How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?

On 2014-11-19 19:15:01 +0000, Davoud said:

Davoud:
Flickr gives me unlimited space. Dropbox is not a suitable place for
posting photos for public viewing.

Savageduck:
That depends on what you mean by public viewing.

I mean that the public (which, for this purpose, I define as anyone on
Earth who has a computer and an Internet connection) can find and view
my photographs without me having to take additional action, such as
supplying a private link via e-mail.

Posting a DB, or CC link to a NG seems public enough for me.
Here is a CC link.
http://adobe.ly/1qXKq3d

So, here is an image shared via DB, an mp4 slide show, and an HTML
folder hosted in DB.
https://db.tt/vfs5uP7X
https://db.tt/TNUfulft
https://db.tt/bdnxoDv4

How would I go about finding those photos without a link provided by
you? Googling for Savageduck and photos doesn't work for me.

It shouldn’t. That was the idea for maintaining some degree of Usenet
anonymity.

That's not my idea of photo sharing. If I google "David Illig" and "photos" the
top hit is a link to my Flickr photostream.

Fair enough. However, I use "Savageduck" as a nom de guerre in the
Usenet environment for several reasons. There are some here who know my
name and I have ways for actual friends & family to have access to my
images without having to even think about the existence of "Savageduck".
So, for now I prefer to maintain the illusion of a modicum of anonymity
in Usenet.

I also have Adobe Creative Cloud space which gives me the ability share
with, or without restriction, JPEG, PSD, & RAW file. Most importantly
it gives me direct access between my desktop and Adobe Mobile apps on
my iPad & iPhone.

As do I, but that's no substitute for Flickr or another sharing service
for public viewing as I define it.

I don't particularly want the public to have access to all of my
photographic work, which I share with friends & family.

If I choose to have full public viewing for images I select for that
sort of display, I will host my own web site with HTML galleries, or
use a site such as 500px.com, and I might well do all I can to make the
world aware of that site by adding it to stuff such as my SIG in usenet
posts. So, for now the only images that "Savageduck" chooses to be
shared will be via DB or Adobe CC link, and their exposure might be
limited to a month or two.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2014-11-19 21:12:20 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 12:25:46 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

Fair enough. However, I use "Savageduck" as a nom de guerre in the
Usenet environment for several reasons. There are some here who know my
name

Send me a Nikon 70-200mm VR f/2.8 immediately or I will reveal your
real name.


You rotten swine you!

Now I'll have to shave my beard, assume my alter ego of Giacomo Sareli,
and relocate to San Marino.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

Davoud:
Flickr gives me unlimited space. Dropbox is not a suitable place for
posting photos for public viewing.

Savageduck:
That depends on what you mean by public viewing.

I mean that the public (which, for this purpose, I define as anyone on
Earth who has a computer and an Internet connection) can find and view
my photographs without me having to take additional action, such as
supplying a private link via e-mail.

Posting a DB, or CC link to a NG seems public enough for me.
Here is a CC link.
http://adobe.ly/1qXKq3d

If that's your idea of "public," then for you, it is. Doesn't fit my
definition of "anyone on Earth."

So, here is an image shared via DB, an mp4 slide show, and an HTML
folder hosted in DB.
https://db.tt/vfs5uP7X
https://db.tt/TNUfulft
https://db.tt/bdnxoDv4

How would I go about finding those photos without a link provided by
you? Googling for Savageduck and photos doesn't work for me.

It shouldn’t. That was the idea for maintaining some degree of Usenet
anonymity.

Again, good for you. Not good for me. "Public" photo sharing.

That's not my idea of photo sharing. If I google "David Illig" and "photos"
the top hit is a link to my Flickr photostream.

Fair enough. However, I use "Savageduck" as a nom de guerre in the
Usenet environment for several reasons. There are some here who know my
name and I have ways for actual friends & family to have access to my
images without having to even think about the existence of "Savageduck".
So, for now I prefer to maintain the illusion of a modicum of anonymity
in Usenet.

Nothing personal, but I tend to look askance at the motives of those
who hide behind aliases on line. That's strictly personal, of course.
My part of this thread is about paranoia, and my point is that those
who don't want to be known should probably not be on-line. I have
friends, current and lost, around the world, and I attempt to make it
easy for them to find me on line. That no doubt horrifies William
Unruh, who apparently lives in dread of being "bitten in the ass."

I also have Adobe Creative Cloud space which gives me the ability share
with, or without restriction, JPEG, PSD, & RAW file. Most importantly
it gives me direct access between my desktop and Adobe Mobile apps on
my iPad & iPhone.

As do I, but that's no substitute for Flickr or another sharing service
for public viewing as I define it.

I don't particularly want the public to have access to all of my
photographic work...

Of course not. I don't put *all* of my photos on Flickr!

If I choose to have full public viewing for images I select for that
sort of display, I will host my own web site with HTML galleries

Yes, I have my own site with astrophotos and nature photos, but that's
not public enough for me. Flickr has 90 million members. It is unlikely
that that many people are going to stumble upon my humble web site. Not
that 90 million will view my Flickr stream, but the audience is out
there.

, or
use a site such as 500px.com, and I might well do all I can to make the
world aware of that site by adding it to stuff such as my SIG in usenet
posts. So, for now the only images that "Savageduck" chooses to be
shared will be via DB or Adobe CC link, and their exposure might be
limited to a month or two.

OK for you, not public by my reckoning.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

On 11/18/2014 8:01 PM, Davoud wrote:
Davoud:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/primeval

http://www.primordial-light.com

PeterN:
I like your macro shots. They are clean and sharp.

Thank you for your kind remarks.

I use macro for
different purposes. Clearly my style is not appropriate for scientific
purposes.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/1%20Needs%20A%20Shower.jpg

That excellent photograph is certainly suitable for scientific use.
Just attach the binomial for the bee (Genus Bombus or Xylocopa, I'm not
very knowledgable about bees, but bugguide.net can help) and the
binomial for the flower, and tell where and when you took it. That's a
wealth of information about the bee, its habitat, and its food, and
really doesn't tell anyone anything about you.


I am glad you appreciate my art. All too often I do too much
manipulation of images, for them to be considered for scientific purposes.

Here are some extreme examples:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/night%20creature.jpg

and an ordinary dahlia, fairly close to the image taken in camera:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/dahlplosion.jpg

And as manipulated in PhotoShop:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/dahlplosion1.jpg


--
PeterN

On 2014-11-19 23:01:34 +0000, Davoud said:

Davoud:
Flickr gives me unlimited space. Dropbox is not a suitable place for
posting photos for public viewing.

Savageduck:
That depends on what you mean by public viewing.

I mean that the public (which, for this purpose, I define as anyone on
Earth who has a computer and an Internet connection) can find and view
my photographs without me having to take additional action, such as
supplying a private link via e-mail.

Posting a DB, or CC link to a NG seems public enough for me.
Here is a CC link.
http://adobe.ly/1qXKq3d

If that's your idea of "public," then for you, it is. Doesn't fit my
definition of "anyone on Earth."

I don't choose to share with "anyone on Earth", I choose to limit my
image sharing to friend, family, and some News Groups. That is public
enough for me.

So, here is an image shared via DB, an mp4 slide show, and an HTML
folder hosted in DB.
https://db.tt/vfs5uP7X
https://db.tt/TNUfulft
https://db.tt/bdnxoDv4

How would I go about finding those photos without a link provided by
you? Googling for Savageduck and photos doesn't work for me.

It shouldn’t. That was the idea for maintaining some degree of Usenet
anonymity.

Again, good for you. Not good for me. "Public" photo sharing.

Why does it sound as if you want global recognition via Flickr?

That's not my idea of photo sharing. If I google "David Illig" and "photos"
the top hit is a link to my Flickr photostream.

Fair enough. However, I use "Savageduck" as a nom de guerre in the
Usenet environment for several reasons. There are some here who know my
name and I have ways for actual friends & family to have access to my
images without having to even think about the existence of "Savageduck".
So, for now I prefer to maintain the illusion of a modicum of anonymity
in Usenet.

Nothing personal, but I tend to look askance at the motives of those
who hide behind aliases on line. That's strictly personal, of course.

My motive is simple. I am a retired Law Enforcement Officer, and I
prefer to keep my retirement as peaceful as possible.

My part of this thread is about paranoia, and my point is that those
who don't want to be known should probably not be on-line. I have
friends, current and lost, around the world, and I attempt to make it
easy for them to find me on line. That no doubt horrifies William
Unruh, who apparently lives in dread of being "bitten in the ass."

My friends & family, also scattered around the world, have had no
trouble finding me, and have made contact with my unaltered true
identity without much trouble. The most effective communication tool
for that has proven to be Skype, there are others, but that seems to
have been the most frequently used common resource.

I also have Adobe Creative Cloud space which gives me the ability share
with, or without restriction, JPEG, PSD, & RAW file. Most importantly
it gives me direct access between my desktop and Adobe Mobile apps on
my iPad & iPhone.

As do I, but that's no substitute for Flickr or another sharing service
for public viewing as I define it.

I don't particularly want the public to have access to all of my
photographic work...

Of course not. I don't put *all* of my photos on Flickr!

Good.

If I choose to have full public viewing for images I select for that
sort of display, I will host my own web site with HTML galleries

Yes, I have my own site with astrophotos and nature photos, but that's
not public enough for me. Flickr has 90 million members. It is unlikely
that that many people are going to stumble upon my humble web site. Not
that 90 million will view my Flickr stream, but the audience is out
there.

I am not that anxious to be found by folks who haven't maintained
contact over the last 40+ years. All who would care, know how to
contact me, or know somebody
in our old circles who does.

, or
use a site such as 500px.com, and I might well do all I can to make the
world aware of that site by adding it to stuff such as my SIG in usenet
posts. So, for now the only images that "Savageduck" chooses to be
shared will be via DB or Adobe CC link, and their exposure might be
limited to a month or two.

OK for you, not public by my reckoning.

Yup! OK for me.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

Davoud:
Again, good for you. Not good for me. "Public" photo sharing.

Savageduck:
Why does it sound as if you want global recognition via Flickr?

Flickr pools are the places from which the Encyclopedia of Life and the
Maryland Biodiversity Project harvest photos. I enjoy making this small
contribution to science. My photos of Ichneumon ambulatorius are the
only ones in the EOL http://eol.org/pages/3779595/media. Ditto
Strophopteryx fasciata http://eol.org/pages/615266/media. Others have
had exclusivity for some period, others are exemplars of their species.

My motive is simple. I am a retired Law Enforcement Officer, and I
prefer to keep my retirement as peaceful as possible.

I'm retired, too https://www.flickr.com/photos/primeval/13024995215/,
and I prefer to keep my retirement as free of unnecessary secrets as
possible.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

PeterN:
I am glad you appreciate my art. All too often I do too much
manipulation of images, for them to be considered for scientific purposes.

Here are some extreme examples:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/night%20creature.jpg

and an ordinary dahlia, fairly close to the image taken in camera:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/dahlplosion.jpg

And as manipulated in PhotoShop:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/dahlplosion1.jpg

Well, yes, those examples are art photos, not scientific photos. Very
nice.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

On 2014-11-20 03:51:02 +0000, Davoud said:

Davoud:
Again, good for you. Not good for me. "Public" photo sharing.

Savageduck:
Why does it sound as if you want global recognition via Flickr?

Flickr pools are the places from which the Encyclopedia of Life and the
Maryland Biodiversity Project harvest photos. I enjoy making this small
contribution to science. My photos of Ichneumon ambulatorius are the
only ones in the EOL http://eol.org/pages/3779595/media. Ditto
Strophopteryx fasciata http://eol.org/pages/615266/media. Others have
had exclusivity for some period, others are exemplars of their species.

My motive is simple. I am a retired Law Enforcement Officer, and I
prefer to keep my retirement as peaceful as possible.

I'm retired, too https://www.flickr.com/photos/primeval/13024995215/,
and I prefer to keep my retirement as free of unnecessary secrets as
possible.

....and thank you for your service. I can say I have only personally
known but one CIA retiree, an old family friend who came out of the OSS
after WWII and was stationed in Cape Town, South Africa (in the 50's &
60's) and Libya (in the 60's before the rise of Gaddafi) where he did a
fair amount of work at Wheelus AFB and in Tripoli. After his return to
D.C. he retired to Ventura, and died two years ago in his mid 90's. A
charming, urbane gentleman.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 11/19/2014 10:52 PM, Davoud wrote:
PeterN:
I am glad you appreciate my art. All too often I do too much
manipulation of images, for them to be considered for scientific purposes.

Here are some extreme examples:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/night%20creature.jpg

and an ordinary dahlia, fairly close to the image taken in camera:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/dahlplosion.jpg

And as manipulated in PhotoShop:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/dahlplosion1.jpg

Well, yes, those examples are art photos, not scientific photos. Very
nice.


Thank you.

I think that photography has many purposes, including, but not limited
to, scientific and artistic. While good scientific can be artistic, if
my aim is artistic, and I give little consideration to reality. Indeed
as shown earlier, I often expressly preclude reality, in order to depict
what I consider to be the essence of my subject.



--
PeterN

On 2014-11-19, Davoud wrote:
Mayayan:
Not to be just the voice of doom, but this might be
worth a look:

http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...-dropbox-priva
cy-spideroak

On the other hand, if you're only using Dropbox for files
that you're happy to have public then the privacy issues
with Dropbox are not relevant.

I take it that you accept the word of the liar, thief, and traitor
Edward Snowden uncritically, unquestioningly.

As a contractor, and no an agent, deserting the USA was the safest
option he had to blow the whistle. Do you have proof that he lied?


--
umop apisdn