Loading
EN/Geotaggin’

Ipernity’s Geotagging feature employs Google maps and is clearly superior to ... what we were used to. The hybrid mode, especially, makes identifying motifs a lot easier, and you’ll be able to differentiate between objects which, in real life, are only a few yards apart.

Unfortunately, that’s not all there is to it.

It’s all very fine if your image focuses on only one thing: just taggit! (and don’t ask yourself if it makes much sense to geotag a tulip). But what if there are more? What if there are a great many? Sometimes, you could fix your tag to a single object, if it is prominent enough: the Eiffel Tower or Mississippi River. But you won’t always be as lucky as that.

Suppose you have a panorama shot: it shows the tops of the trees on the other side of the road, the wide valley of the river that happens to flow past your village, and also a chain of mountains far, far away. This example is purely hypothetical, of course.
Now where do you put your tag?

I wouldn’t know. You could use a small scale view of the map, and place the tag where all three elements –trees, valley, mountains– are covered. That wouldn’t satisfy me, but you might argue that you have determined a certain “average”. Alternatively, it could be your own location, if it can be identified. However, this would revalue an habitual location, for instance your balcony, in a way that you may not always be able to choose between the two criteria: you may have shot a particular building both from your balcony and from the street, isn’t it?

I find this all very difficult. Still, though I occasionally do have a bad conscience, I like the feature a lot. Somehow, it puts the obscurest of places on the map (quite literally) and thus ranks them among metropoles. And you also learn something, for instance, where your friends are at home...

I looked up one of my dearest Fl..., no, Ipernity friends. She appeared to live on a crossroads in Evansville, Indiana, probably trying to flag a ride (yes, I know my Robert Johnson!). She hasn’t deserved to live on the street –it really made me sad...

11 comments

renovatio06 said:

Good point, Kees, especially the notion of the balcony being ranked equally significant as the metropole, hehe :-) And I can only repeat something I've said somewhere on that other places' discussion boards: How come, we complain about corporations and governments attempting to acquire as much data on us as possible and then readily go about exclaiming to all of the online world, where we live...? There seems to be a profound philosophical dilemma involved in the first place in using the web at all... (see it?) (and in the case of the dear friend, a comical one as well...)
16 years ago

Kees replied to renovatio06:

You’re right, Werner: there is some friction between your personal data being collected and stored, and giving them away.
Nevertheless, there’s also a difference. The Dutch have a habit of leaving the curtains open, at night, a strange, but voluntary habit, and it’s up to them what passers-by get to see. If you put a camera in front of their windows, and forbid to draw the curtains, the matter suddenly obtains a new, and infinitely more threatening quality.
16 years ago

renovatio06 replied to :

So, if I read you correctly, Kees, it's ok to leave my curtains open as long as it's me having a say over that? But it becomes some sort of spying on me, if the government orders me to leave them open at *their* will? Got it (I think).
Now, here's a new drift to it: What, if I *choose* to leave the curtains open, since I think it's o.k. for passer-by to catch a glimpse of my life here and there. And what, if the government then decided "You know what? Since you're leaving your curtains open, we figured it to be o.k. to be bring a camera and not only see, but tape some of what's going on inside."
And then they later decide to use that information in whatever way they think is opportune at a given time...
I know, that *is* being paranoid, but wasn't it a little bit like that during the McCarthy era? And would you really trust politicians (especially in light of this article) in that they are competent to decide where to draw the line between what belongs into the area of your privacy and what to the government in their attempt to thwart criminal acts of any kind?
I do have my doubts here...
16 years ago

Kees replied to :

Well, I admit verbalization of my views was sloppy, but I think you got my meaning.

In a free society, it should be a civil right to determine which personal data are public. There must be “good”, justified reasons to hold a citizen suspect, and collecting personal data at random implies everybody is suspect of crime.

IMO, most of what we reveal about ourselves on Web2.0 is unimportant to the authorities. Far more interesting are the things we choose not to tell ... and they’re bound to get a glimpse of those too, when we surf the web.
I was googling, once, for “Phil Daniels”, the leading actor of Roddam’s Quadrophenia movie, and I inadvertently landed on an American porn site. I won’t say I couldn’t learn something from it, but (though I would plead innocent even under torture) it would make a bad entry in my BKA dossier...
Nobody, absolutely nobody has a right to know about this mishap (except you, as I’m telling you).

To attach the term “paranoia” to the recent political developments in Germany and elsewhere is playing down what’s actually happening. The problem isn’t you (your paranoia), it’s the political developments.
Only today, Heribert Prantl, one of the good people, wrote an editorial in the SZ under the title “Vertraut Schäuble!”:
“Reden Sie nicht so laut vom Datenschutz; Sie machen sich verdächtig. Beharren Sie nicht so stur auf Ihrer Privatsphäre; Sie werden sonst als Außenseiter registriert. (Aber registriert und kontrolliert werden Sie natürlich ohnehin.) Man meint es gut mit Ihnen, wenn man Ihr Telefon abhört, Ihre Verbindungen speichert und Ihre Computer durchsucht. Verlassen Sie sich doch dabei einfach auf Ihren Bundesinnenminister; er sorgt, sagt er, für Ihre rechtliche und sonstige Sicherheit.”
That’s the way it is, or is envisaged to be.

It would surely help if our politicians knew what they’re talking about, but the principles of data privacy are quite simple and apply to many fields. Someone to whom data privacy is sacred won’t need much internet experience to recognize the fatal direction the “safety” discussion takes.
16 years ago

renovatio06 replied to :

I agree 100%, Kees. I was only trying to reaffirm your view with my above comment. I agree to what you're saying - and I learnt, it's not me being paranoid, but things are really headed in a bad direction...
16 years ago

Sherry ~ Rebujito said:

lol yeah "she" doesn"t is that a bad thing? but can tell you Robert Johnson is
*alive* ;) and well and has one hell of a kickin ride...love them blues. :)
and Kees do YOU still practice the "dutch leavin the curtains open thing"...if you do can only imagine what some may have thought/recorded when you've done certain pics like "Applying for a job in AFF" :-DDDDD
OH and btw
what's up with the "one of my dearest"....excuse me???? and qualifying it with
fl and Ipernity????????????? ;-)
16 years ago

Kees replied to Sherry ~ Rebujito:

Of course, I’m shocked about your attitude, but I won’t show it. ;-)

We’ve become so international that we experience typically Dutch habits as exotic now: none of my “restricted” pictures would exist without opaque curtains drawn...

As to your “btw”:
You must understand this is a public place, and I can’t express my true feelings as freely as I’d do on a personal level. Now I’m replying just to you, and I can tell you: You are more than a friend, much more than one of my dearest friends in whatever context ... you are the only woman in my life.
In a way, I feel sorry for my wife, daughter, and mother, but the truth must be told. (Billy Wilder once advised never to tell an actress she was “the very best”, but always she was “one of the two best” –clever! This is not the time for evasiveness, though.)
If someone else should incidentally read this: it’s a matter of bondage, nothing less. Laugh at me ... call me an idiot –I’ll gladly bear it. For Sherry’s sake.
16 years ago

Sherry ~ Rebujito said:

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I CAN'T BREATHE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
only woman??? how bout only person???? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
OMG!!!!
Cora you and your mother...pay NO attention to us...Kees is merely trying to one up me on our bizarre humor...and of course as always he has totally succeeded!!! LOL LOL LOL LOL *still trying to catch breath* ;-DDDD
16 years ago

Kees replied to Sherry ~ Rebujito:

Humor? Bizarre humor? I don’t get this. Besides, there are no men in my life...

Oh wait! There’s Robbie! (Neutered, but wasn’t our fault.)
OK, but you rank immediately after him! :-)
16 years ago

Sherry ~ Rebujito replied to :

LOL LOL LOL...Okay Okay I acquiesce....Robbie RULES!!!!
*still trying to catch breath* LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
16 years ago

Kees replied to :

Hello, Nigel! No need to be shy: you’re welcome anytime.
I also find “geotagging” a bore sometimes, especially when we’ve made a trip and I’m a bit disoriented (both at the actual place and in retrospect). It works best for me when I tag the villages where I was born and where I live now. It helps organize repetitive pictures and create a virtual reality of sorts; the “strolls through Icking” (in the Icking Group on ... the other site), for instance, serve the same purpose. I take people who have never been there by the hand and show them how things are, the good and the not-so-good things.
I don’t know if other people like it, but it gives me a strange kind of satisfaction.

I’m pretty sure that the Dutch who leave the curtains open at night belong to the nothing-to-hide category. When I show visitors around the house, figuratively speaking, I am very similar to them, but wouldn’t pretend I’ve got nothing to hide: I’m only cheating, and would never show the sado-maso room in the basement!
16 years ago