The Big Lebowski Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 As many people are aware, when you take a picture with a digital camera information about the picture settings and the camera used are stored as part of the picture. Basically, if you register your camera with the manufacturer, then use the camera to take yard flicks or such and then publish them on a website then authorities can find out exactly who you are from the picture easily enough. Has anyone here found a program that can remove this info from a batch of flicks easily? At the moment it involes cut and paste into a new image in photoshop to remove it. A pain in the ass and time consuming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kr430n5_666 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 hellooo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClueTwo Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Sucks to be you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackson Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I havent registered my camera. /home free Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trackstand Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 _Interesting_ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Lebowski Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 Well registering it is not the only problem. It links all your flicks to the same camera regardless. I have a lot of yard shots of stuff, proper trains not freights, and to be caught with them means I have no way to explain what I was doing in the yard at that time traking those flicks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermdog Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Don't register..and remember that the camera isn't yours Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnomeToys Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Where did you get this information? I've looked through EXIFs for all three of the digicams I owned just now and see no unique identifying information in any of them, just camera make & model. Sometimes even that is vague. Do you have any proof that this is actually being done or is this one of those magical "I heard this from a friend of a friend" crackpot urban legends? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Producto Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Originally posted by The Big Lebowski@Jan 4 2005, 06:48 PM and to be caught with them means I have no way to explain what I was doing in the yard at that time traking those flicks. Quoted post "wow...how the hell did those get on here?" :naughty: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackson Posted January 5, 2005 Share Posted January 5, 2005 haha worst explaination ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_Tesseract Posted January 5, 2005 Share Posted January 5, 2005 I'm not sure how big of a threat the exif tags are to be honest but i gave it some tests and this is how you remove them. I used IrfanView which btw is the best free image viewer if you dont wanna be using photoshop to view your flicks, make a slideshow etc. Anyway, Save the flick as a tiff> Open tiff, resave as a jpg> Exif info erased as they get lost once converted to tiff. (For this option, using a photoshop action to automate the process makes this really fast and effortless) Thats for sure one way, now, if you use irfanview when you open a jpg and try to save it with a new name you have a small window with save options were you set the compression etc. Among the options theres this little box that sais 'keep original exif tag' leave that unticked and your new copy will be exif free. Thats all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnomeToys Posted January 5, 2005 Share Posted January 5, 2005 You're going to lose quality by converting going JPG -> TIFF -> JPG but when you're this paranoid I guess you don't care. The file still has a date on it, so you'd better figure out a way to erase that too. Also, remnants of it that can be retrieved by forensic scientists will remain on your hard drive and memory card, so you better erase those at least 20 times each with bit shifted information. Also, you don't know where the information is stored on your hard drive so better erase the whole thing 20 times as soon as you read this message. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_Tesseract Posted January 5, 2005 Share Posted January 5, 2005 jpg to tiff is losless if you dont use compression on the tiff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnomeToys Posted January 5, 2005 Share Posted January 5, 2005 TIFF->JPEG will attempt to re-encode the JPEG artifacts present in the lossless TIFF back into JPEG gradient blocks, probably making them stand out more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_Tesseract Posted January 5, 2005 Share Posted January 5, 2005 hmm, could be but if you keep the highest quality values in all conversion it shouldnt be anything visible...this thread just got hysterical head to toes, haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRON KING Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 taking pics of graff aint illegal. they got shit on you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Lebowski Posted January 6, 2005 Author Share Posted January 6, 2005 Taking pictures ain't illegal you're right there. Carrying paint in the boot of your car is legal too but that didn't stop some guys in the Uk going to prison for trains they hadn't even painted yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Lebowski Posted January 6, 2005 Author Share Posted January 6, 2005 Originally posted by GnomeToys@Jan 4 2005, 07:50 PM Where did you get this information? I've looked through EXIFs for all three of the digicams I owned just now and see no unique identifying information in any of them, just camera make & model. Sometimes even that is vague. Do you have any proof that this is actually being done or is this one of those magical "I heard this from a friend of a friend" crackpot urban legends? Quoted post When I view my exif information in one of those exif information programs it does give the body number of my Canon 300D and it does the same for my 1D MkII. I've no proof that anyone has been charged this way but I don't want to be the first, it's a pretty simple way of tracking pictures to a camera. I'm sure it would be a good way for cops to find dumb paedo's spreading their flicks on the net. I'll take a screen shot of the info tomorrow, don't have the program on this PC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnomeToys Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 edit: So for some reason canon stuck this in their professional SLRs, but Sigma didn't, Nikon didn't, and Sony didn't (in their prosumer cams). Well, I don't know what to tell you, go shoot your train pictures with an old piece of crap point and shoot if you're that worried about it. None of the cameras I've ever worked with have done this, so you're a special case, but I'm sure if you can afford ~$5,000.00 worth of professional DSLRs and the glass to go with them you won't have a problem bailing yourself out of the tiny jail fines you get in or just buying a cheaper camera to bench with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnomeToys Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 Here are EXIFs from my various cams. ImageDescription - Make - NIKON Model - E775 Orientation - Top left XResolution - 300 YResolution - 300 ResolutionUnit - Inch Software - E775v1.3u DateTime - 2002:03:07 23:14:54 YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited ExifOffset - 284 ExposureTime - 1/119.4 seconds FNumber - 4.90 ExposureProgram - Normal program ISOSpeedRatings - 200 ExifVersion - 0210 DateTimeOriginal - 2002:03:07 23:14:54 DateTimeDigitized - 2002:03:07 23:14:54 ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr CompressedBitsPerPixel - 2 (bits/pixel) ExposureBiasValue - 0.00 MaxApertureValue - F 3.36 MeteringMode - Multi-segment LightSource - Auto Flash - Fired FocalLength - 17.40 mm UserComment - FlashPixVersion - 0100 ColorSpace - sRGB ExifImageWidth - 1600 ExifImageHeight - 1200 InteroperabilityOffset - 886 FileSource - DSC - Digital still camera SceneType - A directly photographed image Maker Note (Vendor): - Data version - 1 (256) ISO Setting - 0 Color Mode - COLOR Image Quality - NORMAL White Balance - AUTO Image Sharpening - AUTO Focus Mode - AF-C Flash Setting - RED-EYE Unknown - 8.83 ISO Selection - AUTO Image Adjustment - NORMAL Auxiliary Lens - OFF Manual Focus Distance - 0.00/0.00 Digital Zoom - 1.00 x AF Focus Position - Center Scene Mode - PARTY/INDOOR File: DSC01413.JPG ImageDescription - Make - SONY Model - CYBERSHOT Orientation - Top left XResolution - 72 YResolution - 72 ResolutionUnit - Inch DateTime - 2003:01:25 18:10:25 YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited ExifOffset - 218 ExposureTime - 1/60 seconds FNumber - 2.00 ExposureProgram - Normal program ISOSpeedRatings - 100 ExifVersion - 0210 DateTimeOriginal - 2003:01:25 18:10:25 DateTimeDigitized - 2003:01:25 18:10:25 ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr CompressedBitsPerPixel - 2 (bits/pixel) ExposureBiasValue - 0.00 MaxApertureValue - F 2.04 MeteringMode - Multi-segment LightSource - Auto Flash - Not fired FocalLength - 9.70 mm FlashPixVersion - 0100 ColorSpace - sRGB ExifImageWidth - 2560 ExifImageHeight - 1920 InteroperabilityOffset - 642 FileSource - DSC - Digital still camera SceneType - A directly photographed image Maker Note (Vendor): - fall1.jpg Make - SIGMA Model - SIGMA SD9 Orientation - Top left XResolution - 180 YResolution - 180 ResolutionUnit - Inch Software - Adobe Photoshop 7.0 DateTime - 2004:10:11 15:12:45 YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited ExifOffset - 208 ExposureTime - 1/30 seconds FNumber - 4.50 ExposureProgram - Normal program ISOSpeedRatings - 100 ExifVersion - 0220 DateTimeOriginal - 2004:10:09 17:30:58 DateTimeDigitized - 2004:10:11 15:07:56 ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr ExposureBiasValue - 0.00 MaxApertureValue - F 4.44 MeteringMode - Multi-segment Flash - Not fired FocalLength - 62 mm FlashPixVersion - 0100 ColorSpace - sRGB ExifImageWidth - 500 ExifImageHeight - 815 SensingMethod - One-chip color area sensor FileSource - DSC - Digital still camera CustomRendered - Custom process ExposureMode - Auto WhiteBalance - Manual FocalLengthIn35mmFilm - 105 mm SceneCaptureType - Standard Nothing. Get a different camera and don't worry about it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Lebowski Posted January 7, 2005 Author Share Posted January 7, 2005 I'm changing the firmware for the 300D to the one used on the 20D, hopefullt this will erase the body number problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heavyLox Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 would not also jsut changing the date in the camera help as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deine Mudder Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 (edited) Does somebody know of a simple / lightweight / free EXIF removal tool that allows for quick ricght click > strip EXIF for windows? Thanks. Edited August 3, 2019 by Deine Mudder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Man Banned Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 @misteravencan correct me if I'm wrong but the "new" Oontz strips exif data from your pix before you post them, another good reason to keep it Oontz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deine Mudder Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 test Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deine Mudder Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 1 hour ago, One Man Banned said: Oontz strips exif data from your pix ..hmm, looks like it does! Even strips the "creator tool" entry, which the former program I used apparently wasn't capable of. @misteraven - good work, thanks - still could you recommend a (win7) desktop app that does this as well? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~KRYLON2~ Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 that's awesome!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misteraven Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 On 8/3/2019 at 5:47 AM, Deine Mudder said: ..hmm, looks like it does! Even strips the "creator tool" entry, which the former program I used apparently wasn't capable of. @misteraven - good work, thanks - still could you recommend a (win7) desktop app that does this as well? Sorry, not a windows guy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misteraven Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 On 8/3/2019 at 4:16 AM, One Man Banned said: @misteravencan correct me if I'm wrong but the "new" Oontz strips exif data from your pix before you post them, another good reason to keep it Oontz. Yes, it strips virtually all exif data. Exception is photo orientation and I believe it might contain non specific data about the type of device or OS. Basically I left the bare minimum needed to have shots post in the proper orientation here on the forum, which is a little challenging since mobile devices handle that differently than digital cameras. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pissdrunkwhat?! Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 @misteravenwhich is especially important in this subject matter and current era. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.