Camera not in preferences menu, and no EXIF

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

07/07/2004 11:43:53 PM · #1

So, as I posted elsewhere, I just bought a "Dakota Digital" one-time-use digital camera (sold through Ritz Camera), but have made a cable and obtained the software to transfer images off of the camera at my own leisure. As such, it's now fully useful as a very simple point 'n shoot digital camera.

My dilemma is as follows:

a) The camera does not appear in the selection menu in the preferences, and as such, I can't add it as a camera in my profile.

b) The camera does not save any EXIF data to the file.

Is there any way that I can use this camera to enter challenges?

faidoi

Pentax K10D

07/07/2004 11:45:29 PM · #2

I believe that you return it to Ritz for processing. Not sure if you get prints and a cd.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

07/07/2004 11:50:51 PM · #3

No, no...

Let me re-state... I have a way to get images off the camera without sending it back to Ritz. As such, I'll be using it as an ultra-cheap carry-everywhere camera.

Question is, can I submit my shots to challenges without EXIF?

/Andrew

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

07/07/2004 11:53:12 PM · #4

simply put, yes.

BUT, if for any reason proof is requested, please know that failure to produce EXIF may result in disqualification.

(FWIW -- the issue of no EXIF has been discussed in SC before, and we are still trying to come up with a solution. We really don't want to exclude cameras without EXIF)>

faidoi

Pentax K10D

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

07/07/2004 11:54:01 PM · #5

Originally posted by Kha0S:

When you win or a DQ is requested you need to send original with EXIF info included.

Message edited by author 2004-07-07 23:54:42.

graphicfunk

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

07/07/2004 11:54:51 PM · #6

My strong feeling is that you should not use it because if your image is called into question you will lack the evidence to substantiate the shot. Look at what just took place: the winner was disqualified.

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

07/07/2004 11:56:23 PM · #7

Originally posted by graphicfunk:

That shot had EXIF. Unfortunately, it showed an incorrect date.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

07/08/2004 12:11:18 AM · #8

Originally posted by karmat:

simply put, yes.
BUT, if for any reason proof is requested, please know that failure to produce EXIF may result in disqualification.

(FWIW -- the issue of no EXIF has been discussed in SC before, and we are still trying to come up with a solution. We really don't want to exclude cameras without EXIF)>

Well, if this is the spirit of the rule, then I will not fear using the camera for challenge entries, and if I'm so lucky as to ribbon, well ... I'll deal with that then. :D

As for adding it to my profile... is there a way to add a camera that doesn't exist in the current menus?

Thanks!

/Andrew

pfellner

Nikon D70

07/08/2004 12:16:40 AM · #9

Originally posted by graphicfunk:

I think his point was that if you can't prove anything, you can't win anything and what's the point? At this time anyway, without EXIF info, even if your picture wins the vote you will be disqualified. You can not win. It's your call but if you're a "ribbon hunter" you'll need to get a camera that saves the data.

07/08/2004 12:20:02 AM · #10

[quote=karmat] please know that failure to produce EXIF may result in disqualification.

May? Is it not correct to assert that it will result in disqualification, or has there been exceptions?

07/08/2004 12:24:13 AM · #11

We will have to make a decision as to whether we will support this camera. All digital cameras manufactured after about 1998 support EXIF. Our current practice is to "grandfather" cameras that predate the EXIF standard, but there has been discussion of abandoning support for those cameras.

As I see it, there are three separate issues here to be resolved:

1. Does DPC wish to support submission from a "hacked" camera?
2. Do we wish to continue to support cameras that do not embed EXIF data in their images?
3. If we choose to continue to "grandfather" pre-1998 cameras, do we wish to support post-1998 cameras that ignore the industrywide EXIF standard?

At this point, I would recommend considering the Dakota unsupported until an official decision is made by Site Council.

-Terry

07/08/2004 12:30:17 AM · #12

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

As I see it, there are three separate issues here to be resolved:

1. Does DPC wish to support submission from a "hacked" camera?
2. Do we wish to continue to support cameras that do not embed EXIF data in their images?
3. If we choose to continue to "grandfather" pre-1998 cameras, do we wish to support post-1998 cameras that ignore the industrywide EXIF standard?

At this point, I would recommend considering the Dakota unsupported until an official decision is made by Site Council.

Thanks for your response, Terry.

Obviously, I'd like to see some sort of consideration for these sorts of cameras, as they offer some very unique opportunities (particularly for making custom modifications that would prove too expensive on other camera models), and are cheap and effectively "disposable," making them great for captures in hazardous environments or for every-day carry.

At the same time, I appreciate the difficulty that the Site Council has in attempting to manage exposure dates, and, while I can claim that my own honesty would keep me within the boundaries of the rules, I obviously can't do the same for others.

If there's any information that you guys might want on the unit in the process of your discussion, don't hesitate to contact me.

Thanks!

/Andrew

Message edited by author 2004-07-08 00:31:01.

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

07/08/2004 12:38:34 AM · #13

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

I've just went in a 360 in my opinion of what has occured in the past with invalid Exif data, and incorrect dates.

When I read the rules I see

"This original photograph must contain valid, unaltered EXIF data. If you are unable to produce your original photo under these circumstances, your photograph will be disqualified."

If I understand correctly, the SC can vote to ignore that section of rules. Given that understanding I think past DQ's for incorrect dates in the exif data was very unfair.

I thought there were no exceptions.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

07/08/2004 12:49:08 AM · #14

Originally posted by garrywhite2:

...If I understand correctly, the SC can vote to ignore that section of rules. Given that understanding I think past DQ's for incorrect dates in the exif data was very unfair.

I thought there were no exceptions.

The only exception has been for cams that do not record EXIF data. Those are few and far between, and as CJ posted, we are considering ending the grandfathering of those cams, because of this very conundrum.
In ALL cases where a photo from a camera that records EXIF data is submitted, and the EXIF dates do not fall within the valid timeframe, we have disqualified. Some of these were very painful, yet we have applied this rule with absolute consistency.

edited for typos.

Message edited by author 2004-07-08 00:50:18.

07/08/2004 12:58:35 AM · #15

Originally posted by Kha0S:

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

As I see it, there are three separate issues here to be resolved:

1. Does DPC wish to support submission from a "hacked" camera?
2. Do we wish to continue to support cameras that do not embed EXIF data in their images?
3. If we choose to continue to "grandfather" pre-1998 cameras, do we wish to support post-1998 cameras that ignore the industrywide EXIF standard?

At this point, I would recommend considering the Dakota unsupported until an official decision is made by Site Council.

Thanks for your response, Terry.

Obviously, I'd like to see some sort of consideration for these sorts of cameras, as they offer some very unique opportunities (particularly for making custom modifications that would prove too expensive on other camera models), and are cheap and effectively "disposable," making them great for captures in hazardous environments or for every-day carry.

At the same time, I appreciate the difficulty that the Site Council has in attempting to manage exposure dates, and, while I can claim that my own honesty would keep me within the boundaries of the rules, I obviously can't do the same for others.

If there's any information that you guys might want on the unit in the process of your discussion, don't hesitate to contact me.

Thanks!

/Andrew

If you could send me a sample image from that camera (an original file, straight out of camera), that would be immensely helpful. It need not be anything fancy, just a random snapshot is fine.

I'll contact you off-board with my email address.

-Terry

07/08/2004 12:59:11 AM · #16

Thanks for the response Fritz.

I may have missed some point in the rules that allow for cameras that do not provide Exif data, if so please point me in the right direction.

07/08/2004 01:06:05 AM · #17

Originally posted by garrywhite2:

I may have missed some point in the rules that allow for cameras that do not provide Exif data, if so please point me in the right direction.

Garry,

While the rules do state that "this original photograph must contain valid, unaltered EXIF data," this rule was never intended to prohibit submission from cameras that predate the EXIF standard. It simply means that for cameras which record EXIF, the information must be present, valid and unaltered. If this is changed at some point in the future, an announcement will be made.

-Terry

Message edited by author 2004-07-08 01:06:26.

07/08/2004 01:11:56 AM · #18

Thanks Terry.

No need for me to repeat what I've already said. The only thing I could add is that I feel very strongly about this and I feel disappointment. I'll move along and get over it.

Thanks again, both Terry and Fritz. =)

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

07/08/2004 01:48:44 AM · #19

Garry,

I understand your frustration. I think we are in agreement in as much as the fundamental issue is fairness.

The question that arises is which option is more fair. On one hand, we can permit use of pre-EXIF digital cameras, accepting the resulting complications in validating the small number of submissions from those cameras. On the other, we can require that all submissions come from EXIF-capable cameras, which effectively requires all owners of the older, non EXIF-capable cameras to purchase new cameras if they wish to continue participating on DPChallenge.

At the time EXIF information was first required (when the site first started in 2002), the EXIF standard was only about 3-4 years old. A significant percentage of users had cameras which predated the standard. At least one prior Site Council member shot exclusively with such a camera. A significant number of submissions came from cameras that predated the standard, and it was clearly not reasonable to expect that many users to spend $200 or more to replace a perfectly good camera just so they could participate on a contest site.

Two years later, the landscape looks somewhat different. Many of the users of pre-EXIF cameras have either upgraded to something newer, or have decided they are not "serious" about photography and have left the site. Also, the price of an entry-level digital camera has dropped into the sub-$100 range, and these are all EXIF-capable. That said, such a change will be a bitter pill to swallow for any participants who still shoot with pre-EXIF cameras.

Clearly, the balance has shifted since the rule was first written in 2002. Whether it has tipped to the other side is an open question. There are a number of factors that have to be considered when evaluating that. Besides the obvious question of how many users still participate exclusively with pre-EXIF cameras, we also need to know how many paying members do so. This is especially important because a decision to exclude those cameras will effectively render the site useless to those members, and we can safely expect that a large percentage of those users will demand refunds of the unused portion of their memberships if such a change is made. If we are to accomodate them, we will need an accurate estimate of the cost of the change.

Edited to add: I do truly appreciate your candor in sharing both your opinions on this and the reasons behind them. On issues such as this it is critically important to understand the opinions/feelings of the users of the site, and I personally appreciate the time and effort you have put into doing so in a constructive tone.

Thanks,
-Terry

Message edited by author 2004-07-08 01:51:09.

coolhar

07/08/2004 03:45:59 AM · #20

Can the SC determine the difference between a direct-from-camera image file from a pre-EXIF and the file of a current non-EXIF camera such as the Dakota? Is there perhaps data in these files that identifies the cam but is not the same as the EXIF standard data?

A camera that does not provide EXIF data doesn't preclude someone from participating, it just precludes them from surviving a request for the original file to verify their entry.

I think that "may" needs to be a "will" or else you can forget about the dates for challenges. Anyone who wanted to enter an image shot before the challenge could just say "my cam broke down and I got a disposible to use while it's being repaired".

jadin

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

07/08/2004 03:59:31 AM · #21

What's stopping someone from lying about the camera they use? It's a simple resize adjustment away from whatever camera they know is non-exif.

I like the way the rules are now. Many people can submit photos to a challenge, and not worry about winning. With (3 winners out of 385) 99% of the time they won't be disqualified. Unless someone asks for a DQ for some other reason...

One of my photos from a challenge was one day off, (first time I checked the camera). I didn't have time to reshoot, but was 99% sure I wouldn't win, so I left it in the challenge where it remains. Should my photo be DQed? Maybe, but it really doesn't affect much.

Message edited by author 2004-07-08 04:03:10.

07/08/2004 05:31:27 PM · #22

Originally posted by jadin:

One of my photos from a challenge was one day off, (first time I checked the camera). I didn't have time to reshoot, but was 99% sure I wouldn't win, so I left it in the challenge where it remains. Should my photo be DQed? Maybe, but it really doesn't affect much.

Actually, yes it should. In cases where the evidence indicates the photographer willfully violated the rules, a suspension is typically also issued.

It's probably in your best interest to let us know which image this was. You are welcome to PM me on this if you like.

-Terry

ElGordo

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS for Canon

07/08/2004 06:40:08 PM · #23

Much thanks to Terry for providing this insight to DPC policy. My older camera is my only DSLR and does not include EXIF data.
But it does include IPTC data (International Press Telecommunication Council) that is readable with Photoshop CS. Remains to be seen whether or not the SC will be able to accept that data.
The camera is a Kodak/Nikon DCS460 of 1995 vintage.

07/08/2004 06:48:04 PM · #24

Originally posted by ElGordo:

I took a look at the file you sent me... the information, including the date does appear in the software I use for checking non-JPG files. I'll run it by the rest of SC but my inclination is that your camera is acceptable.

-Terry

Message edited by author 2004-07-08 18:48:32.