Please log in. To create a new account, enter the name and password you want to use.
If you supplied an email address when you signed up or added a email later, you can have your password reset.
This user name doesn't exist. If you want to create a new account, just verify your password and log in.
This user name exists. If you want to create a new account, please choose a different name.
Enter the current email address you have registered in your profile. You'll get an email containing your new password.
You have no email address in your profile, so you can't have your password reset.
Password reset. Check your email in a few minutes
That account does not exist.
The email address specified is not registered with this account.
Delivery to this email address has failed.
Checkmate said: This topic is a suggestion about stop stripping exif altogether without a good reason. I won't buy the bs md5 mismatch.
I'll admit I started with a shitty reason but at the time that it was keeping EXIF for my shitty reason vs stripping EXIF for what seemed to be no reason at all. I apologise if this offended you in some way.
To enumerate the reasons as they are now, in favour of removing EXIF: - Space - Privacy - Advertising (shameless plug)
In favour of keeping it (or a subset): - Rendering (ICC, orientation?) - Printing/quality (DPI)?
I'm highly dubious about the given reasons for stripping though. Are these real problems? Why weren't they brought up earlier?
I definitely don't buy space. I ran a test on a few thousand unstripped JPEGs I have and the jhead command used by Moebooru removes less than 1% of space. Do you see different savings?
Who thinks people are going to read EXIF and see their shameless plug? Isn't their name on the post a shameless plug already?
If "most of the time, the images are being cleaned and therefore, such EXIF data are also goner. Additionally, many scanner does not embed such data in the first place (unlike cameras)", which EXIF tags have privacy concerns?
Your tone and the fact that these weren't brought up before makes me feel like reasons are being made up out of anger because I offended you. If I'm wrong, I'm sorry.
jkdfahlkdhfjgakdhfg
To enumerate the reasons as they are now, in favour of removing EXIF:
- Space
- Privacy
- Advertising (shameless plug)
In favour of keeping it (or a subset):
- Rendering (ICC, orientation?)
- Printing/quality (DPI)?
I'm highly dubious about the given reasons for stripping though. Are these real problems? Why weren't they brought up earlier?
I definitely don't buy space. I ran a test on a few thousand unstripped JPEGs I have and the jhead command used by Moebooru removes less than 1% of space. Do you see different savings?
Who thinks people are going to read EXIF and see their shameless plug? Isn't their name on the post a shameless plug already?
If "most of the time, the images are being cleaned and therefore, such EXIF data are also goner. Additionally, many scanner does not embed such data in the first place (unlike cameras)", which EXIF tags have privacy concerns?
Your tone and the fact that these weren't brought up before makes me feel like reasons are being made up out of anger because I offended you. If I'm wrong, I'm sorry.