I think the need for editing EXIF may spring from the propensity of some
image editors to remove EXIF data or for some cameras/software to place
EXIF data in unconventional places. Unfortunately, EXIF is not as
standard as we'd all like it to be.
Chuck Norcutt
On 8/13/2011 7:42 AM, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
> OK, that makes some sense. I must also admit that sometimes I have
> used the filter in LR to select all pics taken with a particular
> camera. But I cannot imagine that any camera fails to record that
> piece of info correctly, so I still do not see much need for EDITING
> exif. Although I suppose that when I add keywords in LR I am doing
> something similar.
>
> Cheers, Nathan
>
> Nathan Wajsman Alicante, Spain http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu http://www.nathanfoto.com PICTURE OF THE WEEK:
> http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws Blog:
> http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/
>
>
> YNWA
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2011, at 12:48 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>
>> I have used my EXIF data from a very large number of photographs
>> to determine how frequently I used a particular focal length. It's
>> why I have a 24-135mm Tamron as my walk-around lens and why I've
>> never purchased a 70-200 f/4 to replace or add to my 80-200 f/2.8
>> (which is too heavy to carry very far). But to be eligible for the
>> analysis the photos selected had to have been taken when the 80-200
>> was in the car and available for use had I wanted it.
>>
>> There was a time in my early OM days when I shot almost everything
>> at 200mm. It was my standard lens for some reason. These days I'm
>> much more likely to be at the wide end of the range.
>>
>> It seems to me that I have also analyzed shutter speed vs. focal
>> length to determine relative need for a tripod but I'm a bit fuzzy
>> on that one.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>
>> On 8/13/2011 1:20 AM, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
>>> But...why would I care if not everything is correct in exif?
>>> Frankly, the only thing I care about is the date and time so that
>>> the photos can be correctly sorted in Lightroom.
>>>
>>> Cheers, Nathan
>>>
>>> Nathan Wajsman Alicante, Spain http://www.frozenlight.eu
>>> http://www.greatpix.eu http://www.nathanfoto.com PICTURE OF THE
>>> WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws Blog:
>>> http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/
>>>
>>>
>>> YNWA
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 13, 2011, at 1:34 AM, usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is this it?
>>>>
>>>> http://freeweb.siol.net/hrastni3/foto/exif/exiftoolgui.htm
>>>>
>>>> Oh, this one looks OK too:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.moonsoftware.com/exifmixer.asp
>>>>
>>>> Oddly some chipped adapters have the FL etc show up in the in
>>>> the exif but not in Lightroom. TheOptix V shows up all the
>>>> time for mysterious reasons.
>>>>
>>>> Exif still is often wrong, but not for long, Mike --
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>>>> Archives:
>>>> http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/ Themed
>>>> Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> --
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>
>>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|