Comparison
MetaPurify vs ExifTool
ExifTool is more capable than MetaPurify in almost every measurable way. Choose it whenever you are comfortable at a command line. Choose MetaPurify when you want an answer in the browser without installing Perl, or when you want the findings explained rather than listed.
What ExifTool is
ExifTool is Phil Harvey's Perl library and command-line application for reading, writing and editing metadata. It runs on Windows, macOS and Unix-like systems, requires Perl 5.004 or later, and its documentation states that it recognises tens of thousands of different tags. ExifCleaner is built on it.
At a glance
| Dimension | MetaPurify | ExifTool |
|---|---|---|
| Interface | Web page, drag and drop | Command line; a drag-and-drop executable on Windows |
| Installation | None | Install; needs Perl on some systems |
| Tag coverage | The common EXIF, GPS, XMP, IPTC and PNG text structures | Tens of thousands of tags, including manufacturer maker notes |
| Formats | JPEG, PNG, WebP | Images, RAW, video, audio, PDF, Office documents and more |
| Writing metadata | Yes, EXIF fields only: artist, copyright, description, dates and GPS | Yes, full read, write and edit |
| Scripting and automation | No | Yes — the usual reason to choose it |
| Explains what it found | Grouped into plain-language categories | Tag names and values |
Where ExifTool is better
- Coverage is not comparable. Tens of thousands of tags against the common structures we parse, and manufacturer maker notes that we do not attempt to decode.
- Writing coverage is not comparable. Our EXIF editor sets a handful of fields — artist, copyright, description, dates and GPS — while ExifTool writes essentially any tag in any supported container.
- It scripts. Any repeatable or automated workflow belongs in ExifTool, not in a browser tab.
- It is the reference implementation, so when two tools disagree about a file, ExifTool is the one to believe.
Where MetaPurify is better
- Nothing to install and no command to remember. `exiftool -all= photo.jpg` is not difficult, but it is a barrier that keeps most people from ever checking a photo.
- Findings are explained, not listed. A tag dump tells you `GPSLatitude` exists; the point is that it is a location, and that it is the field worth removing first.
- It runs on a phone, where the photo usually is.
- Removal is verified against the output and reported honestly, including a distinct state for "could not confirm" rather than a green tick it has not earned.
Which to choose
This is not really a competition, and we would be overclaiming to pretend otherwise. ExifTool is a deeper tool and the right answer for anyone willing to use a terminal. MetaPurify exists for the people who will not install it — and for the narrower job of showing someone what is in their photo before they share it.
Common questions
Can MetaPurify edit individual tags the way ExifTool can?
Only a handful. The EXIF editor sets artist, copyright, description, dates and GPS; ExifTool writes essentially any tag in any container it supports. Anything beyond those few fields is an ExifTool job.
Why use MetaPurify when ExifTool is more capable?
Because a command you have to install and remember is a barrier that stops most people ever checking a photo. MetaPurify runs on the phone the picture is already on, and explains what it found instead of printing a tag dump.
Does MetaPurify handle RAW files or video?
No. ExifTool reads RAW, video, audio, PDF and Office formats; MetaPurify handles JPEG, PNG and WebP. For anything else, ExifTool is the answer.
Does removing metadata re-encode the picture?
Neither tool needs to. MetaPurify checks rather than assumes: it hashes the compressed image payload before and after cleaning, so if the picture had been re-encoded the two hashes would differ.
Our own limits are listed in full on the supported formats page, and the verification step referenced above is explained in how to verify metadata was actually removed.