Location and sublocation PM vs Lightroom

[myotis]

In PM, the hierarchy, for  Event and Location is:

City
Location
State/Province
Country.

In Lightroom, the XMPs created in PM come in as:

Country
State/Province
City
Sub Location


So "Location" in PM seems to be mapped to "sublocation" in lightroom and it comes below City in the hierarchy, where as in PM it comes above city in the hierarchy. This makes a big difference to the usabikity of the Location field in Lightroom.

PMs Sublocation field doesn't seem to map anywhere in Lightroom.

Is this expected behaviour, or am I missing something.

Many thanks,

Cheers,

Graham

[Kirk Baker]

Graham,

In PM, the hierarchy, for  Event and Location is:

City
Location
State/Province
Country.

In Lightroom, the XMPs created in PM come in as:

Country
State/Province
City
Sub Location


So "Location" in PM seems to be mapped to "sublocation" in lightroom and it comes below City in the hierarchy, where as in PM it comes above city in the hierarchy. This makes a big difference to the usabikity of the Location field in Lightroom.

PMs Sublocation field doesn't seem to map anywhere in Lightroom.

Does LR not normally offer a Sub-location field?

-Kirk

[myotis]

Hello Kirk,

After googling around it does indeed seem that Lightroom uses sublocation instead of location, and there is no sub-location field, but this is still all very new to me and I am just trying to sort out a catloging system that integrates PM and LR, while at the same time learning to use both.

In fact the PM hierarchy suits me better as I can put UK counties into the PM location field, but that sort of falls apart when imported into LR, with the  hirearchical metadata sort facility that LR has.

Is there is no standard for the hierarchy of these fields.  Everything I have found seems to the same as Lightroom, with PM the one that is different, but I'm not sure whather this is an IPTC standard, or it just so happens everything I have  found is Adobe based.

Actually, it seems that location from iptc 1.0 was replaced with sublocation in iptc 1.1, so Lightroom is using the more up to date terminology.

Cheers,

Graham

[myotis]

To reply to myself, as I said in the last email the location/sublocation things seems to be simply a naming thing. The IPTC web site says that some programs are still using "location" rather than the newer "sublocation" so that would explain why Lightroom is mapping location to sublocation.

The rest of my problem is back to the old lack of IPTC fields to properly identify location, and thus not a PM problem, so I think my question is closed.

Cheers,

Graham

[Kirk Baker]

Graham,

To reply to myself, as I said in the last email the location/sublocation things seems to be simply a naming thing. The IPTC web site says that some programs are still using "location" rather than the newer "sublocation" so that would explain why Lightroom is mapping location to sublocation.

The rest of my problem is back to the old lack of IPTC fields to properly identify location, and thus not a PM problem, so I think my question is closed.

And you can customize the labels used in Photo Mechanic so if you want to use the other term, just customize the Location field.  You can do this in the Accessibility section of the Preferences dialog.

-Kirk

[myotis]

Thanks Kirk,

I will have a look at that, but now that I think I follow what is happening, I think am OK:-)

Cheers,

Graham

[Mick O (Camera Bits)]

Hi Graham,

You may also be interested in our documentation of the IPTC fields.   This may help you interpret the intention of some of these fields and how we used the IPTC documentation.

http://wiki.camerabits.com/en/index.php?title=IPTC_map

-Mick

[myotis]

Hi Graham,

You may also be interested in our documentation of the IPTC fields.   This may help you interpret the intention of some of these fields and how we used the IPTC documentation.

http://wiki.camerabits.com/en/index.php?title=IPTC_map

-Mick

Thanks Mick, but I have already read this, and although useful, it doesn't actually help with this specific issue.

Cheers,

Graham