I built a browser-based photo geotagging tool. What should I lead with?
I'm building GeoTag Photos: https://geotagphotos.app
It reads existing EXIF GPS data, lets you add or replace coordinates, and exports tagged photos individually or as a ZIP. It's mainly built for local SEO teams, photographers, and people processing location-based image batches.
Image processing happens in the browser, so original photos aren't uploaded to our servers.
One thing I learned while building it: writing latitude and longitude is the easy part. Compatibility is messy. JPEG is the safest format for GPS EXIF. PNG and WebP can store metadata, but other platforms may not read it consistently. That's why I added output verification and client reports instead of simply showing a "done" message.
The free plan supports 5-photo batches and 10 exports per day. Paid features include 50-photo batches, CSV import, address search, saved locations, resizing, watermarks, and reports.
I'm still working out the positioning. Which message would make you pay attention?
Your original photos stay in the browser.
Batch geotagging built for local SEO work.
Verified exports and reports for client handoff.
I'd especially value feedback from anyone running a local SEO agency or handling repeated photo workflows. What sounds useful, and what sounds unnecessary?
Lead with the verification and client reports — that's the outcome, not the feature. "Batch geotagging" describes what it does. "Verified exports your clients can trust" describes why it matters. Local SEO teams don't pay for geotagging, they pay to avoid the conversation where a client asks why their photos aren't showing up in Maps.
The part that caught my attention is that the post starts as a geotagging tool, but most of the story is actually about everything that happens after the coordinates get written.
Writing the metadata sounds like the easy part.
The thing you seem to have spent most of your time solving is making sure the result survives contact with the real world.
"Survives contact with the real world" is probably a better description of the product than the one I started with.
Geotagging is the easy entry point to explain, but a file containing coordinates isn't useful if the next platform can't read them or the client can't verify what was delivered.
I may be positioning the product one step too early in the workflow. Would "verified geotagged photo delivery" make the value clearer, or would you still lead with geotagging?
I don't think I'd feel comfortable giving a confident answer in a thread.
What makes it interesting to me is that those aren't just two different descriptions—they imply very different ideas about where the product's value actually starts.
I've got a few thoughts on that, but it's probably more than I'd unpack properly here.
What's the best email to reach you on?