Location-based camera capability in 1st Gen?

[JNB]

I've noticed that with the 2.0 Firmware upgrade, my 1st-Gen iPhone asks my permission to use my current location for tons of things. I just went to use the Camera for the first time since the upgrade, and got the request below, but I note that the EXIF data doesn't actually contain the location (I posted a couple of shots to the Web Gallery on MM--very cool!--and the location data isn't in the info). Anyone know of anything that is using location internally (not something from the App Store), or is this just a general notice we have to "Cancel or Allow" forever?

On a side note, I also find that my location sensing in Google Maps is within 25 feet or so reliably, and faster than before (once again, on a 1st-Gen phone).

EDIT: Importing to iPhoto, the lat/long are populated now. Cool beans!

 

[Anonymous Freak]

My first-gen reports coordinates. It uses the same cell-tower-and-WiFi triangulation that Google Maps introduced in firmware 1.1.3.

On the 3G, it uses actual GPS.

In both cases, though, it only stores latitude and longitude to the nearest minute.

Check out the EXIF on these two pictures. The ducks were the first photo I took with my original iPhone after updating to firmware 2.0; and the one of my daughter was the first one taken when I got my 3G iPhone.

EDIT: I see you found it. I would also like it if there were a way to view that on the iPhone. It would also be nice if iPhoto included a location viewer as a pop-up or something now, too.

P.S. There's a Mobile Flickr app that lets you send photos to your Flickr account; and the next version promises to have a way of viewing photos based on your location. (Similar to the Panoramio-based "NearPics", which doesn't let you upload.) That would be perfect, just upload them to Flickr immediately, and anyone can see them based on location!

 

[JNB]

UPDATE: More & more interesting. In iPhoto, lat/long are as noted, to the nearest minute. In MM Web Gallery (my own login), no positional data. In the public Web Gallery, positional data to the hundredth of a second. (DD MM SS.xx). The position generated, although pretty detailed, is nonetheless off by 780'/237m.

 

[Nicholas.C]

i don't understand, what does geotargeting do?

 

[JNB]

I think you mean geotagging. It allows you to associate your picture with a geographical position for mapping. Google Maps, Flickr, social networking sites, etc, are all starting to really take advantage of this.

 

[gibbz]

Basically, geographic location information is "tagged" in the EXIF data of the image. This way, you know where you took the photo.

Edit: OP beat me to it.

 

[Nicholas.C]

i sitll don't get it... i though it was something where it uploads to myspace or something and tags it LOL

 

[viggen61]

i sitll don't get it... i though it was something where it uploads to myspace or something and tags it LOL

No, but places like MySpace, Flickr, etc. can display that information if it is available. All it does is "tag" the geographical location the photo was taken at (get it? geo-tagging) with the lat/lon into the EXIF data of the digital photo.

Once could take that information, go back to something like Google Earth, and plug that in to get directions to a spot, or just know where it is.

 

[viggen61]

UPDATE: More & more interesting. In iPhoto, lat/long are as noted, to the nearest minute. In MM Web Gallery (my own login), no positional data. In the public Web Gallery, positional data to the hundredth of a second. (DD MM SS.xx). The position generated, although pretty detailed, is nonetheless off by 780'/237m.

I wonder...On my avaition GPS, when I want to save a waypoint, I get several options: one is to take the "current" location, and another is to have it take several (2, 10, 100, 1000, whatever...) to average the calculated position. The latter is said to be more accurate and/or repeatable.

That's one of the issues with GPS, it's repeatability. You can stand in the same set of footprints at several different times, and when you take a reading, they won't be exactly the same.

It's still pretty darned accurate, when you consider that your little GPS receiver is tracking 5 or more satellites moving in different orbits at over 17,000 MPH!

But I wonder if the 3G is just taking one reading, or several?

 

[View]

Mine still doesn't tag the photos for some reason...
Show picture info still show lat/long as --