Getting keywords applied in PM recognised in I-Match

[happysnapper]

Hi Kirk.
I have a problem that is driving me crazy. I apply keywords both flat  and hierarchical in PM but under certain circumstances I-Match wont recognise some of them. If I apply a keyword string it is recognised if I then apply a flat keyword it is recognised but any subsequent keywords added will not be.

I have been asking Mario at I-Match why this is and he has said it is because I-Match extracts all keywords flat or hierarchical from the xmp:heirarchival subject  entry. He seems to be suggesting that PM should be syncing both the xmp dc subject and the xmp hierarchival subject. I paiste his comments.


" I looked at your XMP file with the following ExifTool command (works also in the ExifTool Command Processor in IMatch):

exiftool -G1 -xmp-lr:hierarchicalSubject "IMG_9821.xmp"

The result is:

[XMP-lr]        Hierarchical Subject            : Quick|Brown|Fox
[XMP-dc]        Subject                         : Quick|Brown|Fox, jumps, over, lazy, dog

which shows the problem. The keywords "jumps", "over", "lazy" and "dog" are only in the flat keywords, but not in the hierarchical keywords. The keywords are not properly synchronized. It should look like this:

[XMP-lr]        Hierarchical Subject            : Quick|Brown|Fox ,jumps, over, lazy, dog
[XMP-dc]        Subject                         : Quick|Brown|Fox, jumps, over, lazy, dog

If this is output generated by PM, it is wrong.

IMatch by default assumes that if a file has hierarchical keywords that these keywords are properly synchronized with the flat keywords. This is a reasonable assumption and also according to the Metadata Working Group rules. IMatch uses only the hierarchical keywords on import.

You can override this behavior by disabling the option Don't replace existing hierarchical keywords in Edit > Preferences > Metadata. This will merge existing hierarchical and flat keywords contained on your files when IMatch imports them (into the IMatch database) and when you later write the files back, IMatch will synchronize flat and hierarchical keywords properly.

You may use this as a work-around for an initial import of your files. But when you continue updating metadata in multiple applications and some of them mess up your metadata, you will be in trouble. I recommend only using IMatch or asking the PM developers to fix this.

Note: Disabling the option should be done on a needed-only basis because it can play havoc with your keywords if you combine it with thesaurus lookups to map flat keywords into your keyword hierarchy on import. This probably won't affect you in this case, so this is just a thing to keep in mind...
« Last Edit: October 14, 2015, 10:38:17 am by Mario »"

I really really need both your applications as I consider them both the best in their field . PM already has a tick box to stop structured keywords being added to XMP dc subject field would it not be possible to have one that allows flat keywords  to be added to xmp lr hierarchical subject field?

cheers Graham

[Kirk Baker]

Graham,

I'd have to check the standards again, but I don't see why non-hierarchical keywords should be represented in the hierarchical keywords field.  We put both in the normal keywords because for quite some time most applications would only ever look in the dc-Subject field for keywords (really just in the legacy binary IPTC record at that.)

PM reads and manages both fields.  Why can't I-Match do the same?  Just make a union of the keywords (removing duplicates) before putting them into the database.

-Kirk

[happysnapper]

Thanks Kirk for your fast response.
As a mere photographer not software  programmer I too could not see the logic so spent the whole night googling for xmp. standards without a lot of success, but I do know that Mario is a very clever chap. I have a feeling it has something to do with the way Lightroom handles files, I'm not a Lightroom user so can't experiment.

I will pass on your comments to Mario, I'm sure this problem must have a solution. There must be hundreds if not thousands of Pro Togs using both your applications.

Cheers Graham