Removing meta-data, yeah... That has gotten some people into trouble before, like the published article of (I think we all agree) a low-life spammer who was accidentally outed by the online version of the story that included photos with IPTC info of the city he lived in. Oops. In this particular case I wasn't too upset, but in general this is not good if you believe that the press should be able to protect their sources. We do offer the ability to not include Exif data for those who don't want anyone to know their camera (or that they shoot in P mode
![Wink ;)](https://forums.camerabits.com/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
). But this is the subject of another thread of course... We will probably add the ability to strip IPTC/XMP in the future. In Photoshop, for example, you have to go to some extra work to hide this (e.g. select all, copy, new document, paste).
But regarding chroma subsampling, we are discussing how to best offer this option. We are thinking about a preference slider that says at what JPEG quality to start subsampling.
BTW - I was wrong about an earlier post. I had thought that only one dimension was commonly subsampled (perhaps it was the D1X JPEGs I was looking at). But typically if chroma subsampling is done, it is done in both the horizontal and vertical dimensions. So in this case, chroma subsampling will remove 3/4 of 2/3 of the data, which is a savings of 1/2. Photoshop CS2 starts chroma subsampling at quality 6 and lower.
--dennis