preserving EXIF when I link to my photos from a forum

xenonsupra

I often hotlink to my images from different photo forums.

I get a link by hitting the "share" button and copying and pasting.

But my exif data doesn't show up even though it does show up on smugmug.

am I missing something or is it just not possible to keep the EXIF intact? :dunno

rainforest1155

Hi,

The metadata is always stripped out of the display copies to prevent the display copies from getting twice as large or larger and therefore slowing the loading time down.
You can link to the EXIF info like that.

Sebastian

jfriend

rainforest1155 wrote:

Hi,

The metadata is always stripped out of the display copies to prevent the display copies from getting twice as large or larger and therefore slowing the loading time down.
You can link to the EXIF info like that.

Sebastian

Please stop propogating the myth that non-thumbnail display copies would be twice as large with a little metadata included. An appropriate amount of metadata could be included (EXIF and copyright) and only make non-thumbnail sizes a tiny bit larger (0.5% to 2% - depending upon which size image it was).

You can see the actual test data I measured where I compared an image with and without EXIF metadata here and found a 0.4% difference in size for an XL size image with and without EXIF metadata. The percentage would be slightly larger for a Large sized image, but it would still be less than 1% larger, not 100% larger.

This issue is not about the size of the image with a small amount of metadata. It's about when Smugmug decides to prioritize this and change the display copy generation code to do it.

ashishpandey

rainforest1155 wrote:

Hi,

The metadata is always stripped out of the display copies to prevent the display copies from getting twice as large or larger and therefore slowing the loading time down.
You can link to the EXIF info like that.

Sebastian

Stripping metadata to reduce display image size makes sense only when you are talking about all the possible metadata that the user may have embedded

On the contrary, looking at the approach you suggest about linking to EXIF info separately, it is quite laughable to see the amount of information we are talking about. If we stick to embedding the very basic EXIF (shutter, f-number, ISO, copyright and perhaps another field of two), your display copies won't be much larger. If anyone thinks this is not the case, then let's talk real numbers (just as John is doing) and see how much difference it makes

However, if the argument is because SM is not doing that currently, it is a different story altogether