LR Hierachy lost

[Chris Bishop]

On dragging and dropping a 300 trial catalogue from LR to eMedia the keywords transferred but linearly (is that a word?) not in the hiearchy structure that was set up.
Can this be overcome?
I created a hiearchy structure in CS3, copied every word to a file, imported that file into LR -- that worked (I was imporessed). It set up my keyword structure in LR. BUT I still don't know whether to stick with LR or eMedia. Serial monogomy may be right, but the affair is making me go grey. I need to find the partner and stick with her.
However eMedia may be the best so far? BUT I like the changes that can be made in LR.
Before I go futher is it possible? I could keyword in CS3 or LR before finally resting in eMedia.
Chris Bishop

[roberte]

Hi Chris,

xMedia is handling your keywords correctly. The current IPTC spec for keywords is as a flat field with no hierarchy . Adobe have a big say in the IPTC specs so I see their LR method of storing a hierarchical keyword list in XMP being added to the next version, IPTC Core 2?

John Beardsworth has shown a script where iView hierarchical Sets can be transferred to LR hierarchical keywords. This is a one-way trip and the opposite to what you're doing - however as proof of concept it is possible.

-- Robert.

[Chris Bishop]

Thanks speedy
Chris Bishop

[havezet]

Maybe slightly offtopic;

LR stores its hierarchical keywords in yet another XMP property inside a Lightroom schema. So now we have: 1. IPTC keywords, 2. dc:subject keywords, and 3. Lightroom keywords. I'm not very fond of this solution as keyword data is now getting redundantly stored in XMP which is never good for the long term.

I don't see it as a problem to introduce a new keywords property, but the solution as it is now is almost just as limited as the original dc:subject solution. As keywording and DAM systems evolve there will be a need for additional keyword related data elements and what would be better than to store these together instead of splitered over several ad-hoc schemas/properties. If keywords were stored as "structured bags" then we would be able to "extend" that definition. Then as the definition evolves older systems would still be able to read the old data and new systems can use the additional info. As a sample I'd like to mention "relational keywording". This is something IDimager V4 introduces and it allows you to inter-relate keywords (e.g. "John" relates to "Anita" as "husband" to "wife"). This is info that could easily be stored together with the keywords itself in a bag of structured objects.

Ah well, the world will never be perfect

Hert

[Chris Bishop]

Over to JB or another script writer for Windows.
Can a script be created to take the hierachical (?) keywords and create a Catalogue set?
Once the major structure has been transferred over minor updates can be accomodated as per DAM CD's vol 2 article 16
My structure is 90% there already
I created it in CS3 migrated it to LR as per another thread -- these two programmes are now in sync, although I tend not to need to go LR-CS3.
Chris Bishop

[Chris Bishop]

I've managed to save the keywords out as a .txt file, which when opened in Notepad appears as I want it to.
Does anyone know how to import this .txt file as a catalogue set in xMedia or iVMPro?
Chris Bishop

[peterkrogh]

Hert,
(Writing from your home country today)
I was part of the Adobe group that worked on the keywords.  It is considered a temporary solution until a more permanent place could be found.  The needs were two: dont' break existing keywords field (the dc:subject field)and make it forward migratable. Embedding te hierarchy information as they did seemed to be the only solution that worked for both. 

Everyone agrees that there needs to be standardization here, the question was what was possible to get out the door, given the fact that no standard exists at the time.

Peter

[ScottBuckel]

Chris-

There was a thread while ago that discussed this:  http://thedambook.com/smf/index.php?topic=1575.0  I have used it to create catalog sets for bird classification (I am proof reading this now,and can make it available in the future).

I hope this helps.

Scott

[Chris Bishop]

Maybe my title was les saccurate than it could have been. My LR keyword hierachy is fine in LR. My problem was trying to get it into the catalogue sets "as is" rather than a flat field in keywords.
Chris Bishop

[ScottBuckel]

Chris - iView does not have heirachical keywords so you will not be albe to get them to look the same in iView as LR.

Scott

[havezet]

(Writing from your home country today)

Peter,

Aah, you're in Holland now. Do you happen to be near Den Haag (The Hague)?

It is considered a temporary solution until a more permanent place could be found.

I understand the background of this being a temporary solution, but you can not call it a temporary solution when this is already "live". Hopefuly you can use my summier input above when a more final solution is being determined.

Everyone agrees that there needs to be standardization here, the question was what was possible to get out the door, given the fact that no standard exists at the time.

A good moment to set a standard is when there is no standard yet  . And i couldn't agree more. As XMP is so easy to use to exchange metadata it becomes more and more important to strive for one standard which all management/keywording tools could then follow. Maybe good to include the "independant" IPTC organization in the discussion. Also if you need me to provide input, I'd be more than happy to provide it.

Hert

[peterkrogh]

Hert,
This was a hot topic in Florence last year at the international metadata convention.  The hope is that they do come up with something.  This effort is being supported by all the major players, btu things move slowly. 

You should be part of this discussion, if you have time.
Peter

[havezet]

You should be part of this discussion, if you have time.

Peter, I'd be happy to join the discussions. You've got my mail address.

Hert