Making Sure All Your Images Have GPS Data (a follow-up to an earlier post)

This is follow-up to a post I did last month where Adobe’s Terry White shared a very clever tip on how to add images to the Maps module that didn’t have GPS data already embedded into them (here’s a link to that post).

This tip today is how to find out which images in your catalog still don’t have any GPS data attached to them (perhaps you can use Terry’s tip once you find them all). Here’s how it’s done (quick and easy btw):

STEP ONE: Start by going to the Catalog panel (in the left side panels of the Library module) and click on “All Photographs” so you’re searching through your entire library. Press the Backslash to bring up the Search fields across the top of the preview area (if they’re not already visible) and click on the Metadata tab. Now click and hold on the name of any one of the search terms at the top of a column (in this example, I clicked on “Lens”) and choose GPS data (as shown here).

STEP TWO: Now that column will display how many images are tagged with GPS data, and more importantly, how many are not. Click on the phrase “No Coordinates” and it will display the thumbnails of all the images in your entire catalog that don’t have GPS data embedded, so they’re not findable in the Maps module. Now you can use Terry’s tip (using cell phone images you’ve already taken in the past) to get them tagged and on the map. NOTE: That’s not the only way to find GPS info – just a clever way.

There ya have it. Hope you found that helpful.

Come spend the day with me in Indianapolis
Later this month (May 23rd to be exact) I’ll be in Indianapolis with my “Lightroom On Tour” full day seminar. Hope you can come out and join me for the day. It’s only $99 and includes a detailed workbook, my custom set of presets, a bunch of video downloads, and the whole this is 100% money-back guaranteed. Hope I’ll see you there. 🙂

Have a great Monday everybody! 🙂

Best,

-Scott

Author: Scott Kelby

Scott is the President of KelbyOne, an online educational community for photographers, Photoshop and Lightroom users. He's editor and publisher of Photoshop User Magazine, Editor of "Lightroom magazine"; Conference Technical Chair for the Photoshop World Conference & Expo, and the author of a string of bestselling Photoshop, Lightroom, and photography books. You can learn more about Scott at http://scottkelby.com

Share This Post On

8 Comments

  1. GPS is great for a location you want people to know about. Crappy idea for an urban explorer. Some locations are best left to the imagination.

    Post a Reply
  2. Hi Scott – whilst we have your attention… 😉

    I was chatting with some other photographers the other day & we all agreed that we understood the impact of APS-C on focal length, but nobody’s really explained its impact on Depth of Field. i.e. would the same lens give the same Depth of Field on a FF & Cropped sensor camera. None of us had a FF camera available to run an experiment… words of wisdom from Mr K always welcomed.

    Post a Reply
    • Hi Paul: Unfortunately, I’ve never tested it, so anything I say would just be a guess. Sorry ’bout that.

      Post a Reply
    • When I shoot on my D70 (which is 1.5), I have to open up at least 1 stop to get the same DOF drop-off as with my D700 (FF). Your crop sensor result will look like it’s giving you extra depth of field at the same f-stop. There are DOF calculators out there which let you calculate it based on sensor crop factor btw.

      Post a Reply
    • A crop sensor is, essentially, just that – a sensor which is the same as a full-frame sensor, but with the top, bottom, left, and right edges all shaved off. With the exact same lens/mount and the exact same aperture and the exact same shutter and ISO, all taking a picture from the exact same location and orientation, the crop sensor will appear exactly the same as if you had taken that picture with a full frame sensor and cropped it down in Lightroom, with two exceptions when you get down to pixel-peeping:

      1. The number of pixels in the cropped-down image might be less than the number from the cropped sensor. This is because, ex, a 5Ds has a monstrous 50.6MP sensor, so the 1.6x crop on that will be just under 20MP (crop factor is the ratio of the diagonal, so the ratio of the areas and hence number of pixels is crop factor squared), while an 80D has a 24MP sensor, although the 7D Mark II is roughly the same pixel density at 20.2MP. Comparing the more common 6D, 5D Mark IV, or 1DX Mark II, all of which have 20.2MP or 30.1MP sensors will yield equivalent APS-C densities not seen since the Canon 40D days.
      2. Since the individual pixels in the sensor are larger, and assuming approximately the same generation of sensor technology, they will each gather more light and have less noise, etc. Roughly. But, that ends up being a general camera characteristic.

      That said, you wouldn’t take the same picture with the 5D. You’d frame it differently by either stepping closer or zooming in, because you don’t want all that content which was cropped off the sides (otherwise you would have taken a wider shot with the crop, etc; edge case is where you could not get the picture you wanted with the crop sensor due to lack of a wide enough angle or ability to step back far enough). The effect of either moving closer or of zooming in is to shorten the effective depth of field. This is why generally you will hear that a larger sensor has shallower depth of field. I have heard that a good approximation of this is that you change the depth of field here approximately the same as though you had reduced the aperture by your crop factor (ie, with a f/4 aperture a crop sensor will have the same depth of field as a full frame would at f/6.4). Not sure if that is mathematically a sound approximation though.

      All told, there is nothing magical about the full frame sensor which gives “better bokeh” or shallower depth of field. The sensor is just bigger than APS-C (and smaller than the various medium-format sensors etc). Which means with a lens capable of painting the full sensor you will see a wider view of the scene – more of the scene on all four sides – than you would with the crop sensor. The widely-purported claims of better subject isolation are completely due to the larger sensor allowing the photographer to zoom in more optically or to step closer.

      Post a Reply
      • I should also note that “depth of field” is a bit of an imprecise term. Focus is always precisely on a single plane (the focal plane). The idea of “depth of field” is “how far in front of and behind that plane can something be before I start noticing that it is out of focus”. How far you can go really depends on the subject matter, the pixel density at which the photograph is being rendered, the image quality of the lens, etc.

        Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *