Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/60/9972860/html/smf/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
Still scratching my head on this ....
The DAM Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 21, 2020, 11:30:50 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
28033 Posts in 5147 Topics by 2903 Members
Latest Member: kbroch
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  The DAM Forum
|-+  Workflow Discussions
| |-+  Stock Photography
| | |-+  Still scratching my head on this ....
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Still scratching my head on this ....  (Read 12560 times)
Matt Limb OBE
Newbie
*
Posts: 26


View Profile WWW
« on: January 24, 2009, 10:57:03 AM »

Hello All

Has anyone found a good method of 'tagging' metadata when you submit an image to a Stock Picture Library?

For example 10 images all sent to XX Picture Library - all 10 need a tag to say they have been sent - 4 are rejected so this 4 now need a tag to say rejected by XX Picture Library - then start again with ZZ Picture Library etc etc

Anyone any guidance?

Matt
Logged

-----------------------------------------
Matt Limb OBE
www.mlimages.co.uk
peterkrogh
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5682


View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2009, 11:51:33 AM »

Mat,
What software are you using to manage your collection?
Peter
Logged
Matt Limb OBE
Newbie
*
Posts: 26


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2009, 03:56:38 AM »

Hello Peter

Running with Lightroom version 2 and PS CS4 as and when needed

Matt
Logged

-----------------------------------------
Matt Limb OBE
www.mlimages.co.uk
peterkrogh
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5682


View Profile Email
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2009, 07:48:41 AM »

Matt,
It's probably best to build a keyword hierarchy to help remember this
Submissions
>Agency
>>Date
>>>Accept/Reject Status

Something like that.  You can set the keywords as ones not to be exported.

You could use Collections also, but building hierarchies is kind of painful with that tool as currently designed.

Of course this gets to be more difficult if you have multiple catalogs.

Peter
Logged
johnbeardy
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1813


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 25, 2009, 10:12:40 AM »

I feel it's lousy data practice to pollute keywords with non-descriptive information - the best that can be said for it is that at least it can be made to work. I do have a working LR plug-in designed for stock submission control, but have chosen not to release it, or even use it myself in "real" catalogues - the SDK's custom fields are just too flaky. It's just another reason why Lightroom should have had a proper implementation of custom fields, and from day 1.....

John
Logged
peterkrogh
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5682


View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: January 25, 2009, 07:50:34 PM »

John,
Given the reality of the program at the present time, would you do this in collections instead?  There's not a huge difference between collection and no-write keywords as far as durability goes. What would you say are the pluses and minuses for each? 
And don't say Expression Media.
Peter


Logged
johnbeardy
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1813


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2009, 12:27:20 AM »

I'd say it's about equal. You can search on assignment to collections (smart collections can target a collection name), and there's no risk at all of collections getting into the xmp. On the other hand, assigning to keywords is easier via sets, presets, and you've got various ways of searching for keywords.

John
Logged
perkarlsson
Newbie
*
Posts: 18


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: January 28, 2009, 03:37:52 AM »

I don't use LR so this does not quite apply for you.

Instead, i use Portfolio and to track agency submissions I have created custom fields (which you can't in LR if I understand right).

For each agency I have a custom field in which I note where each image is in the process: candidate for submission / to submit / submitted / accepted / rejected / not to submit ... (or whatever would fit your needs)

This makes it very easy to track where images are with each agency (provided you diligently update the fields).

The disadvantage is that the info is not embedded in the image file itself. (But I would not what to have that info embedded in keywords anyway. Perhaps if I knew how to work with embedded custom metadata it could work, but I don't want to "corrupt" a field with info that it was not intended to contain).

In the worst case, if I need to migrate from Portfolio, I can always export the custom field and import it into any new DAMĀ  start to work with.

-Per
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!