Smugmug is stripping Copytrights from files.

MarcinJankowski

Hello

I have a problem with smugmug. Basically it is stripping information attached to image as metadata. It took me long time to perfect a workflow that works for me:

• Starting with Sony *.ARW files
• Converting to DNG
• Adding comments and Title
• Geotaging
• Adding Creative Commons licence information
• Adding Lens information (work in progress - this is still removed when converting to JPG)
• Exporting as JPG

Sadly, after uploading to smugmug photos seems to have that lot of information removed. As example here is one of the pictures:
Original (JPG) version: http://www.jankowscy.org/DSC00518.jpg
Smugmug version: http://marcin-jankowski.smugmug.com/photos/541290240_9mxug-M.jpg

I use PhotoMe (free, but absolutely great software) to read metadata from files. You can download it here: http://www.photome.de

Following link shows the chosen elements of metadata that was in original file but is no longer available in smugmug version. http://marcin-jankowski.smugmug.com/photos/541297462_qSFem-X3.jpg

While removing GPS, comments etc from file is simply annoying, I strongly believe that removing Copyrights information (or Creative Commons licence) from file is not right.

Regards

Marcin Jankowski

Andy

Hi Marcin, we leave all your info in your Originals. Display copies have minimal metadata in order to have speedy delivery.

We're working on a method that would allow the inclusion of this data and still keep things speedy.

Stay tuned.

rhjf

MarcinJankowski wrote:

While removing GPS, comments etc from file is simply annoying, I strongly believe that removing Copyrights information (or Creative Commons licence) from file is not right.

I agree with you wholeheartedly on this. James Duncan Davidson wrote about this matter in relation to Flickr in January (and previously). It was at that point that I realized that the same thing is happening at SmugMug. I just hadn't got around to posting it on the forum yet (I know, it's now five months later, but I've had a lot on).

I hope this can be fixed, because it's one of those 'trust' things.

JohnnyJr

I agree as well. I set set all my metadata information in Adobe Bridge and it sould stay with the image when a user downloads an image from my website. Very important!

helfrez

No offense intended...
But did anyone actually read Martin's reply? All of the data is intact on the ORIGINALS...the resized version (s,m,l,xl..etc) all have some of the data removed. If you allow access to the "Original" size, all of the data would be available.

Personally, I don't have a problem with this, I can understand why it wouldn't make alot of sense to maintain full exif data on 7 version of the same file, it would be alot of waste bandwidth and space when you multiple it across millions of photos.

Check out your gallery and make sure the "Original" option is set for max size, all of your info will be there.

jfriend

helfrez wrote:

But did anyone actually read Martin's reply? All of the data is intact on the ORIGINALS...the resized version (s,m,l,xl..etc) all have some of the data removed. If you allow access to the "Original" size, all of the data would be available.

Personally, I don't have a problem with this, I can understand why it wouldn't make alot of sense to maintain full exif data on 7 version of the same file, it would be alot of waste bandwidth and space when you multiple it across millions of photos.

Check out your gallery and make sure the "Original" option is set for max size, all of your info will be there.

We've been through this several times before including taking actual measurements of the impact of keeping some metadata on display copies. Maintaining copyright info and a small number of EXIF fields is a fraction of a percent of the size of most of the display copies. It is very do-able technically and should be done and it sounds like Smugmug is working towards that.

At the very least, copyright fields should be maintained and many of us who do a lot of online postings would like some common EXIF fields (aperture, shutter speed, ISO, focal length, lens, camera) to be maintained too.

rhjf

helfrez wrote:

Check out your gallery and make sure the "Original" option is set for max size, all of your info will be there.

…if people download the Original size. But (as you acknowledge), all the other sizes haven't got that data. From a certain point of view, a photo is only as good as its metadata. And yet SmugMug, which positions itself as a premium online photo-management system, is not maintaining that metadata.

rynoshark

Excited to hear from Martin that Smugmug is finally including all Exif metadata in various resizings of each photo. The additional data size should be (relatively) small even if kept across several different resized copies. Thanks Smugmug!!!

MarcinJankowski

First I'm very happy to hear that sugmug is working on the issue.

The usability of data included in metadata is incomparable to amount of space it uses (as it is text based). I bandwith taken by one or two of my original files is enough to have metadata added to all other pictures and their sizes.

At this moment I would have to link the original sizes to any external webpages (to keep the metadata). Normally it would be enough to link medium or large. And they are much smaller than original.

Finally I'd preffer to have metadata included at the cost of fractions of seconds needed to download images. So maybe leave the chice to gallery owner. Metadata vs speed.

Regards
Marcin Jankowski


P.S. Please don't neglect xmp information as many photographers use Photoshop, Lightroom and other Adobe applications which embed xmp in JPGs

Andy

jfriend wrote:

At the very least, copyright fields should be maintained and many of us who do a lot of online postings would like some common EXIF fields (aperture, shutter speed, ISO, focal length, lens, camera) to be maintained too.

Thinking about this, too.

One issue is that some folks may not want the camera info. And so we've left it as a toggle in gallery settings now.

I dunno how granular our image processing can get (allow exif data for you, don't do it for the next guy's)... but I'm finding out!