The DAM Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 28, 2014, 07:34:50 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
28016 Posts in 5137 Topics by 2912 Members
Latest Member: kbroch
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  The DAM Forum
|-+  DAM Stuff
| |-+  Software Discussions
| | |-+  Transfer, Saving, Movement of Metadata
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Transfer, Saving, Movement of Metadata  (Read 2115 times)
Reg33
Newbie
*
Posts: 9


View Profile Email
« on: July 14, 2010, 12:32:43 PM »

Hi,
I'm new to DAM and one of the first things I want to do is appropriately tag my files with metadata.  I'm wondering if there's a way to be able to save metadata or transfer it if i change systems?

 For example, currently I'm using a combination of Picasa and Bridge CS3 with a small amount of tagging.  I've been watching some of the videos on dpworkflow.com (quite a resource) where use of ImageIngester is suggested.  My concern is that if I pick a system to use to add my metadata and then change systems, will i have to redo all of the metadata or will I have to enter it all over again.  I want to look at a few options but I don't want to commit to hours and hours of metatagging only to find that I've got to redo it if I change software.

Thank you.
David
Logged
R. Neil Haugen
Full Member
***
Posts: 121


View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2010, 12:57:08 PM »

You're right to have some concerns, but the answer to the question is to always test. When you "tag" or key-word in Picasa, open the image then in Bridge and see if the metatdata you entered through Picasa made it into the file in such a way that Bridge can see it. ESPECIALLY check for the field groups of say, copyright, location, email/website info, those crucial ones.

Then enter such meta in Bridge, open the file in Picasa, and see what made it through. You may need to find settings that help, I know nothing of Picasa ... but with any combination of programs we ALWAYS have to test. And any time one of the programs is up-dated, test ALL connections again. And again ... and ...

Neil
Logged

R Neil Haugen
MyPhotoMentor.com
rNeilPhotog.com
Haugensgalleri.com
Reg33
Newbie
*
Posts: 9


View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: July 14, 2010, 03:51:08 PM »

Thanks, and good point.  It's just at this point I'm not sure I want to get LR3 because I do almost all of my work in PS.  $300 seems to me to be a lot for what I'm going to use as a cataloging program.  So I will test Picasa and Bridge and go back and forth.  I''ll probably also download a trial of ImageIngester and see that tagging, too.

Logged
R. Neil Haugen
Full Member
***
Posts: 121


View Profile Email
« Reply #3 on: July 15, 2010, 10:38:44 AM »

If you're only doing a few photos a month new, Picasa and/or Bridge would probably do just fine. Maybe even PSElements (which can also round-trip shots to CS and has a database of sorts these days).

If you are doing more shooting, several hundred images a month, then LR becomes an amazing tool. As a professional portrait photographer of 30+ years, used to using diffusion on the lenses on my ol' RB67 medium format film camera, and a dang good negative retoucher and print retoucher on staff, I DO expect the skin of my subjects to be smoothed and softened a bit ... not to plastic of course, but definitely worked until you pay more attention to the eyes than to zits and moles. I USED to send entire groups of images from a session Bridge to Photoshop ... but now, I can do so much so fast in Lightroom to improve the images that ALL "general" corrections of color and "density" and all are done in Lightroom, and all "dodging" and "burning" and other selective spot or area enhancements ... there's even a bit of skin-smoothing in LR so by the time I get done there, there aren't many that need to go to Photoshop.

Kevin Kubota and onOne both have wonderful 'plugins' for Lightroom and Photoshop that can speed your work there also. But again, if you're only doing a few per month, they'd be fun but expensive overkill.

LR doesn't have quite enough DAM capabilities to totally satisfy the missus and my brands, but wow ... it's sure made our "darkroom" work faster and better. After LR, we go to EM2 (the wife's "Haugen's" studio) and idIMager (for me) ... may bring those together in one of them at some point ...

Neil
Logged

R Neil Haugen
MyPhotoMentor.com
rNeilPhotog.com
Haugensgalleri.com
Reg33
Newbie
*
Posts: 9


View Profile Email
« Reply #4 on: July 15, 2010, 02:38:04 PM »

Thanks for the insight.  I'm probably adding 250-500 shots per month. 

On the subject of meta -- if I decide to go the "Way of the DNG", is it correct to state that meta data can be incorporated into a DNG file.  So if today I use EM2 and next week move to lightroom, as long as I have DNGs, then my standard meta data will be preserved?  (I say standard because I've read that EM2 has some non-standard meta fields that other program don't "know about").




Logged
ScottBuckel
Full Member
***
Posts: 245


View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: July 15, 2010, 05:00:52 PM »

As long as you sync the metadata from the catalogs to the files you should be fine. 

Scott
Logged

Scott Buckel
Monrovia, CA
R. Neil Haugen
Full Member
***
Posts: 121


View Profile Email
« Reply #6 on: July 15, 2010, 10:31:28 PM »

Scott's right ... before moving image files "out" of one system, simply push the metadata back into the files and you'll be fine ... mostly. And yes, DNG's carry all metadata internally. For proprietary RAW files (Canon's CRF, Nikon's NEF, Fuji's RAF, etc.) most programs create "XMP" files, so-called sidecar files, that have the same name as an image file but the .xmp extension, and these hold all the metadata fields.

Note, however, whether it's a PIEware program like Lightroom or DAM like iView/EM2, most programs do not place EVERY bit of info they have on the file back into the file. There are known things for each of them, and the folks around here can provide you with work-arounds consisting either of fairly simple steps or suggest scripts that can harvest the non-included data and put it into the file in such a way that you know what it is. So it's not a huge problem.

250-500 a month ... hmmm ... that's getting close to where I'd suggest Lightroom, actually ... different strokes for different folks ...

Neil
Logged

R Neil Haugen
MyPhotoMentor.com
rNeilPhotog.com
Haugensgalleri.com
raka
Newbie
*
Posts: 18


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: July 16, 2010, 09:34:56 AM »

the OP may be interested in this technique as well:

here is another metadata portability scenario:

thinking of moving from EM2 to LR

i like the idea of keeping my original files 'pure', so i'd like to NOT write metadata to the actual image files (which will change a jpeg file's 'modify date', etc.).

instead, to transfer the metadata i would like to:
1- use EM2 to create an XMP sidecar for each file w/ the exported metadata
2- use LR to import these files, harvesting the newly created xmps into the LR catalog
3- delete the xmps, since the metadata is now safely in the LR catalog

can this be done?

the roadblock i have is that:
1- EM2 command Action>Extract Metadata....  creates these xmps BUT dumps them all into a useless single folder, as opposed to the originating file folders where LR can find & use them
2- these xmps seem to be missing a few basic metadata elements

any workarounds for the above, or comments on the feasibility of my idea? i do also have a few files with existing xmp sidecars (PS editing) that would need special consideration to prevent overwriting the xmp file)

thks,
- pieter

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


View Profile Email
« Reply #8 on: July 25, 2010, 08:15:13 PM »

Pieter,
The biggest problem with the sidecar export is for those usig proprietary raw with sidecars.  In these cases, the sidecars made byEM will overwrite all the existing data in the sidecar.

The next issue, is to make sure that the sidecar data is "respected" by whatever the receiving application is. You could easily have a collision between what is embedded and what is in the sidecar. And many programs would simply ignore  sidecar for a non-proprietary raw file.

Peter
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!