EOS 10D question (date stamp)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Marc Walch, Oct 13, 2003.

  1. Marc Walch

    Marc Walch Guest

    I just bought a Canon EOS 10d and have gone through half of the user manual.

    One question I have is: how to get a date stamp on each image?


    Marc Walch
    Marc Walch, Oct 13, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. You can't have it simply superimpose one. The date is added to the header of
    each JPEG file created, so you will have to add this on the computer. There
    are probably programs out there to do it at that point, but there's no way to
    get the camera to do it itself.
    Ethan Trewhitt, Oct 13, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Sorry, to clarify, the image has the date stored in an invisible section of
    the file, but you can only translate this to the visible part of the image
    with a PC.
    Ethan Trewhitt, Oct 13, 2003
  4. Marc Walch

    George Kerby Guest

    I don't understand why people would WANT that annoying crap on a high
    quality camera! The EXIF file should also have it, if one wants it. Too me,
    it's worse than the "bugs" that every damn network uses these days at the
    bottom corner of the screen. Oh well, to each their own...
    George Kerby, Oct 13, 2003
  5. I don't understand why people would WANT that annoying crap on a high
    Agreed 100%. The last thing I want in the corner of my images is an
    orange time/date stamp. That always looks so tacky.
    Randall Ainsworth, Oct 13, 2003
  6. << Agreed 100%. The last thing I want in the corner of my images is an
    orange time/date stamp. That always looks so tacky. >>

    There are times when it is good to have an automatic date, such as when photos
    are used for documentation rather than art.

    It can usually be turned off in those that have it. It looks like the
    manufacturers have made the decision for us and turned it off permanently on
    most recent cameras!

    Fred McKenzie, Oct 14, 2003
  7. Marc Walch

    Junque Guest

    Not so much "turned it off" as not increased the development cost by
    adding a feature that most users of a high performance camera would not
    want. I can see that the performance and visible date stamping might be
    desirable in forensic use.
    Junque, Oct 14, 2003
  8. Marc Walch

    Guest Guest

    Fred> orange time/date stamp. That always looks so tacky. >>

    Fred> There are times when it is good to have an automatic date, such as when photos
    Fred> are used for documentation rather than art.

    Fred> It can usually be turned off in those that have it. It looks like the
    Fred> manufacturers have made the decision for us and turned it off permanently on
    Fred> most recent cameras!


    With a digital the time stamp is part of the file,
    and does not need to be part of the image.

    Why is this so hard to understand?
    Guest, Oct 14, 2003
  9. Marc Walch

    Marc Walch Guest

    It's not hard to understand at all. However, when you review a whole
    stack of photos, sometimes it is nice to know the chronology. Looking at
    the time field on the file is not always feasible.

    What is hard to understand is why wasn't this yet another option (ON or
    OFF) amidst all the other options this fine camera provides. For
    example, Canon could have added another C.Fn custom function.

    So, for those who colorfully think it's "crap", turn it off; for those
    who like it (and sorry, that has nothing to do with this type of
    camera), turn it on.

    Marc Walch
    Marc Walch, Oct 14, 2003
  10. Marc Walch

    Crownfield Guest

    and on the other hand,
    I never want a picture with the date screwing up the image.
    Crownfield, Oct 14, 2003
  11. Marc Walch

    Ron Hunter Guest

    I certainly agree. The place for a date on a picture is ON THE BACK!
    One of the printers back in the 50's used to print the date on the
    picture in the margin (no borderless prints (or color) those days), and
    that was great. Sure helps 50 years later when going through the old
    Ron Hunter, Oct 14, 2003
  12. Marc Walch

    MarkH Guest

    I don’t see why anyone would need this feature unless they print the
    picture, when it is on a computer then the file date & time is easy to see
    with most software.

    Obviously it should be a simple feature to get the software used to print
    the image to print the time and date on the image, though I have not looked
    at what software might offer this. Though there are many programs that let
    you add info to a header or footer, like: filename, image properties, time
    & date, filesize, etc. e.g. ACDSee can add a caption with info like file
    date or the date from the EXIF.
    MarkH, Oct 14, 2003
  13. Marc Walch

    Junque Guest

    The image viewing software supplied with my camera shows this
    information along with the picture, in fact it shows the focus, focal
    length, shutter, appetiser etc. Maybe some people would like to see
    these on the picture.
    It would cost money to implement, is that difficult to understand.
    Perhaps the people who want the best image do not want it damaged, of
    course you can turn it off; but why pay for a feature that detracts from
    the image quality?
    Junque, Oct 14, 2003
  14. Marc Walch

    George Kerby Guest

    Agreed. In film cameras, a simple group of LEDs put the date on the film at
    the film plane.

    Since there is no film to absorb the light energy and keep it from
    scattering all over the CCD/CMOS, this technique would not seem appropriate.
    Some method of selection of certain pixels to glow/charge, regardless of
    what light intensity and color is coming through the lens, would certainly
    be a challenge to accomplish.

    I'm not saying it can't be done, but how much would this little convenience
    add to the price of the camera?

    I agree with, I think it was Ron, that the dates should be on the back or
    border of the image, not within the image.

    But WTF do I know?
    George Kerby, Oct 14, 2003
  15. Marc Walch

    Junque Guest

    That was a typo, but it almost sounds better than the correct word.
    Junque, Oct 14, 2003
  16. Marc Walch

    Junque Guest

    I don't think you would have to instruct pixels to glow, only to
    substitute values from them; but you would want to put the date within a
    contrasting block, which would look ghastly. Incidentally both film and
    sensor should be roughly equally absorptive since both must extract
    energy from the incident wave in order to respond to it.
    In all probability not much, but how many purchases of high end cameras
    would view the availability of this image damaging feature a
    non-professional disincentive?
    Junque, Oct 14, 2003
  17. Marc Walch

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    Here's a compromise solution; the camera could add a border area, as an
    option, with the info in it. You could still crop it away and have your
    full original if you want.
    JPS, Oct 15, 2003
  18. The LEDs expose the film from the rear, through the backing.

    This wouldn't work for a CCD. But if a manufacturer really wanted to
    simulate the effect in a digital camera, it would be trivial to generate
    7-segment red characters and stuff them into the image data.

    They don't do this because it's simply the wrong way to achieve this.
    The camera puts date and time (and lots of other info) into the EXIF
    header, and unadulterated image data into the image portion of the file.
    Then, later, you can combine the date with the image in any way you

    If you're looking at the image on screen, you can ask to see the EXIF
    data. If you print the image, you can have your printing software add
    the date and time, in any format you want, in the image area, or on the
    border just outside the image, or on the back - as long as you have
    suitable software and printing hardware. And you can do this after
    cropping the image. This is far better than irreversibly writing the
    date or time in some arbitrary format in some arbitrary corner of the
    Essentially nothing. But nobody in their right mind would use it.
    That is better, but has to be done by the printing software or hardware;
    it can't be done in camera.

    Dave Martindale, Oct 15, 2003
  19. Marc Walch

    Rafe B. Guest

    Baloney. Implementing this as a C.Fn custom function is
    a good idea -- it would be accessible only to the few who
    want it and would be invisible to the vast majority who don't.

    I think Marc's idea is brilliant.

    And all it costs is a minimal firmware effort by some engineer
    at Canon. It wouldn't add one penny to the product's bill of
    materials (BOM) cost.

    rafe b.
    Rafe B., Oct 15, 2003
  20. To my eyes the datestamp "feature" seems absurd, especially on a 10D. It
    would just clutter up the menus. Adding this feature wouldn't be just a
    matter of adding this one little feature; that would be irrational.
    Rationally, if a stupid useless feature like this should be added, then
    every other imagined feature which is equally stupid and useless, along
    with all less stupid and useless features, should be added. Can you imagine
    how crowded the menu system would get.
    Constantinople, Oct 15, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.