Metadata displayed: Lightroom vs elsewhere

  • Thread starter Thread starter dav_id
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dav_id

Guest
Hi all,

I am starting the process of filling those desesperately blank fields in the metadata panel and I am already scratching my head...

It may be fun to fill all of the fields but if it can't be seen by 8'% of those looking at your pics, what's the point ?

In fact, I was just looking at the copyright and some of the contact fields (web address, email etc)

The problem is, I filled those but when using windows properties my url and email were not displayed anywhere. Same problem when checking with irfanview.

So I guess, it will be seen with Lightroom, Photoshop and most probably other specialized softwares (Aperture, NX Capture and so on). But if, like me, most of those looking at your pics only do so through windows viewer, there is no way for them to see those contacts details (email, url etc) in windows properties...

How do you do it yourself ? Do you put those information in different fields so that it could be displayed in windows properties and if so, which ones ?

Thanks a lot for your lights ;)
 
[quote author=dav_id link=topic=7519.msg51481#msg51481 date=125''96142]
I am starting the process of filling those desesperately blank fields in the metadata panel and I am already scratching my head...

It may be fun to fill all of the fields but if it can't be seen by 8'% of those looking at your pics, what's the point ?

In fact, I was just looking at the copyright and some of the contact fields (web address, email etc)

The problem is, I filled those but when using windows properties my url and email were not displayed anywhere. Same problem when checking with irfanview.

So I guess, it will be seen with Lightroom, Photoshop and most probably other specialized softwares (Aperture, NX Capture and so on). But if, like me, most of those looking at your pics only do so through windows viewer, there is no way for them to see those contacts details (email, url etc) in windows properties...

How do you do it yourself ? Do you put those information in different fields so that it could be displayed in windows properties and if so, which ones ?[/quote]

Many of those fields are searchable in Lightroom (and elsewhere). So, for example, if you have photos from several sources, and the Originator field is filled in, you can search for all photos taken by Denise. If you have some photos that you want to make public domain, and other that you want to copyright, you can search for those.

The bottom line is that you have to decide which metadata is going to be meaningful to you. Ask yourself, “what possible ways to organize and search might I want?” and then use the appropriate fields. I personally have no use for most of those fields, but I can see how other people might have a use for them.

By the way, Exiftool will examine your files and find all those fields and report the values that you have entered in LR and saved to the file itself.
 
Also, make sure you save the metadata to file if you're going to give someone your actual file. Or to include the metadata in export. Otherwise your information is only in the LR catalog/database.
 
Windows file properties, and image metadata are unfortunately mostly unrelated.
We had a discussion here sometime ago about software that would tie the two together, but honestly I forget the result of that discussion.

As Paige says, many of these things are important to consider/document from either a search or copyright aspect. Most competent imaging software will be able to display and perhaps search on those fields. Unfortunately, Windows Explorer and Picture Viewer, are not exactly 'competent' imaging programs. They leave a lot to be desired. Those entries should appear in Irfanview, I believe, but it's been a while since I used it last. Anybody else?

If you have no commercial or copyright ambitions or concerns for your images, and your sharing partners, family and friends, etc. will be using consumer oriented viewer programs, then you may be correct.

Erro makes a very good point as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top