Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

GeoTagger Adds Positioning Info to Snapshots

Posted by CmdrTaco on Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:45 AM
from the do-you-see-what-i-see dept.
Richard Jelbert writes "Check out this hardware device to geo-tag your photos to help share / manage your photos using Google maps. The Jelbert GeoTagger device records the latitude and longitude and compass direction of every photo you take. It connects to the camera flash shoe and stores the geo metadata on an SD memory card. Geotagging is becomeing more and more popular with sites like Flickr supporting geotagging via Google Earth interface. Hardware geotagers save you the effort of geo-tagging the images manually after taking the shot. The Sony geotagger is a great step forward but the Jelbert GeoTagger also records direction data."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Slashvert (Score:4, Insightful)

    by HugePedlar (900427) on Monday September 25 2006, @10:53AM (#16186243) Homepage
    Christ, could the summary sound any more like a PR press release?
  • is the angle with the horizontal. With all this information it should be relatively easy to build a 2D/3D map from the pictures you collect.
    • Actually you need more to build a reliable 3D map:
      -horizontal angle mentioned by you
      -altitude
      -zoom

      5 numbers at a minimum: latitude, longitude, vertical and horizontal angles and altitude.
  • by Lord Satri (609291) <alexandre@@@leroux...net> on Monday September 25 2006, @10:56AM (#16186283) Homepage Journal
    There are *many* alternatives. Read those stories:
    Flickr Adds Geotagging [slashgeo.org]
    Geotagged Photo Browsing Tools for Google Earth [slashgeo.org]
    Picasa Photos in Google Earth [slashgeo.org]
    and the most important one:
    Info on Geocoding Photos [slashgeo.org] which links (in 'related links') to numerous other sources of info.

    Today, you can tag photos using Picasa and Google Earth, Yahoo! and Flickr, or other alternatives such as GPS hardware [slashgeo.org] to geotag your photos directly.
    • Superb post man......... I just discovered Picasa's new features today when I downloaded the update- the tagging feature using Google Earth is brilliant - it feels a little fiddly at first, but after a few minutes I had tagged hundreds of my shots (only another 19,000 to go, then.... no, seriously, I need some kind of batch function)

      Anyway, I havent probed all of the possibilities yet, but I'm sure there's a service where you can upload your JPEGs to a site which will automatically place them on a googl
  • by Stavr0 (35032) on Monday September 25 2006, @11:00AM (#16186333) Homepage Journal
    It's a SONY.
  • Doubtful, what with Flickr being owned by Yahoo and all.

  • by Glacial Wanderer (962045) on Monday September 25 2006, @11:07AM (#16186419) Homepage
    I wrote a command line application for windows that reads track information off of Garmin and Megellan GPSs (or it can read .gpx files) and then uses that information to update the exif information in the image files based on timestamp information. I'm using it with flickr and it works great. You do need to allow flickr to use exif data here: www.flickr.com/account/geo/exif. Since it updates exif information in jpg files it should work with any photo sharing tools.

    This was meant to be a free simple application that you can just run on all your photos and I think it is just that. No bells, no whistles. It just gets exif data added to all the photos you just took in a quick easy manor.

    You can download GeoPhoto Batcher with source code from: http://moesphoto.glacialwanderer.com/ [glacialwanderer.com]
    • Now that is one slick idea.

      How does it deal with photos that are taken at a time between GPS waypoints? I assume that the 'track files' produced by the GPS are a series of fixed positions and timestamps; e.g. x1,y1,z1,t1;x2,y2,z2,t2, where delta-t varies depending on the resolution you have the GPS recording at. What happens if you take a photo at t1.5? Does it pick the nearest timestamp, or does it interpolate a vector between the two points and estimate one's position at the time? Seems like it could be s
  • by Forthan Red (820542) on Monday September 25 2006, @11:07AM (#16186429)
    If you already own a GPS, there are several software-only solutions to perform the same function. Just sync your camera's clock to the GPS clock, and turn on the GPS tracking function. The software will link up locations by matching the photo's time-stamp with the tracklog time-stamp.
    • Thank you! I was wondering how I could do it w/o a bunch of extra shit that I'm not using already. The only question I have is how accurate the camera's clock has to be (being that the GPS is constantly updated and the camera isn't).

      Are there any specific pieces of software that will take the GPS' tracklog GPX and sync it with the EXIF data or is it more a manual thing?
      • The only reason I ask is that I see plenty of ways to manually look at the tracklog and get the coords, but I don't want to do anything manually and was hoping that there was some software to do it for you. Perhaps some shell scripts or something else, maybe even for Gallery1?
        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          There is software, even freeware if you aren't allergic to Microsoft: WWMX Location Stamper [wwmx.org] by MS Research. The camera clock doesn't need to be particularly accurate, unless you move fast while taking pictures. A simple trick is to always start your photo sessions by taking a picture of your GPS unit displaying the current time. Then you can compare the camera time (from the EXIF data) and the GPS time (in the picture) and calculate the offset of the camera clock, which you can then enter into the location
  • Until my digital camera automatically tags all photos with the information then uploads them wirelessly and automatically up to my flickr or other site, then logs the photos into google earth or whatever. I can't be arsed. Really all this is completely automatable so why would I bother?

     
  • by i4u (234028) on Monday September 25 2006, @11:16AM (#16186567) Homepage
    Grazer is now free The tool synchronizes GPS location information in GPX format and matches the timestamp of the location information with the timestamp on the EXIF header of your photos.
    http://www.i4u.com/article6502.html [i4u.com]

    Sony has released a GPS Geotagger gadget: Using time and location recordings from Sony's GPS-CS1 GPS device and the time stamp from a Sony digital still camera or camcorder, you can plot your digital images to a map and pinpoint exactly where you've been.
    http://www.i4u.com/article6207.html [i4u.com]
  • Of course GPS does not work inside buildings. The website says other hardware used 'bad' ways to retrieve inside-building location information, but they give no clue on how they do it themselves! How can I judge if their system is better?!

    Additionnaly, most of the work is done by RoboGeo [slashgeo.org], which must be purchased seperately.
    • No, most of the work is done by the GPS, which you must purchase separately. Then the software, which you must also purchase separately. This device, which costs 150 pounds, doesn't do anything but ask the GPS for the location when you press the shutter button.
  • by Gothmolly (148874) on Monday September 25 2006, @11:36AM (#16186811)
    Um, most handheld digital cameras dont have a flash shoe, so this is sort of irrelevant.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      not to be rude or anything but most CONSUMER grade digital cameras dont have a hotshoe however many high end/professional ones do (search eBay for "professional digital camera")

      here are some examples:
      a Canon one [ebay.com]
      or
      a Nikon one [ebay.com]
      • Which is why I said "most". If you do the math, there's more $150 cameras out there in the hands of the great unwashed, than there are pro cameras.
    • The pro side is the device retains compatibility with classic film slrs ; the con side, it's way too big for my OM1 ! Couldn't have they put just the GPS receiver part on the hot shoe, and use whatever link (be it bluetooth or even a wire) to hold the recorder in a pocket ? As it is, I don't see how you can snap a pic without a tripod. The weight would necessarily tilt and shake the body.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Most people willing to put out the $600 investment this requires likely have a camera worth more than that. And those cameras have a flash shoe.
  • Get a photograph GeoTagged at ll=61.26426,-149.851316. You are not allowed to wear any uniform while doing it.

  • Known for his love of nature, particularly of the mountains and caves and all the beauty therein, O B Laden was given 3 new cameras to test: NikOnTarget, Olymwillnotmiss, and the much anticipated Canon Fodder.

  • Wow this is great. By coincidence I typed a memo into my mobile phone, a napkin-back spec for a device that has what this one does, and a week later it appears all finished on slashfot! Well, they are perhaps missing one component but I am not going to post it here. I think I'm going to try it again.
  • Friends don't let friends buy Sony. They probably embed the geodata in the image pixels so they can always find you.
  • There are already a few Ricoh cameras which can connect to a GPS device (bluetooth or serial, I assume) so this is a pretty stupid way to get GPS info on photos. I can't find the official product page, but here's a random link: Caplio 500SE B/W [letsgodigital.org]. I don't have one so I don't really know how exactly they work, but I'd guess better than this hack.
    • Re:Practical uses? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by cayenne8 (626475) on Monday September 25 2006, @11:03AM (#16186365) Homepage Journal
      Is this really that useful for the public in general, or is this more of a tool for the authorities to use to better locate and document crime scenes, if the picture was taken at one?

      I just heard the other day about some kind of 'mark' that digital cameras put on all images, that notate what type camera you have...and some of the programs put registration information on the images (name, etc).

      I'm not sure I want all that meta data on pictures I take...just a simple picture thank you.

      (I forgot the name of that tag..starts with an "E" I think.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        You mean "EXIF"? And yes, EXIF really is pretty damn useful for anyone who wants to actually know what type of comera setup was used, exposure info, focal length, whether a flash fired, etc...
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        I just heard the other day about some kind of 'mark' that digital cameras put on all images, that notate what type camera you have...and some of the programs put registration information on the images (name, etc).

        I forgot the name of that tag..starts with an "E" I think.

        EXIF

        I'm not sure I want all that meta data on pictures I take...just a simple picture thank you.

        Most of the information is both innocuous and helpful (at least to other photographers). You can disable things like camera serial number and all

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Pratical Uses? I can think of quite a few. When I go on vacation, I find the meta data from digital very useful. Most cameras will put EXIF [digicamhelp.com] data in the image recording such things as the specific camera you shoot with, your exposure time, aperature, what mode you shot with... You can use it to adjust how you take your shots if you shot with different settings.
        As far as geotagging, it gives you the flexibility to organize your photos by location, and add in that info to your photo. I went on a month long
      • Is this really that useful for the public in general...?

        Of course -- wives can find out where their cheating husbands are taking the naughty pictures they find on their home computer, anyone can determine where the picture someone posted on an on-line dating service was taken (she says she's in Pocatello, ID, but all her pictures are from Bozeman, MT!), etc. A multitude of uses in the home!

      • So just strip it off. It's in plain text, the format is well documented, you can even get a ready made python module for reading it. Not to mention lots and lots of software both free and otherwise for editing and deleting EXIF tags.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        I just heard the other day about some kind of 'mark' that digital cameras put on all images, that notate what type camera you have...and some of the programs put registration information on the images (name, etc).

        You're thinking of Exif data [wikipedia.org]. It contains information regarding a specific image: the camera model, the date and time of the photo and all sorts of potentially useful photographic details -- the ISO, aperture used, shutter speed, focal length, etc.

        This can be extremely useful stuff if you're
        • I'm not sure why you wouldn't want this sort of metadata saved in your pictures

          Well, I'm wondering about that right now. I sell images online [gdargaud.net] and I'm in the process of editing two new CD compilations. The difference with before is that I now use digital which records the instant the image was taken. I'm not absolutely sure I want people to know exactly where I was every day of my life (or every day I use a camera). It's one thing to have your images made public, another one to have your whereabouts made pu

        • "It's not as if it's reporting your full legal name and social security number or anything."

          Well, I dunno if that is exactly true. I'd heard of the EXIF tag (thanks for reminding me of what it was), and on this post this person went in to examine the contents...and whatever application they were using...was adding full name and other info they'd used to register the photo application they were using.

          This is what caught my attention. Kind of like how MS imbeds information into word .doc f

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          Well said.

          The other major purpose of this is for historical benefit. Imagine, for example, that we had Geotagging+Timestamping on all the photos taken in the last 30 years, and they were shared on something like Flickr. You could focus on a particular place and build a timeline of photos to see how it changes over the years. Given the ubiquity of camera phones, digital cameras, etc, we could have a complete photo-historical record of, well, almost everything.

          Personally, I've gone through all my "good" photo
      • Is this really that useful for the public in general, or is this more of a tool for the authorities to use to better locate and document crime scenes, if the picture was taken at one?

        Don't know about everyone else, but it would be a godsend for some architects. Many progressive architecture and/or exterior design firms are taking photos of an existing site and superimposing a 3D modelled rendering of the finished building or renovations over the site. In order for the modeller and/or renderer to get the p

        • Yeah (as other people have pointed out) the 3D modeling applications of this are pretty big.

          My question is, does the EXIF specification have a place for an "azimuth" variable? I know it has Lat/Lon and time, but azimuth is really the key if you want to be able to reconstruct a model of a place. You need to at least know where the camera was and where it was pointing. Granted, most GPS units won't give you this information (a few that have magnetic compasses might) but it would be good to at least have the p
          • Apparently so, along with elevation information.
          • Oh this stuff is so cool! Add "zenith" to the mix you described, and EXIF could very well provide all the information necessary to recreate that any given photograph exactly, albeit at a different point in time.

            Do any GPS units record zenith as well as azimuth, or do need to rig up some sort of sextant on the head of my tripod and log that information manually?
      • It be true. When you upload your photos to Flickr it will display all that info for you and your friends. I don't care if people know what type of camera I have and what exposure settings I use.
        • I had an idea for something that used a similar technology. You'd have to log not only location and compass orientation, but also altitude and angle of elevation, along with zoom, exposure and other standard camera information.

          With all that information in hand, it would be possible to collect, say, thousands of photographs from different sources and stitch together a 3-d Google Earth-esque 3d map of the world from human perspective.

          With error correcting techniques, you could eliminate the problems of p

    • A few possible uses:
      -> You can now have software track the route you took while on vacation as you snapped pictures
      -> If you find a camera, you can now track the route the previous owner took before losing their new camera, and know exactly where their house is with the nifty bigscreen tv (in the background of a shot taken at home for example)
      -> If you find a corpse next to the road with one of these cameras, you can tell if they were standing in the road taking pictures when they got hit or if the
      • -> If you find a corpse next to the road with one of these cameras, you can tell if they were standing in the road taking pictures when they got hit or if the car had to swerve off the road to hit them

        GPS doesn't have nearly the resolution that would be required for that. Plus, if the shot was taken at 3:15:30, and the time of death was 3:15:45, you don't know where the photographer moved in those fifteen seconds. More likely, though, you'll have a time of death of 'a little after 3PM' or 'between tw


      • A little more practical and mundane than that: think traffic accidents, speeding tickets.

    • One of the most obvious uses is in making travel photography easier. There are specific travel blog sites like TripDiary [tripdiary.com] that let you set up a travel journal and specify the geographic locations at which your entries occur. A GPS device would make that easier, as the data can then be extracted from the photos. When you're showing off your travels to family/friends, showing them where you were on a map (especially with satellite footage) is pretty cool.
    • It's not a bad solution, and the clunkiness is not their fault - it's the fault of digital camara producers: I guess the digital cameras coming to us from "traditional" camera manufacturers have some sort of excuse for not thinking too radically about the "device" side of things (it's wearing thin though), but what is Sony's excuse, or any of the other consumer electronics companies now making cameras? Why don't digital cameras all talk bluetooth? Why can't high end cameras talk to bluetooth GPS device