Home > Commerce > Digital Resources > The 2007 Best-of Series: Edward Gajdel
Basic metadata: a photographers best friend
by Ethan G. Salwen
For a print article on pages 20-23 of the ASMP Bulletin’s Fall 2007 issue, Ethan Salwen investigated the metadata practices of numerous ASMP members, including Richard Anderson, Judy Herrmann, Paul Hester, Chase Jarvis, Jay Kinghorn, Peter Krogh, Chun Lai, Lee Peterson, David Riecks, Jeff Sedlik, Dan Stack, Corey Weiner, and Gale Zucker. Here, Salwen provides additional information, strategies and Web links for working with metadata.
Many photographers don’t even think of an image’s file name as metadata. Yet, this critical metadata is often mishandled in the workflow from camera to photographer to client. By understanding problems that can arise when multiple parties are renaming image files, photographers can improve their metadata practices and nip trouble in the bud.
File Names: critical and misunderstood basic metadata
The name of an image is actually metadata. For better or worse, file names are one of the most easily altered types of metadata. In fact, the file name is one of the few types of metadata that can be changed in a raw file. And this can actually be done directly through the computer’s operating system — intentionally or by mistake.
This easy-to-change nature of file names can result in anything from time-wasting headaches to virtual disasters. Photographers maintain tens of thousands of captures based on the unique naming systems they develop for their specific digital workflow. Few others working with these files will respect this original, photographer-generated name. This calls for a clear understanding and careful maintenance of file names right from the start.
A survey of picture editors reveals that most feel totally free to change file names to best meet their own in-house needs. This includes anything from renaming images copied from the Web to renaming files submitted by a photographer as part of an assignment. If the photographer’s contact information metadata remains in place, the editor or publisher can always track down the photographer. But identification of a specific image may still be tricky, particularly if the photographer shot many similars, or if the image was cropped for layout purposes by the client.
Editorial photographer Gale Zucker found out how distressing such file renaming can be. At the same time, she also learned how quickly informed metadata practices can come to the rescue. Zucker recently spent two seasons photographing nearly 12,000 captures on more than ten farms across the United States for a book project called ShearSpirit.
In the middle of the job, she learned that she would have to adhere to the publisher’s file naming convention, even though she was already using her own numbering system for delivery of Web galleries and low-res images for layouts. Zucker thought that she was facing a disaster. How was she going to coordinate the publisher’s numbers with her own numbering system?
Luckily, Zucker remembered that the “Batch Rename” action in Adobe Bridge has a check box labeled “Preserve current file name in XMP metadata.” Using this feature, Zucker batch renamed all her files to meet her publisher’s requirements. The result was that the new file name was stored in the standard “File name” field, while Zucker’s original names were stored in the “Preserved File name” field. Disaster avoided.
File name copied to Document Title field
David Riecks points out that Zucker’s solution is a valid one, and that it can work fine under the right circumstances. However, he makes it clear that the “Preserved File name” field is an XMP metadata field, and not an IPTC metadata field. IPTC fields are the most internationally standardized metadata fields, and therefore the most likely to remain valuable over time. “If your client is using an older, ‘legacy’ IPTC application, they will never see that XMP field,” Riecks explains. “Or more correctly, the data will never be transferred to the application’s database because it is not recognized as part of the IPTC data.”
Riecks has a solution. After capture, he renames all image files in a consistent format that best meets his digital asset management practices. Then, as part of his normal metadata workflow, Riecks embeds a copy of the unique file name in the IPTC “Title” metadata field. (This field is also called the “Document Title” in Photoshop). He does this because the “Title” field is part of the IPTC Core, and assures more backward and forward compatibility among different applications. Furthermore, Riecks explains that the IPTC standards body actually defines the “Title” as a field to be used “primarily for identification” and that this can include the file name.
This definition of the “Title” field makes it the perfect place to store a copy of the original file name. Riecks points out that that the “Title” field should not be confused with the “Headline” field, which is intended to hold a short synopsis of the photograph.
Riecks has found the practice of embedding his file names into the “Title” field invaluable in automatically protecting himself against the kind of problem encountered by Zucker. “There are numerous times where clients will download a comp image and rename the file to make it easier for them to manage,” says Riecks. “Therefore, it’s very useful to have the file name backed up inside the file.” Depending on what applications are being used, there are a number of ways to embed the file name into the “Title” field.
When clients contact Riecks for an image that does not have his file number, he simply leads them though the steps of finding the original embedded file number in the File Info dialog box in Photoshop and then matches that to his own system. However, he also likes to introduce clients to Jeffrey’s Exif Viewer, which is probably the easiest tool for a non-photographer to access an image file’s complete metadata.