Copyright

[PGBerrie]

Just looked at Corel Photopaint and Nero Photosnap Viewer - the EXIF information is viewable under File=>Document Properties and Tools=>File Information respectively. For my camera there are two fields "Artist" and "Copyright" which are not filled in - looks like they must be set up in the camera. It seems that not all cameras have these fields. The file is Read Only. For files that have been cropped and edited in Corel Photopaint, the EXIF file is empty - which I suppose proves the picture has been manupulated in some way.

In Windows Explorer you can right click on a photo and open the Properties dialog. Here you can enter the IPTC information Bill talked about. There is a Write Protection key which blanks out the field once you've pressed OK.

I imagine that when you are scanning in old photos, something similar will be provided by the scanning software - if not, then good old Microsoft.

Excuse me while I metadata all my railway photographs!

Peter

[PinzaC55]

Just looked at Corel Photopaint and Nero Photosnap Viewer - the EXIF information is viewable under File=>Document Properties and Tools=>File Information respectively. For my camera there are two fields "Artist" and "Copyright" which are not filled in - looks like they must be set up in the camera. It seems that not all cameras have these fields. The file is Read Only. For files that have been cropped and edited in Corel Photopaint, the EXIF file is empty - which I suppose proves the picture has been manupulated in some way.

In Windows Explorer you can right click on a photo and open the Properties dialog. Here you can enter the IPTC information Bill talked about. There is a Write Protection key which blanks out the field once you've pressed OK.

I imagine that when you are scanning in old photos, something similar will be provided by the scanning software - if not, then good old Microsoft.

Excuse me while I metadata all my railway photographs!

Peter

Yes at the rate I work should I Metadata only the 3,886 I have on Flickr or the other 2000+ I haven't done anything with yet?

I wonder which friend of the Tory party stands to make money out of this?

[Bill Bedford]

Thats OK for images taken by a digital camera but not so good for images taken on a 35mm SLR in the 1970's/80's.

Just about any image manipulation software can add this information to a scanned image. Presumably you could copy this info from the notes you took when the photos were taken.

[PinzaC55]

Thats OK for images taken by a digital camera but not so good for images taken on a 35mm SLR in the 1970's/80's.

Just about any image manipulation software can add this information to a scanned image. Presumably you could copy this info from the notes you took when the photos were taken.

It would/will be easier if it comes to that to simply delete my photo's. Why should I do extra work for no reward?

[Autocar Publicity]

It would/will be easier if it comes to that to simply delete my photo's. Why should I do extra work for no reward?

Usually, because there's a 'good', non-financial, reason. Otherwise, we would not have the voluntary sector we currently have, whether we're talking railway preservation, the Dogs Trust or Help the Aged.

I can see your PoV though and despite my comment above, think it's a fair point. At the risk of stating the obvious, the reason Intellectual Property law was introduced in the 19th century was to encourage people to be inventive and creative and allow 'society' and the economy to benefit from that, whilst giving the inventor/author legal protection and allowing them to benefit from their efforts. Without such protection, there is less incentive to make such efforts and we are all poorer for that.