photo so much more interesting!

miamivice · Wed Aug 09, 2017 6:53 am

Thank you I think it is a very useful and interesting tool especially for all the people (lime me :mrgreen:

) who want to learn more about photography!
Just a question, will this tool/function be available only for new added shots?

Thanks!

scbriml · Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:57 am

Hi Paul, I think this is a great option for the photographers.

I have a couple of questions -

1) Can this option be turned on for all photos already uploaded by a photographer?

2) Can the photo date be 'auto-filled' from the image EXIF data on the upload page? This is used by another site and makes uploading there a simpler process.

310815 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:34 am

Personally not an issue for me as I won't use this feature, but just from a visual point of view it does make the caption field very large. Would look nicer if the information would be displayed directly behind the colons. That would save half the space actually. And as the date is already in the "Loaction date" field I would leave that Information out.

scbriml wrote:

2) Can the photo date be 'auto-filled' from the image EXIF data on the upload page? This is used by another site and makes uploading there a simpler process.

That would be a huge improvement for me as well, otherwise I don't care about EXIF too much, there are rather few shots where it's interesting IMO.
Therefore I do appreciate that upon the upload-page you do have to select to Display EXIF and that it isn't automatically preselected.

airkas1 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:31 am

miamivice wrote:
Just a question, will this tool/function be available only for new added shots?

At the moment only for photos uploaded as of last night. So photos in the queue that were uploaded before that will not have it either.

scbriml wrote:
1) Can this option be turned on for all photos already uploaded by a photographer?

I'm not sure and will ask the developer. Will report back when I have an answer.

scbriml wrote:
2) Can the photo date be 'auto-filled' from the image EXIF data on the upload page? This is used by another site and makes uploading there a simpler process.

This is our aim, yes.

airkas1 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 2:44 pm

JKPhotos wrote:
but just from a visual point of view it does make the caption field very large. Would look nicer if the information would be displayed directly behind the colons. That would save half the space actually. And as the date is already in the "Loaction date" field I would leave that Information out.

The layout has already been edited and it looks much nicer now in my opinion.

Catalin81 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 4:43 pm

Hello. I've also seen this option now when I uploaded a picture. What I do not like is that if all the exif data of the images are read, why do not you set the date to automatically set exif, or can not? On the German Planespotters site, this is possible, image and registration, and with a click all the information appears, with the execution when an image is not on the site.

airkas1 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 5:14 pm

Catalin81 wrote:
Hello. I've also seen this option now when I uploaded a picture. What I do not like is that if all the exif data of the images are read, why do not you set the date to automatically set exif, or can not? On the German Planespotters site, this is possible, image and registration, and with a click all the information appears, with the execution when an image is not on the site.

airkas1 wrote:
scbriml wrote:
2) Can the photo date be 'auto-filled' from the image EXIF data on the upload page? This is used by another site and makes uploading there a simpler process.

This is our aim, yes.

airkas1 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 5:24 pm

Any chance of having the box "ticked" in stead of "unticked" as a default setting? Ideally this would be something each photographer can adjust for himself as some kind of preference on their profile settings page.

There are reasons why one would not want to include the EXIF, especially if a it more 'secrecy' is involved in the making of the photo. But perhaps for other photos, the photographer does want to enable the showing of the EXIF. This would be possible under the current conditions, but not if there is only 1 option (on or off). And if the default is 'on', then some photographers (who are not looking properly) might not notice and have the EXIF displayed against their will. So right now, the enabling of the EXIF has to be a conscious choice.

*In the photo conrer, when I look at my screening queue photos, either on the "edit" or "detail" pages, I can't see whether or not the EXIF data will be displayed when accepted (i.e. to check whether or not I ticked the box while uploading).

I will ask the developer if this is possible.

310815 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 5:25 pm

airkas1 wrote:
JKPhotos wrote:
but just from a visual point of view it does make the caption field very large. Would look nicer if the information would be displayed directly behind the colons. That would save half the space actually. And as the date is already in the "Loaction date" field I would leave that Information out.

The layout has already been edited and it looks much nicer now in my opinion.

Fully agree, Kas. My post concering the layout is obsolete now :-)

airkas1 wrote:
Any chance of having the box "ticked" in stead of "unticked" as a default setting? Ideally this would be something each photographer can adjust for himself as some kind of preference on their profile settings page.

There are reasons why one would not want to include the EXIF, especially if a it more 'secrecy' is involved in the making of the photo. But perhaps for other photos, the photographer does want to enable the showing of the EXIF. This would be possible under the current conditions, but not if there is only 1 option (on or off). And if the default is 'on', then some photographers (who are not looking properly) might not notice and have the EXIF displayed against their will. So right now, the enabling of the EXIF has to be a conscious choice..

You said it very well, again couldn't agree more. I don't want to share this info due to different reasons, and again I don't want to need to check everytime if I ticked the box or not, so it is very good as it is with the Default being an unticked box.

airkas1 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 5:30 pm

And just to have mentioned it; a better name for the values and proper displaying of the values is still in the works.
Example: FNumber: 71/10 --> Aperture: 7.1 (or similar)

airkas1 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 5:33 pm

JKPhotos wrote:
I don't want to share this info due to different reasons

Because you don't want anyone to know you're a lousy photographer? :biggrin:

Catalin81 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 6:10 pm

airkas1 wrote:
And just to have mentioned it; a better name for the values and proper displaying of the values is still in the works.
Example: FNumber: 71/10 --> Aperture: 7.1 (or similar)

I prefer F8 and aperture 200 mm, not 2000/10, and possibly appear in the same aliases not under it, as it already occupies too much space.
Ex : Camera setting: Canon EOS 40D, 1/320s, f/8.0 at 55mm ISO 200

Catalin81 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 6:12 pm

airkas1 wrote:
JKPhotos wrote:
I don't want to share this info due to different reasons

Because you don't want anyone to know you're a lousy photographer?

I do not understand why many prefer to hide this information, namely what device it uses, or what settings. What do you gain if you do not know the others what equipment you use?

dutchspotter1 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:29 pm

airkas1 wrote:
There are reasons why one would not want to include the EXIF, especially if a it more 'secrecy' is involved in the making of the photo. But perhaps for other photos, the photographer does want to enable the showing of the EXIF. This would be possible under the current conditions, but not if there is only 1 option (on or off). And if the default is 'on', then some photographers (who are not looking properly) might not notice and have the EXIF displayed against their will. So right now, the enabling of the EXIF has to be a conscious choice.

I get that point, which is why I included the second sentence: Ideally this would be something each photographer can adjust for himself as some kind of preference on their profile settings page.
For photographers who want to display the EXIF data I can imagine it becoming quite a nuisance when you have to manually tick the box every time, especially when uploading a batch of 30-40 photos.

airkas1 · Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:49 pm

OPINIONS NEEDED !

---

Hi all,

I'm posting this on behalf of the developer and his exact words are quoted. Please let us know if you would utilize option 1 and/or 2. Both options is also possible.
Of course when choosing #1, your previously accepted photos need to have the EXIF embedded, otherwise it would be quite useless (or you would have to reupload all your photos since the site relaunch). I for example have only had the EXIF embedded for the last handful of photos (I had a setting wrong in PS). Thus the feature would be of little use to me.

In the forum, can you gauge the interest from photographers in the following two features:

1) A "batch" option to extract all EXIF data from a photographer's already accepted photos. This would put all their photos in a queue to have the data extracted and display would be switched to YES for ALL photos, no exceptions. This will obviously be much easier than manually going through individual photos in the case of hundreds accepted over the past year.

In evaluating whether or not #1 would be a useful feature, we should be sure that photographers are aware that this would only apply to photos uploaded since the new site launched. Older photos appear to have been stripped of EXIF data after initial upload (and really, really old photos obviously will not have EXIF data if they were scanned).

2) A per photo option in Photo Corner that can be managed by the photographer, much like changing a watermark.

I think #2 makes sense and is absolutely needed. The batch option is actually more effort so I'd like to make sure it's something that a significant number of photographers would actually utilize (especially give that it would only really apply to photos from the last year and a half or less).

scbriml · Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:48 pm

[quote="airkas1"][/quote]

Given the comment that EXIF has been stripped from all photos uploaded prior to the system upgrade, option 1 becomes a lot less interesting for me.

Option 2 absolutely required.

Personally, I agree with the suggestion that the photographer should be able to set "EXIF On" or "EXIF Off" as a default for all future uploads, rather than have to make a selection for each upload.

G-CIVP · Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:55 pm

Don't make it optional. It enhances the validity and transparency over the authenticity of the uploaded image.

dutchspotter1 · Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:51 am

I'd like option 1 and 2. Both are valuable features although option 1 would be of slightly lower priority taking into account that it only applies for photos uploaded in the past 1-1.5 years. I'd give more priority to the suggestion that the photographer should be able to set "EXIF On" or "EXIF Off" as a default for all future uploads.

scbriml · Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:18 am

G-CIVP wrote:
Don't make it optional. It enhances the validity and transparency over the authenticity of the uploaded image.

I can live with that, but apparently, it's a big issue for some 'secret squirrel' photographers out there.

miamivice · Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:24 am

For me all the two options are ok.

HarryLi · Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:39 pm

Such a useful function for photographers ! Many spotters who are not the locals they can know some information about it like Lens. Love it ! !

airkas1 · Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:09 pm

Harry, as a regular forum user, could you also please indicate whether you want option 1 (keeping in mind that it can only be done for photos that were accepted after the site relaunch) and option 2?

WingsFan · Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:31 pm

It is a terrific new addition. Would there be a corresponding photo search function that goes with it? Even cross-data feature that connects these new fields would be very useful.

airkas1 · Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:43 pm

WingsFan wrote:
It is a terrific new addition. Would there be a corresponding photo search function that goes with it? Even cross-data feature that connects these new fields would be very useful.

Glad to hear you like it.

Could you also please comment on option 1 and 2? We would like as much feedback as possible.

HarryLi · Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:19 pm

airkas1 wrote:
Harry, as a regular forum user, could you also please indicate whether you want option 1 (keeping in mind that it can only be done for photos that were accepted after the site relaunch) and option 2?

Hello Kas,
So sorry that i forgot to reply my opinion here.

Well, from my perspective i prefer the option 2 instead of the option 1 :bouncy:

And the option 2 also should be needed. I am not so interested in the first option. But EXIF is very necessary for us to know as i said before we can know some information about spotting location from it like what lens is suitable there. But i don't think it is necessary to extract old photos' info which have already accepted . And some photographers don't want to show for whatever reasons i think.

Thus, Option 2 is my choice.

Cheers,
Harry

WingsFan · Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:53 pm

airkas1 wrote:
WingsFan wrote:
It is a terrific new addition. Would there be a corresponding photo search function that goes with it? Even cross-data feature that connects these new fields would be very useful.

Glad to hear you like it.

Could you also please comment on option 1 and 2? We would like as much feedback as possible.

I would say option 2 is a must. I only have a handful of uploads so it is much easy for me to enable/disable individually. I can imagine photogs with a large portfolio would really find option 1 useful.
All things considered, I say we need both.

Also, since 'model' field for the camera typically reads like 'Canon EOS 50D', why bother with 'Make' field conveying very similar info ? If the model is 'Canon EOS 50D' its obvious that the make is Canon.
I would much rather see lens specifics along with camera details....and a search feature to go with it.

airkas1 · Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:02 pm

Thanks for all the opinions so far!
@all, if you are a photographer and happen to read this thrad, please let us know your thoughts as well if you haven't already done so.

Regarding Make/Model redundancy:
I raised that point in the crew E-mail chain as well, but can't find what was said about it anymore.

Regarding the lens EXIF:

For some reason, LensModel tags are not being extracted from photos with the function I am using. Not 100% sure why, but might have to do with the type of EXIF tag it is. I'll look into this but I wanted to get this live rather than wait so for now LensModel will not show up in the EXIF list.

Miguel1982 · Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:00 pm

Option 2 for me as well. Not interested in using precious develoment effort in a function that will be used once by each photographer (interested in having EXIF displayed) at most.

airkas1 · Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:14 pm

Miguel1982 wrote:
Option 2 for me as well. Not interested in using precious develoment effort in a function that will be used once by each photographer (interested in having EXIF displayed) at most.

Nicely said and considering all facts this reflects my opinion as well.

xxxpan · Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:44 pm

I would say option 2 is a must, and option 1 is nice to have (if not too expensive to get it done, having said that, being a developer myself I can imagine how this will turn out...)

Also as some photographers have already pointed out, a default 'on/off' option will be very useful. Otherwise this might just end up the same as the watermarks option for me - I have never really bothered to set it every time..

XP

kann123air · Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:23 am

Option 2 is certainly better. Gives the photographer more control and decreases the amount of time the developers have to spend on it.

It's important to consider the main reason why many of us want EXIF data to be visible when making this decision. I don't really care about seeing a sunny side-on's data; rather, I'd be more interested in studying such information from creative/low light shots. If option 1 were to be implemented, we'd have an 'all-or-none' choice, and I imagine some photographers who have real expertise in such techniques might be hesitant to share all of their ideas with the rest of us. With the ability to share data from some shots and not from others, such creative photographers have more control regarding what techniques they want to reveal, making them more likely to share some examples of their work. This benefits us all.

Amrit

airkas1 · Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:33 am

Amrit, but would you use option 1 as well or is it not something you would be interested in?

@all, please note that it's not about choosing between the options. Both are diferent and we are polling whether people would use option 1 and 2. Keeping in mind that option 1 can only be done for photos accepted since June last year.

Miguel1982 · Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:09 am

Kas, if I understood it correctly, BOTH options only apply for shots accepted after the reengineering of the site, as previous shots were stripped of all EXIF data on upload. O course one can always re-upload older shots and have the EXIF processed there...

airkas1 · Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:18 am

Yes, but from what I understand option 1 refers to photos that have already been accepted (past photos) and option 2 refers to future uploads. So it's not a choice between the 2 options, but rather a 'would you use this feature/do you think it's needed" for both options.

Miguel1982 wrote:
O course one can always re-upload older shots and have the EXIF processed there...

I was wondering about this as well, but haven't tested it yet. Will do that later.

Miguel1982 · Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:30 am

Ah, I see. I was only thinking about photos that were already in the database. I'm still voting for option 2

310815 · Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:14 am

kann123air wrote:
It's important to consider the main reason why many of us want EXIF data to be visible when making this decision. I don't really care about seeing a sunny side-on's data; rather, I'd be more interested in studying such information from creative/low light shots.

Amrit

Very well said Amrit. That's why I really don't get why I get bashed when (certainly don't mean your post Kas, don't worry :-)

) saying that I don't want to share my settings. I only shoot sunny shots, there is honestly nothing to learn from that.
I totally agree that there are some shots where it is really interesting though.

Why everybody not wanting to display is supposed to be a secret squirrel or why that is supposed to be a sign of lacking authenticity for anyones pictures is beyond my imagination and not very respectful. I wouldn't judge anyone I don't know.

Otherwise I'll stay out.

310815 · Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:28 am

airkas1 wrote:

Miguel1982 wrote:
O course one can always re-upload older shots and have the EXIF processed there...

I was wondering about this as well, but haven't tested it yet. Will do that later.

I reuploaded a shot yesterday (as you might have noticed - or not :-)

) and any option to add/ edit info or data like EXIF wasn't available.

airkas1 · Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:51 am

JKPhotos wrote:
I reuploaded a shot yesterday (as you might have noticed - or not ) and any option to add/ edit info or data like EXIF wasn't available.

I did notice

And after I posted that, I realized that the checkbox on the upload page is the key at the moment. So indeed, reuploads aren't a workaround.
As for sharing the EXIF info, everyone should do what he/she wants. Which is why sharing it will be made optional.

spompert · Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:22 am

For me option 2 looks better. I already gave information about exif-data in some of my shots in the remarks-area. I have a lot of normal sunny shots where the exif-data is not interesting at all. And I would say it`s not really fare if all the exif-data comes available to everyone at once. I think I speak for other photographers as well who don`t read this forum and can not choose. Or is option 1 only for the photographers who want this? Either way I would not choose option 1 I think. Greets Stefan

airkas1 · Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:10 am

Thanks for replying Stefan.

spompert wrote:
Or is option 1 only for the photographers who want this?

- There is a thought of making a function with a button (this would be available to all photographers).
- Pressing the button would enable a photographer to have the EXIF shown for his/her photos, but only the photos that have been uploaded since the site relaunch (June 2016).
- Making such a function requires a significant amount of effort, so we are polling whether people would actually use this.
- This is what option 1 is.
- That's why we need user opinions about it, to determine whether it would be worth the effort.

It's highly likely that option 2 will be implemented for sure, as pretty much everyone (incl. developer) acknowledges the need for such a feature. Perhaps we should talk about feature 1 and feature 2, instead of option 1 and option 2.

WingsFan · Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:35 pm

JKPhotos wrote:
I only shoot sunny shots, there is honestly nothing to learn from that.

Don't be too sure about that. EXIF from normal sunny shots that might seem too ordinary is also very useful to many. New photogs might get an idea about size of lens needed for their favorite airport or an unknown location they might be visiting. Many new people might try to duplicate photographs as a learning process using the settings. EXIFs play an important part in buying new gear and scouting new locations.

kann123air · Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:36 pm

airkas1 wrote:
Amrit, but would you use option 1 as well or is it not something you would be interested in?

Yes, I would use it. I'm an open book.

Amrit

LGM · Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:10 am

scbriml wrote:
2) Can the photo date be 'auto-filled' from the image EXIF data on the upload page? This is used by another site and makes uploading there a simpler process.

It will be nice!

kann123air · Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:51 am

LGM wrote:
scbriml wrote:
2) Can the photo date be 'auto-filled' from the image EXIF data on the upload page? This is used by another site and makes uploading there a simpler process.

It will be nice!

I don't know if I'm on board with this. I travel for spotting quite a bit and would hate to keep updating the date and time settings on my camera. Let's make this an optional feature that can be enabled by the photographer if desired.

Amrit

Miguel1982 · Sat Aug 12, 2017 12:23 pm

The idea is to have the date dropdowns pre-filled, but you can still change them if the date is wrong. I think in 95% of the shots, the date in the Exif matches the date it was shot.

Cheers,
M

scbriml · Sun Aug 13, 2017 3:43 pm

kann123air wrote:
I don't know if I'm on board with this. I travel for spotting quite a bit and would hate to keep updating the date and time settings on my camera.

I travel extensively as well and I find it causes me more confusion if I don't keep my camera date & time correct. It's not as though changing it takes more than a few seconds.

I actually have "Set camera time" as an item on my spotting trip checklist. But then, I am a geek! :geek:

kann123air · Sun Aug 13, 2017 5:41 pm

scbriml wrote:
kann123air wrote:
I don't know if I'm on board with this. I travel for spotting quite a bit and would hate to keep updating the date and time settings on my camera.

I travel extensively as well and I find it causes me more confusion if I don't keep my camera date & time correct. It's not as though changing it takes more than a few seconds.

I actually have "Set camera time" as an item on my spotting trip checklist. But then, I am a geek!

Fair enough. I'll probably do it next time.

Amrit

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net