The Importance of Managing Photo Metadata

I still remember the street names from a trip over ten days in August 2015: Chamber Street in Edinburgh, where our performance venue was, and Lutton Place, where our guest house was located. In that state, the moment I open a photograph and check its EXIF data, information floods my mind. When you use such useful and powerful functions of your equipment, it becomes significantly easier to encounter "opportunities to extend myself."

I occasionally take notes while looking at maps alongside the detailed information of old photos.

This often becomes a time when I gain an immense amount of insight.

Camera EXIF (Exchangeable Image File Format) data is metadata embedded in a digital image file, containing detailed settings from the time of shooting, such as the camera model, date/time, and shooting parameters. If GPS is activated, it also includes location data. It's used to understand the image's properties and for copyright and forensic purposes. You can easily check it in the file properties menu in most operating systems or image viewers.

You can think of EXIF as a kind of digital signature that tells the technical background of a photo. The Japan Electronic Industries Development Association (JEIDA) first created this standard in 1995 to define a way to include camera setting information (tags) within widely used file formats like JPEG, TIFF, and WAV. The goal was to standardize the exchange of image files and metadata between various devices and software. The name 'Exchangeable' reflects the purpose of ensuring compatibility and interoperability, allowing metadata of image files (and audio files) to be universally read and written by various systems, regardless of the manufacturer.

Despite the foundation of Hangeul and metal type, which came early, there's one underlying reason why the knowledge revolution by Gutenberg's printing press is evaluated so much more highly, even across different languages. It is the principle of operation over outcome. It’s not about the immediately visible achievements, but about the contextual function and potential that it implies.

Data is like that.

And this will only become more important.

When King Sejong created Hangeul in 1443, Joseon already possessed the world's most advanced metal type technology. It was a setup that could be called the most powerful engine for a 'knowledge revolution' in human history—a combination of the most efficient script (software) and the most advanced printing technology (hardware). Sejong's publication of <Yongbieocheonga>(용비어천가, Songs of Flying Dragons) and <Worincheongangjigok> (월인천강지곡, Songs of the Moon's Reflection on a Thousand Rivers) using Hangeul type was undoubtedly a grand vision that foresaw a new era this combination would bring.

But the current of history flowed differently. Around the same time, Gutenberg's printing press spread throughout Europe, sparking the Reformation and the Renaissance, and opening the gates to the modern era. We led in technical sophistication, but the world-changing impact exploded in Europe.

What was the problem?

Whenever I think of this, I feel compelled to emphasize:

"We often try to find the cause in the technology itself,

but the core of it lies in the social and economic soil of

'sharable content' and 'a market to consume knowledge.'"

The success of Gutenberg's press started with the 'conceptual standard' it would print—Christianity, which everyone shared—and the 'content' of the Bible. Luther's reforms (encompassing the entire Christian context) tore down the barrier of Latin and created demand for the Bible translated into the vernacular. The aspiration, "Everyone must read the Bible for themselves," became the driving force that kept the presses running day and night. On top of this, we must remember that the printing of Catholic indulgences served as a definite revenue model, proving this technology was a 'profitable business' from the very beginning.

Joseon's situation was different. The Confucian classics, the foundation of the state ideology, were trapped within 'Hanja,' or Classical Chinese. For the Sadaebu (사대부, scholar-official) ruling class, Hanja was both knowledge and power, and they had no intention of sharing their power base with the masses by translating it into Hangeul, which they condescendingly called 'Eonmun' (the vulgar script). The brilliant 'software' Sejong created was, in effect, incompatible with the state's 'operating system (OS).' Hangeul content, shunned by its core knowledge consumers, could not form a 'market.' We must remember that Europe began its knowledge revolution through the challenge of translating the Latin Bible into its own languages. This is where the fates of Joseon and Europe diverged.

This difference leads to the difference in who operated the printing technology. Gutenberg was a 'private entrepreneur' who started his business with capital borrowed from an investor; from the start, 'profit' was crucial. He devised a 'mass production system'—a lead-alloy type, oil-based ink, and a screw press—to print cheaper, faster, and in greater quantities. A 'market' of new knowledge consumers—universities, merchants, and the emerging bourgeoisie—existed to buy these books. Printing technology, combined with commercial capital, could thus spread explosively.

In contrast, Joseon's metal type was a 'state-monopolized enterprise' run by the 'Jujaso' (the state foundry). Its purpose was not profit, but the 'noble' goal of spreading royal authority and Confucian ideology. The printed books were not commodities but 'royal gifts' (하사, hasa) bestowed upon a small number of scholar-officials. The knowledge consumers, the Sadaebu, already monopolized knowledge and did not want it disseminated. Furthermore, an agrarian-based economy and policies that suppressed commerce prevented the growth of private capital. Ultimately, Joseon's printing technology became a means of 'preservation' and 'control' of knowledge, not its 'dissemination.'

Sejong's grand vision, which transcended his era, must have foreseen the knowledge-based society that the combination of script and printing would bring. However, that revolutionary technology hit a wall of ideological barriers and a rigid socio-economic structure. We must remember that Gutenberg's innovation was not a victory of technology itself, but a victory of the dynamic system of 'market,' 'capital,' and 'demand' that embraced the technology, turned it into a commodity, consumed it, and reinvested in it.

Considering the dynamics of data, content, information, and capital flow—while some still talk of an "AI bubble"—I'm betting on the side that says, "It hasn't even started." This is why I believe those who possess a large amount of contextualizable and standardizable data will have an absolute advantage. Although created by humans, the language of machines has aspects different from human language, and this is both their strength and their weakness.

“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,

Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

- Hamlet

What is truly vast is not human thought, but the world itself.

The greatness of recording lies not in its historicity, but in its role as a threshold where we begin our encounter with the world. The "historicity" dominated by historians is trivial in comparison. The world is everything outside the record. The record exists, ultimately, not for itself, but for that remainder.

I can leave explanations for my own artwork, but 'work'—commissions—is different.

Metadata management is as important as the act of shooting itself.

The Importance of Managing Metadata.

I want to eagerly emphasize this.