What to put in the Date/Time Digitized for Stock Photos?

[SummerPhotos]

My apologies if this is not the forum to ask this question. I couldn't find a more relevant forum to ask.

I am often downloading stock images. Mostly they are CC0 or Public Domain images, however, I like to complete the IPTC and EXIF data anyways in order to accurately track their source of origin, original creator etc.

Many of these come in with the EXIF Date/Time Original filled in. But the Date/Time Digitized is empty.

What Date should I put in the Date/Time Digitized as I don't technically know that. But it looks so empty. 

[StarGeek]

The EXIF Date/Time Digitized (called CreateDate by exiftool) is the time that the image was turned into a digital file. If the picture was taken by any sort of digital camera, then this time will be the same as the DateTimeOriginal, so you can just directly copy it over
exiftool "-CreateDate<DateTimeOriginal" /path/to/files/

Technically, if the photo was a taken by a film camera, then the Date/Time Digitized would be the date/time when it was scanned in.  But hardly anyone keeps such detailed track of things so it is usually filled in with the DateTimeOriginal, as above.

[audiogalaxy]

My apologies if this is not the forum to ask this question. I couldn't find a more relevant forum to ask.

I am often downloading stock images. Mostly they are CC0 or Public Domain images, however, I like to complete the IPTC and EXIF data anyways in order to accurately track their source of origin, original creator etc.

Many of these come in with the EXIF Date/Time Original filled in. But the Date/Time Digitized is empty.

What Date should I put in the Date/Time Digitized as I don't technically know that. But it looks so empty. 

Beyond the technical operation that Stargeek surely pointed out perfectly, your question concerns a piece of information that you can only and uniquely find in the photo releases, produced by the original photographer. These are provided only to agencies unless there are disputes in court.
The dates in the releases are compared by the agencies with those in the exif data.
So the date in theory should already be correct and relevant.

However, if you are using free, non-stock image agencies, this kind of service does not exist and the risk is high: no one has worked for free to do useful cross-checks for law and safety in the workflow. This is one reason why free image sites are not safety-proof for the end customer.

Anyway, the site from which you download the photos, perhaps, can answer you

Then you can apply the instructions provided by the magical Stargeek !

Good Luck!

[StarGeek]

However, if you are using free, non-stock image agencies, this kind of service does not exist and the risk is high: no one has worked for free to do useful cross-checks for law and safety in the workflow. This is one reason why free image sites are not safety-proof for the end customer.

I feel that WikiCommons might be considered an exception.  Wiki zealots, I mean editors, do a lot of work to make sure that the images are either free license or small for fair use.  I call them zealots because several images of mine that I upload there were flagged and subsequently removed, even though I had followed all the rules and given notice that they were mine to distribute.  Which is why I never bother to share any images there anymore.

Or pretty much anywhere else as some of my pictures of cosplayers kept ending up on Russian porn sites

[audiogalaxy]

However, if you are using free, non-stock image agencies, this kind of service does not exist and the risk is high: no one has worked for free to do useful cross-checks for law and safety in the workflow. This is one reason why free image sites are not safety-proof for the end customer.

I feel that WikiCommons might be considered an exception.  Wiki zealots, I mean editors, do a lot of work to make sure that the images are either free license or small for fair use.  I call them zealots because several images of mine that I upload there were flagged and subsequently removed, even though I had followed all the rules and given notice that they were mine to distribute.  Which is why I never bother to share any images there anymore.

Or pretty much anywhere else as some of my pictures of cosplayers kept ending up on Russian porn sites

LOL!
But I understand both situations. I think that for wikimedia's "policy" it is better to be in total security that they have not violated any laws anywhere in the world and so they become precisely zealots.

I still wish you all the best because sometimes our photography may be neither commercially useful nor art in the highest sense of that term, but technically so well executed that it can contribute to the total knowledge of the world ... with style and grace.

If the urge comes back to you, maybe get involved in wikimonuments or that kind of activity where wikimedia is really calling for it. I suggest that to all the photography enthusiasts I chat with.

But if you get bored, I totally understand.

Thank you for your contribution here!