How to erase ONLY the camera name in EXIF?

<p>Hi, i've seen around that some pro photographers leave all the exif metadata but the camera name/brand. I.E. you get to see "35mm" "f1.4" but no line of camera (brand).</p>

<p>My opinion is to hide a camera that's not recent for example a Canon 5D and i'd like to do it too!</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>google will find you more than a couple of exif editors. :)</p>

 

<p>It's strange that you would feel a need to do that.</p>

<p>Save for web, erase it all. That info is for you, not viewers.</p>

<p>This is the digital darkroom forum, I assume you have PhotoShop.</p>

<p>Jack: I'm curious too. Why would you want to hide Exif data? Alan</p>

<p>Hi everyone. To answer your questions, is something i've seen quite a lot in recent times in the professional photography market. My best guess and the reason why i would use it ;) is you have a not-so-new camera you don't want to let other people know. The other exif metadata is useful to keep for a number of reasons.<br /> For example i've got a Canon 5D (not mark II) and would like to keep that information for me, not the clients.<br /> @richard<br /> i don't think the "save for web" option is the best way to retain the quality you need for serious work. Even if very useful and quick!</p>

<p>Thank you!</p>

<p>Strikes me as a weird thing to want to do...I truly do not understand. Are you thinking that revealing the "state secret" that you don't have the latest camera will stop you getting work? What about if someone objects to you only having a 35/2 when a 35/1.4 is available? Clearly you are not good enough to own the 1.4 version, and so it goes on and on. I suggest you might need to bolster your own self confidence in your photography.</p>

<p>I agree with Robin. It's a sad fact that most professional photographers can't afford the caliber of gear that a serious amateur of financial means might take for granted. Cameras like the 1DsIII are somewhere up in the stratosphere, at least for me. I shoot unapologetically with a 5D classic (which I consider a superb camera), and I will probably be upgrading to the 5DII when the 5DIII comes out. What I offer clients/customers isn't fancy gear, but rather my experience, knowledge, and results. If they want someone with the fanciest of gear, they'll need to seek out another photographer. I don't think they would appreciate what I would have to offer anyway.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Why would you want to hide Exif data?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My answer in another thread:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00ZT8n?start=10</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I want a viewer to judge an image by its merit, or lack there of, without being influenced by how/when it is created.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Here's another thread about how EXIF data are misunderstood and misused:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00XA1B?start=0</p>

<p>I use this program:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.yafla.com/papers/purejpeg/filter_unnecessary_jpeg_info_such_as_exif.htm">http://www.yafla.com/papers/purejpeg/filter_unnecessary_jpeg_info_such_as_exif.htm</a></p>

<p>I have nothing to hide in my EXIF data. So why do I strip it? The smaller your files, the faster they download. Using this tool makes each jpeg 40k smaller. My average jpeg is slightly over 100k. I see no reason to bloat the size of the files I store on my website by 40% and decrease download time similarly.</p>

<p>If you're just wanting to hide the make of your camera, I'm not sure what that accomplishes. But if you're wanting to streamline your files, I think that's a great idea.</p>

<p>Eric</p>

<p>You are thinking too logically. Some clients, who know a little bit about cameras, but not so much about aesthetic considerations, will pick a photo shot on a Canon 5D II over a photo shot on a 5D just because they confuse quality of the photograph with pixel count. Remember that not long ago many clients insisted that photos be shot with 4x5 view cameras (or larger) and rejected aesthetically better photos shot on lowly 35mm film cameras.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>i don't think the "save for web" option is the best way to retain the quality you need for serious work. Even if very useful and quick!</em></p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Well, for 8-bit JPG it's as good as any "save to JPG" will ever get. What is your concern?<br>

Save For Web at a quality level of 80 or higher renders a SUBERB image file with little to no compromise other than than the obvious JPG 8-bit data format.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>You are thinking too logically. Some clients, who know a little bit about cameras, but not so much about aesthetic considerations, will pick a photo shot on a Canon 5D II over a photo shot on a 5D just because they confuse quality of the photograph with pixel count.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's people like that who buy fancy cameras (or often just high pixel count cameras, which is what they understand) and do their own photographic work, turning their nose up at any skill a pro photographer might bring to the table. That's not a potential client anyway.</p>

<p>In a world where communication is so easy, I find it a bit crazy to hide exif information. When I see a photo that I really like, I like to be able to see what camera and lens were used, or the shutter speed and aperture, because I am curious. I don't have any ill intentions in trying to duplicate what others are doing. I shoot what I want because I have certain subject matter that I enjoy shooting. The bottom line is that knowing someone's exif data is different than having that person's eye for composition, or understanding of how to create a certain effect in a photo using slow shutter speeds etc. For me, hiding exif information is for people who live in fear of others duplicating their work. I don't get it, although I do understand Eric's reasoning (to reduce file size for storage reasons). I thought we are here on Photo.net to share ideas and information...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>You are thinking too logically. Some clients, who know a little bit about cameras, but not so much about aesthetic considerations, will pick a photo shot on a Canon 5D II over a photo shot on a 5D just because they confuse quality of the photograph with pixel count. Remember that not long ago many clients insisted that photos be shot with 4x5 view cameras (or larger) and rejected aesthetically better photos shot on lowly 35mm film cameras.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Totally agree with Glenn. That's my point. I personally love the Canon 5D, and find it stellar with professional lenses. But i don't want it to be my Achilles' hell with some client who thinks the Mark II is the one the pros use just because his nephew at the school of videography has it.</p>

<p>I agree that in a perfect world images would speak for themeselves but c'mon.. honestly how many times are them the only factor?</p>

Where are you posting this serious work, where you can tell the difference between a 'save for web' 100% jpg versus

the 'save as' 12 jpg?

<p>I'll tell you why you need to strip off EXIF data in some circumstances. I photographed at a site that was officially off limits and posted it on flickr and it had tags and EXIF information attached. Who would care, its been abandoned for a hundred years?<br>

There are eyes watching all the time it seems. On Internet things can be found readily. I received this as a comment.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Filming in Off-Limits Areas is Against the Law<br />Filming a Model Without a Permit is in Violation of Director's Order <br /><br />Filming a Prop or Set Without a Permit is in Violation of Director's Order <br />If you Choose to Ignore these Laws and Regulations, you will be Apprehended and Either Ejected from the Park, Fined, or Prosecuted</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is in the USA. In some states they will arrest you for filming a police officer under the pretense that its "wiretapping". If you are in Syria, Egypt or some other hell hole you had better wipe the camera data before you release anything.<br>

I don't mind people seeing my camera setups but watch out.<br>

Big brother always watches.</p>

<p>The program to edit any or all EXIF data is Exiftool by Phil Harvey, at: <a href="http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/">http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/</a>. It's a little cumbersome but with practice it can be made to do anything.<br>

I use it to correct the non-CPU lens name recorded by my D700.</p>

 

<p>David, that's sobering! Wow!</p>

<p>David. Did you post GPS info as EXIF? Perhaps whoever contacted you simply recognized the place in the picture, in which case the EXIF was immaterial. They would have recognized it just from the image. If you take pics in a prohibited area then such a message may result whether there's EXIF data or not. Also the OP is not suggesting removing his name or contact details which might make the image anonymous and help prevent such messages. Probably the flickr viewer simply recognized the place and contacted you via your flickr account. I am not sure EXIF is relevant here.</p>

<p>Metadata is the relevant key. Anything either you or the camera attaches to the image you should be careful about. I don't mind my camera settings are logged. Some people do. I do attach GPS coordinates to pictures using and external program and I also tag photos in Adobe Bridge with lots of information such as where the shot was taken. Flickr will allow these tags to be immediately searched and in my case someone is monitoring what is posted with the name of the park I was shooting in.<br>

Some cameras now allow you to add your personal copywrite and other data direct to the recorded metadata. Another item that is usually in the EXIF is the camera serial number. So if your camera is stolen you can possibly find the thief on line. This is a two edged sword since the serial number can be associated with the camera owner even if that metadata is not explicitly present by finding other images that were posted by the same camera.<br>

I wish Adobe Bridge would allow you full control over metadata edits and not require you to have to use an external program. The one tool they should have - wipe metadata.</p>