ExifTool Forum

StarGeek has documented the behaviour of the Windows Title Property (https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php/topic,6589.msg32862.html#msg32862):

When you set the Title from Windows Properties, the following tags are set:

1. EXIF:ImageDescription
2. EXIF:XPTitle
3. IPTC:Caption-Abstract
4. XMP:Description
5. XMP:Title

And when populating the Title Property, Windows will take the value from the first existing tag with the above order of priority.

And deb27 has documented the behaviour of the Windows Subject Property (https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php/topic,6589.msg32863.html#msg32863) (for Windows 7):

When you set the Subject from Windows Properties, the following tags are set:

EXIF:XPSubject

And Windows will populate the Subject Property from the following fields, in order of priority:

1. EXIF:XPSubject
2. EXIF:ImageDescription

Jpeg/Tiff
Note: IPTC data is only written when there is a pre-existing IPTC block.

Windows property	Tags Read	Tags Written	Notes
Title	EXIF:ImageDescription EXIF:XPTitle IPTC:Caption-Abstract XMP-dc:Description XMP-dc:Title	EXIF:ImageDescription EXIF:XPTitle IPTC:Caption-Abstract XMP-dc:Description XMP-dc:Title
Subject	EXIF:XPSubject	EXIF:XPSubject
Rating	EXIF:Rating EXIF:RatingPercent XMP-microsoft:RatingPercent XMP-xmp:Rating	EXIF:Rating EXIF:RatingPercent XMP-microsoft:RatingPercent XMP-xmp:Rating	When writing: 0 stars = removes tags 1 star = 1 2 stars = 25 3 stars = 50 4 stars = 75 5 Stars = 99  When reading: no tag or 0 = 0 star 1-12 = 1 star 13-37 = 2 stars 38-62 = 3 stars 63-87 = 4 stars 88-100+ = 5 Stars
Tags	EXIF:XPKeywords IPTC:Keywords XMP-dc:Subject	EXIF:XPKeywords IPTC:Keywords XMP-dc:Subject XMP-microsoft:LastKeywordIPTC XMP-microsoft:LastKeywordXMP	Windows combine all entries in these three tags when reading.  Windows will write LastKeywordIPTC only when a previously existing IPTC block exists.
People	XMP-MP:RegionPersonDisplayName	N/A	Does not display in the Property window if empty
Comments	EXIF:UserComment EXIF:XPComment XMP-exif:UserComment	EXIF:XPComment	Clears EXIF:UserComment and  XMP-exif:UserComment when writing
Authors	EXIF:Artist EXIF:XPAuthor IPTC:By-line XMP-dc:Creator	EXIF:Artist EXIF:XPAuthor IPTC:By-line XMP-dc:Creator
Date Taken	EXIF:CreateDate EXIF:DateTimeOriginal IPTC:DateCreated + IPTC:TimeCreated XMP-exif:DateTimeOriginal XMP-xmp:CreateDate	EXIF:CreateDate EXIF:DateTimeOriginal EXIF:SubSecTimeDigitized EXIF:SubSecTimeOriginal IPTC:DateCreated + IPTC:TimeCreated XMP-Xmp:CreateDate	Only date portion can be set.  Time is set to current computer time.  If only IPTC:DateCreated exists, then the time will be set to 00:00:00. IPTC:TimeCreated is ignored when IPTC:DateCreated doesn't exist.  Sets timezone for  IPTC:TimeCreated to +00:00, ignoring computer's local timezone.
Program name	EXIF:Software IPTC:OriginatingProgram XMP-tiff:Software XMP-xmp:CreatorTool	N/A
Date Acquired	XMP-microsoft:DateAcquired	XMP-microsoft:DateAcquired
Copyright	EXIF:Copyright IPTC:CopyrightNotice XMP-dc:Rights	EXIF:Copyright IPTC:CopyrightNotice XMP-dc:Rights
Image ID	EXIF:ImageUniqueID XMP-exif:ImageUniqueID	N/A
Horizontal resolution	EXIF:Yresolution	N/A
Verticle resolution	EXIF:Xresolution	N/A	If only one tag is filled, the same value will be used for both.
Compression	EXIF:Compression	N/A	Probably tiff only
Resolution unit	EXIF:ResolutionUnit XMP-tiff:ResolutionUnit	N/A	Displays raw number, 2 = inches 3 = cm
Color representation	EXIF:ColorSpace	N/A
Camera maker	EXIF:Make XMP-tiff:Make	EXIF:Make
Camera model	EXIF:Model XMP-tiff:Model	EXIF:Model
F-stop	EXIF:FNumber XMP-exif:Fnumber	N/A	Rounds to nearest decimal
Exposure time	EXIF:ExposureTime XMP-exif:ExposureTime	N/A
ISO speed	EXIF:ISO XMP-exif:ISO	EXIF:ISO
Exposure bias	EXIF:ExposureCompensation	N/A
Focal length	EXIF:FocalLength XMP-exif:FocalLength	N/A	Rounds to nearest decimal
Max aperture	EXIF:MaxApertureValue XMP-exif:MaxApertureValue	N/A
Metering mode	EXIF:MeteringMode XMP-exif:MeteringMode	EXIF:MeteringMode
Subject distance	EXIF:SubjectDistance XMP-exif:SubjectDistance	N/A
Flash mode	EXIF:Flash	EXIF:Flash
Flash energy	EXIF:FlashEnergy XMP-exif:FlashEnergy	N/A
35mm focal length	EXIF:FocalLengthIn35mmFormat XMP-exif:FocalLengthIn35mmFormat	EXIF:FocalLengthIn35mmFormat
Lens maker	XMP-microsoft:LensManufacturer	XMP-microsoft:LensManufacturer
Lens model	XMP-microsoft:LensModel	XMP-microsoft:LensModel
Flash maker	XMP-microsoft:FlashManufacturer	XMP-microsoft:FlashManufacturer
Flash model	XMP-microsoft:FlashModel	XMP-microsoft:FlashModel
Camera serial number	XMP-microsoft:CameraSerialNumber	XMP-microsoft:CameraSerialNumber
Contrast	EXIF:Contrast XMP-exif:Contrast	EXIF:Contrast
Brightness	EXIF:BrightnessValue XMP-exif:BrightnessValue	N/A
Light source	EXIF:LightSource XMP-exif:LightSource	EXIF:LightSource	Windows does not know the full range of values that exiftool can write
Exposure program	EXIF:ExposureProgram XMP-exif:ExposureProgram	EXIF:ExposureProgram
Saturation	EXIF:Saturation XMP-exif:Saturation	EXIF:Saturation
Sharpness	EXIF:Sharpness XMP-exif:Sharpness	EXIF:Sharpness
White balance	EXIF:WhiteBalance XMP-exif:WhiteBalance	EXIF:WhiteBalance
Photometric interpretation	EXIF:PhotometricInterpretation XMP-tiff:PhotometricInterpretation	N/A
Digital zoom	EXIF:DigitalZoomRatio XMP-exif:DigitalZoomRatio	N/A
EXIF version	EXIF:ExifVersion XMP-exif:EXIFVersion	EXIF:ExifVersion
Latitude	EXIF:GPSLatitude + EXIF:GPSLatitudeRef XMP-exif:GPSLatitude	N/A	Always positive, ignores reference direction
Longitude	EXIF:GPSLongitude + EXIF:LongitudeRef XMP-exif:GPSLongitude	N/A	Always positive, ignores reference direction
Altitude	EXIF:GPSAltitude XMP-exif:GPSAltitude	N/A	Always positive, ignores reference direction

PNG
Windows will only read/write one tag.  All others are ignored.

Windows property	Tags Read/Written
Date Taken	PNG:CreationTime

MP4 files
Windows has a problem displaying metadata when there is a large amount of embedded data.  It will show most entries as empty when this happens.  Unlike images, Windows will read/write only one tag for each entry under "Details".

Windows property	Tags Read/Written	Notes
Title	ItemList:Title
Subtitle	Microsoft:Subtitle
Rating	Microsoft:SharedUserRating	1 Star : 1 2 Star : 25 3 Star : 50 4 Star : 75 5 Star : 99
Tags	Microsoft:Category
Comments	ItemList:Comment
Contributing artists	ItemList:Artist	Slash separated list,  e.g. Elton John/Axel Rose
Year	ItemList:ContentCreateDate
Genre	ItemList:Genre	The Details tab treats this as a List Type tag, but writing to this value with a slash separated list (as with Artist) only lists the first entry.  Re-writing this from windows creates a second ItemList:Genre tag.
Directors	Microsoft:Director	List Type tag
Producers	Microsoft:Producer	List Type tag
Writers	Microsoft:Writer	List Type tag
Publisher	Microsoft:Publisher
Content provider	Microsoft:ContentDistributor
Media created	Quicktime:CreateDate	Time portion cannot be set through Properties.  This tag correctly adjusts to UTC.
Encoded by	Microsoft:EncodedBy
Author URL	Microsoft:AuthorURL
Promotion URL	Microsoft:PromotionURL
Copyright	Unknown	The Property window cannot write this.  Unknown which tag but Microsoft:Copyright is likely.
Parental rating	Microsoft:ParentalRating
Parental rating reason	Unknown	The Property window cannot write this.  Unknown which tag but Microsoft:ParentalRatingReason is likely.
Composers	ItemList:Composer	Slash separated list,  e.g. Elton John/Axel Rose
Conductors	Microsoft:Conductor	List Type tag
Period	Microsoft:Period
Mood	Microsoft:Mood
Part of set	ItemList:DiskNumber	Must be number
Initial key	Microsoft:InitialKey
Beats-per-minute	ItemList:BeatsPerMinute	Setting this from Properties results in exiftool displaying an empty tag, though Windows will still be able to read the data.  Setting this with exiftool to a number and Windows correctly reads it.
Protected		The Property window cannot write this.  Unknown which tag but Microsoft:IsProtected is likely.

Webp files
There are multiple tags for which Windows desplays a possible entry, but are not filled.  Some others seem to be hard coded
Windows lists the following properties that do not seem to be filled from any tag

• Rating
• Comments
• Date acquired
• Compression
• Color representation
• Compressed bits/pixel
• Flash maker
• Flash model
• Contrast
• Brightness
• Light source
• White balance
• Photometric interpretation

Windows will list these properties, but they seem to be hardcoded and not read from the files

• Horizontal resolution: Hardcoded 72 dip
• Vertical resolution: Hardcoded 72 dip
• Resolution unit: Hardcoded 2 (aka inches)
• Bit depth: Hardcoded 32?

Windows property	Tags Read (does not appear to be able to write any data)	Notes
Date taken	EXIF:DateTimeOriginal
Program name	EXIF:Software
Copyright	EXIF:Copyright
Image ID	EXIF:ImageUniqueID
Camera maker	EXIF:Make
Camera model	EXIF:Model
F-stop	EXIF:FNumber	Rounded to 1 decimal place, i.e. .44 is rounded to .4, .45 is rounded to .5
Exposure time	EXIF:ExposureTime
ISO speed	EXIF:ISO
Exposure bias	EXIF:ExposureCompensation
Focal length	EXIF:FocalLength
Max aperature	EXIF:MaxApertureValue
Metering model	EXIF:MeteringMode
Subject distance	EXIF:SubjectDistance
Flash mode	EXIF:Flash
Flash energy	EXIF:FlashEnergy
35mm focal length	EXIF:FocalLengthIn35mmFormat
Lens maker	EXIF:LensMake
Lens model	EXIF:LensModel
Exposure program	EXIF:ExposureProgram
Saturation	EXIF:Saturation
Sharpness	EXIF:Sharpness
Digital zoom	EXIF:DigitalZoomRatio
EXIF version	ExifVersion
Latitude	EXIF:GPSLatitude	Always positive, ignores reference direction
Longitude	EXIF:GPSLongitude	Always positive, ignores reference direction
Altitude	EXIF:GPSAltitude	Always positive, ignores reference direction

Revisions:
2015-07-25: Reorganized post, reformatted as table, added Tags, Ratings, Comment, Author, Program Name, Date Acquired, and Copyright for jpegs, added Title for Tif, added notes
2015-07-26: Resorted by order tags appear in windows Property->Details tab, fixed Rating, Author, Date Taken for jpeg, added Subject, Rating, Tags, Comments, Authors, Date Taken for Tif
2016-05-28: Updated info on Comments
2016-08-24: Updated info on Comments
2021-05-07: Updated to reflect Details tab of Windows 10, Added video metadata, split file types into separate tables and reformatted (took me long enough)
2023-04-11: Added webp, added notes to GPS tags
2025-02-01: At some point, Windows changed the "Rating" from Microsoft:Rating to Microsoft:SharedUserRating, updated

Credits:
deb27 - Subject property for Windows 7 (https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php/topic,6589.msg32863.html#msg32863).
lewisn - updated comment info (https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php/topic,6591.msg38109.html#msg38109)
José Oliver-Didier - Added RegionPersonDisplayName (https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php?topic=6591.msg40340#msg40340)
neebah - Pointing out that Windows had expanded the data it read (https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php?topic=6591.msg42607#msg42607)

Edit:  I figure that consolidating all this info into one post is better than spreading it out through a thread, unless there's any objection to that.  So I'll add any info from any other posts into this post.

Big revisions and corrections.

Somehow I seriously messed up the details for Date Taken.  I double checked it and the above posted info seems correct, at least for Windows 8.1.

This post is a very useful reference.

I also stumbled upon this MSDN page, which is more developer oriented. I believe it can also help out folks trying to understand how photo metadata is read and written in windows:

Microsoft Photo Metadata Policies:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ee872003(v=vs.85).aspx (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ee872003(v=vs.85).aspx)

Thank you for that link.  I never found anything like that when I went looking for info. 

This is a great table!

On 'Comments' in Windows here is a bit more detail that I had documented for myself:

• 
  When enter 'Comments' in Windows 10, Windows puts 'Comments' in EXIF:XPComment (only), and DELETES EXIF:UserComment and XMP:UserComment.  It leaves FILE:Comment alone if that exists.
  
• Note that EXIF:UserComment and XMP:UserComment show in Windows at higher priority (in that order in my experiments) than EXIF:XPComment.  FILE:Comment is never displayed as 'Comments'.
  

Thanks, I was unaware of XMP:UserComment (too hard to catch them all), updated the table.

Some additional info which may prove useful, especially for folks using Windows Photo Gallery.

People Tags
- Written with Windows Photo Gallery. People names are displayed and read on Windows Explorer. It is written using the Microsoft XMP People Tags Schema.
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ee719905(v=vs.85).aspx

Geo Tags
- Windows Photo Gallery can read the IPTC (Legacy) SubLocation, City, State-Province, Country fields but upon edit it stores this information in the corresponding IPTC Extension "Location Created Fields"- Sublocation, City, ProvinceState, and CountryName.

Thanks for the info.

At some point, I really want to make a fairly comprehensive list of various windows image programs and how they deal with metadata.  Things just keep getting in the way.

I was going over some old photos which I posted in Flickr and noticed the XP_DIP_XML tags in some of them. At the time I was using Microsoft Digital Image Suite 2006 which introduced a hierarchical labels and keywords feature. You could group labels within some "base or root" labels such as Keywords, People, Places, Events and Flags.

A sample image can be seen here as well I am attaching one to this post- https://www.flickr.com/photos/jmoliver/98986647/meta (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jmoliver/98986647/meta)
A review of the product: http://winsupersite.com/product-review/microsoft-digital-image-suite-2006-review  (http://winsupersite.com/product-review/microsoft-digital-image-suite-2006-review)
A screenshot of the hierarchical labels dialog -  https://winsupersite.com/site-files/winsupersite.com/files/archive/winsupersite.com/content/content/127172/reviews/dis2006_04.jpg
(https://winsupersite.com/site-files/winsupersite.com/files/archive/winsupersite.com/content/content/127172/reviews/dis2006_04.jpg)

I did not find much info on XP DIP XML (Exif Tag ID 0x4747) on the exiftool site. So I am just posting this to point it out and let folks know if they stumble upon it on their photos.

Digital Image Suite was a good product at the time which got discontinued as Vista introduced Windows Photo Gallery. Ref article: https://www.cnet.com/news/microsoft-axes-digital-image-suite/ (https://www.cnet.com/news/microsoft-axes-digital-image-suite/)

Doing a Google Search for XP_DIP_XML site:flickr.com will yield a lot of samples. I was suprised to see photos taken as recently as last year with this metadata! Seem that some folks still use this app.

Thanks for the sample, and for the links.

- Phil

Over the years I have used different OSes and photo management apps which have played differently in terms of reading and writing metadata. I have a lot of photos with many annotations with some taken from old family albums from folks who have passed. Many of my early scans have information only written in the now notorious "XP" Tags and thus inaccessible in many modern applications. So, I have been spending time ensuring that they are adequately preserved to modern metadata standards.

Microsoft's Digital Image Suite which I used early on my projects was discontinued quite some time ago. Windows Photo Gallery and Picasa are more recent examples.

Building upon the excellent analysis of StarGeek and others in this forum I am testing out how Windows Photo Gallery's Info Pane behaves in terms of writing and reading metadata. So far, I have found some slight differences in comparison with how Windows Explorer works (example: Ratings), but most of it is similar. Of particular concern for example, is that WPG overwrites many other tags when updating the "Captions" field.

I am still updating this document:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/19cfitAyoQj97iWE8GhMLDPWubijy_2zDuUp7xOPE3UQ

Feedback is welcomed.

So as not to duplicate work, these are the sites/apps I already have data on:
    Photos.google.com
    Flicker
    Irfanview
    Dropbox
    Picasa
    Adobe Reader
    Lightroom (4.4)
    Windows properties
    Adobe Bridge (7.0.0.93)

After I get a few more done and get the formatting correct, I'll make a consolidated thread and I'll add your info in as well. 

Two questions: 

#1:  Is the camera make and model only read from the exif in windows and WPG

#2:  Is there anyway to camera make and model tag mp4 files so that Windows or WPG reads them. 

I haven't done any testing with WPG yet, so I have no idea about what it reads

Quote from: neebah on May 18, 2017, 09:40:51 PM
#1:  Is the camera make and model only read from the exif in windows and WPG

I didn't realize that Windows read the make and model.  My test image had only limited data and was an image I scanned previously.  Checking now with a image from my camera, I see that data is available.  That gives me a bunch more data to check for. 

I really need to get back to working on this project.  I was a bit discouraged when I realized that some programs would read data based upon what it encountered first in the file, meaning I would basically have to start all over with an expanded set of test files.

A quick test shows that Windows 10 properties will read from EXIF:Model and EXIF:Make first, then it will read XMP-tiff:Make and XMP-tiff:Model.  I haven't test beyond that or tested WPG.

Quote#2:  Is there anyway to camera make and model tag mp4 files so that Windows or WPG reads them.

Windows 10 properties doesn't show XMP-tiff:Model, XMP-tiff:Make, XMP-exifEX:LensModel, or XMP-exifEX:LensMake when added to an MP4 and exiftool can't add EXIF tags to an MP4.  It also doesn't show the Nikon make and model tags taken from my camera.  So, I'd say that Windows 10 can't read those. 

Probably time to add MP4 to the testing as well.

Thanks

What about those crazy Microsoft tags that are added to MOV and MP4.  These are where descriptive tags are stored in these files (and called categories) when set in windows.  Is there a camera make and model for these tags that can be set by something. 

A possible known note about XP keyword tags. 

I've noticed that when you delete descriptive tags (at least in WPG, not 100% on properties pane) that the xmp gets deleted but the XP keywords are still in the file.  Only the pointer is deleted.  I"m sure this is known behaviour.  But wanted to make sure.

Testing now writing tags in Windows 10 Explorer, I'm finding that EXIF:XPKeywords and XMP:Subject are written, but not IPTC:Keywords. However, if I manually create an IPTC:Keywords value, it will be read in Windows 10 Explorer, and if I then update the tags in Windows 10 Explorer it will write to all three EXIF:XPKeywords, IPTC:Keywords, and XMP:Subject.
So it seems that Windows 10 will always read from IPTC:Keywords if present, but will not write to IPTC:Keywords unless already present.

Ah, yes, I had forgotten about that.  As I noted in my first post, IPTC data isn't written unless the IPTC block already exists.  It doesn't have to be Keywords.  Even if the only thing in the IPTC block is ApplicationRecordVersion, then IPTC data will be written. 

Updated to match Windows 10 details tab and added video metadata.

Quote from: StarGeek on May 07, 2021, 04:22:48 PMUpdated to match Windows 10 details tab and added video metadata.

Sorry if this has been answered. I am new here. Has anyone put together a command-line command, batch file, or PowerShell script that will exactly and surgically remove everything outlined by StarGeek (https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php?msg=32875) in this thread?

I am creating a Powershell module that will have the ability to remove metadata from TIFF+TIF/JPG+JPEG/PNG/BMP/WebP/GIF files. I'm also going to have an option to do this on PSD and AI/EPS/PDF files, but that's out of the scope of this thread.

Anyone?

For most of it
exiftool -All= /path/to/files/

There are a few Microsoft specific tags in the above list that exiftool can't edit, but then, neither can any other program, as far as I can tell. I'm not even sure what program can write them in the first place

And Windows built in option works pretty well
(https://i.imgur.com/ZfGSJ0F.png)

1. @STARGEEK - THANKS FOR YOUR EPIC POST!

Quote from: StarGeek on July 07, 2015, 04:23:25 PM@StarGeek: Your post on the mapping between Windows properties and EXIF values is amazing!

I'm actually a bit gutted I've only just seen this today, as I've been tinkering on this topic for well over a year and have been looking through the EXIF documentation on Microsoft Tags (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/Microsoft.html), Microsoft's pages on Windows Properties (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/win32/properties/props), and testing out a small plethora of tools like:

• EXIFtool (obv :) )
• FFmpeg
• AtomicParsley
• NirSoft SystemPropertyView
• PropertyEdit
• MP3 Tag Editor
• Creating custom PowerShell
• Using VB / WShell object

... to work out the best option to try and create some kind of 'master metadata manager' tool, to sort out all the metadata for my images, videos and other files once and for all. I've already done quite a bit of property mapping / exploration and have been writing and using a few work-in-progress scripts as I've been going, but your post should now let me build on that significantly - thanks so much for sharing! (and thanks to @Phil for kicking this topic off and getting the ball rolling)

---

2. QUESTION ON "TAG COMPLETENESS" (e.g. IPTC Keywords)

I've read a few replies around the fact that not all tags are read/written by Microsoft (e.g. jo.dor's post on IPTC:Keywords (https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php?msg=58455)) and was wondering...

• In terms of the "best" way to being setting and managing metadata, is it a problem that Windows's will only write IPTC keywords if they exist already (but will always create/write EXIF and XMP keywords) for example?
• Should we be manually creating IPTC:Keywords for every image, so that they then can be written and updated by Windows when it updates the other two?
• ... Or is this just going to cause unnecessary overhead? -- When you consider in reality new images will keep on being generated from things like downloaded files, saved email attachments, phone transfers, etc. So if the main goal is tag consistency/completeness, to avoid gaps creeping back in almost immediately you'd have to set up broad folder scanning to detect for any new images and then run a script to create whatever tags were needed (which sounds a bit much)
• ... Is it "better" to instead just ignore IPTC and remove it from the equation altogether, as in if tags won't be there 100% of the time and this would cause problems(?), then essentially treat it as an "unreliable" tag group and instead gear any scripts to read/write from other tag groups like XMP / EXIF exclusively?

In your recent update you say that ExifTool can't set EXIF FlashEnergy in a WEBP file, but I have no problems doing this:

> exiftool a.webp -exif:flashenergy=2
1 image files updated
> exiftool a.webp -flashenergy -G1
[ExifIFD]       Flash Energy                    : 2
- Phil

I didn't actually try it, but looked up the tag on the EXIF Tags page (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/EXIF.html) where it is listed a "no" in the writable column.

Ah, I see, the first listing 0x920b is listed as no, but there is a second listing, 0xa20b which is writable.

Testing it, Windows does read that tag, so I'll fix it.

Somehow I missed or forgot to respond to this.

Quote from: Martin Z on April 04, 2023, 12:08:00 AMIn terms of the "best" way to being setting and managing metadata, is it a problem that Windows's will only write IPTC keywords if they exist already (but will always create/write EXIF and XMP keywords) for example?

Should we be manually creating IPTC:Keywords for every image, so that they then can be written and updated by Windows when it updates the other two?

I believe the Metadata Working Group standard is followed here.  As it says on the MWG tags page (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/MWG.html)
    IPTC information is written only if the original file contained IPTC.
See page 28 of the Metadata Working Group Guidelines for Handling Image Metadata (https://web.archive.org/web/20180919181934id_/http://www.metadataworkinggroup.org/pdf/mwg_guidance.pdf#page=28) under "Writing IPTC-IIM and XMP"

QuoteIs it "better" to instead just ignore IPTC and remove it from the equation altogether, as in if tags won't be there 100% of the time and this would cause problems(?), then essentially treat it as an "unreliable" tag group and instead gear any scripts to read/write from other tag groups like XMP / EXIF exclusively?

The MWG standard has detailed suggestions on how to reconcile and sync the data.  It's worth reading the full spec.  Though the Metadata Working Group has apparently become defunct, the standard is still used, at least by the better programs.

I faintly recall someone saying that the IPTC is working on a newer spec along these lines.

Of course, for personal use, you have to decide what is best for your workflow.  As I often say in these forums, if you can, ditch the IPTC IIM and use the XMP tags.  Trying to keep the ITPC and XMP tags in sync is an extra step and complicates your workflow.  Unfortunately, my main image viewer, Irfanview, still hasn't added the ability to display XMP data, even though it's been requested for over a decade.  And I often use it to take a quick peak at the data.

Hi @StarGeek,

Thanks for the replies and advice, I appreciate the info and will try and check out the links but just to be 100% honest, this is probably reaching the limit of my knowledge in terms of tagging/groups (hadn't heard of 'IPTC IIM' before, etc) but keen to try and understand this space better.

To check my understanding, I wanted to try and re-answer my original q's more directly and include some additional information/extrapolation as best I understand it. I realise the below may not be 100% accurate and/or I may have used the wrong term, etc however it would be great to get a quick "👍🏼" from you if the below is broadly correct (or corrections, if any of the below is too far off the mark)...

❓ Is it a problem that Windows's will only write IPTC keywords if they exist already?
✅ No, this is fine: This approach follows the official guidance from the Metadata Working Group [MWG])

❓ Is it better to instead just ignore IPTC?
✅ Generally, yes: This does not mean you need to go out of your way to purge IPTC data/tags, however they are an older set of tags which have now been replaced by the likes of XMP and so there is no need to run extra scripts/workflows to try and populate these tags explicitly. The fact that Windows doesn't create them if they don't already exist, is simply alignment with the general shift away from IPTC.

Thanks once again for your help as I try to get my head round this!

---

[Minor FYI]: I did initially use the "quote" feature however I didn't want you to think I was trying to turn any of your comments into into official guidance (from the likes of MWG, etc) or equally mis-quote you because of mis-understanding something.

PS -- I have a few things I can add to the table at the start of the thread (mapping Windows properties to EXIF ones, etc)... Assuming you don't mind, what's the best way for me to provide this?

Quote from: Martin Z on April 23, 2023, 08:51:55 AM❓ Is it a problem that Windows's will only write IPTC keywords if they exist already?
✅ No, this is fine: This approach follows the official guidance from the Metadata Working Group [MWG])

Sounds good.

Quote❓ Is it better to instead just ignore IPTC?
✅ Generally, yes: This does not mean you need to go out of your way to purge IPTC data/tags, however they are an older set of tags which have now been replaced by the likes of XMP and so there is no need to run extra scripts/workflows to try and populate these tags explicitly. The fact that Windows doesn't create them if they don't already exist, is simply alignment with the general shift away from IPTC.

This is "it depends" and varies by your workflow and what programs you are using.  You don't want to update Description and not change Caption-Abstract if one of your programs is going to give priority to Caption-Abstract, as I believe this is what the MWG guide suggests.

This is something you have to work out what is best for you depending upon what programs you are using.  If you want to not deal with IPTC data, then you should probably remove it rather than just ignoring it.  You probably should check to make sure things match before deleting.  For example
exiftool -if "$Caption-Abstract eq $Description" -Caption-Abstract= /path/to/files/
Unfortunately, it would require a separate command to check each pair.

Quote from: Martin Z on April 23, 2023, 11:25:55 AMAssuming you don't mind, what's the best way for me to provide this?

Go ahead and post it hear or send me a DM.  I'll double check it and add it to the main table.

Oh god, it's even worse than I thought, lol! 🙈

In the process of writing a response back to you, I did 1-2 quick tests in EXIFtool, but rather than giving me info that I hoped would help me clarify my reply it ended up opening a whole 'nother can of worms! ;D  (stay tuned for another post from me within the next hour)

I will carry on writing my proper response to you, but I just had to pause and write this interim comment as it was just too crazy/funny/depressing not to, lol.

Quote from: StarGeek on April 23, 2023, 01:17:34 PMThis is "it depends" and varies by your workflow and what programs you are using.  You don't want to update Description and not change Caption-Abstract if one of your programs is going to give priority to Caption-Abstract, as I believe this is what the MWG guide suggests.

Lol, so am not sure if it was deliberate or not but Description is probably actually a great example to dive into for a second as it shows how mixed-up and complicated metadata is (at least for me) and why I am finding it trickier than I expected to try and get my head round this...

Firstly, just to be clear* when you say Description, as you referenced Caption-Abstract (and thanks to your table above, I could cross-reference!) - I'm assuming that you're referring to... [what I, being more Windows/File property-centric, would generally refer to as]... Title? (please say yes! :)  )... and hoping to score max points - as this is an amalgamation of different tags into 1, this is a composite tag?**

* If the above sounds like I am nit-picking or being sarcastic, please note I this is not my intention at all and I am genuinely trying to understand the nuance and interaction amongst different properties better, and so just trying to disambiguate between the different properties otherwise I end-up confused and with a headache! [PS - Hope you like disambiguate, had to google that one! :)]

** If it's not a composite tag then just ignore that reference for now - we can pick composite tags later (if at all) but I don't want to lead things off at a different tangent.

---

Quote from: StarGeek on April 23, 2023, 01:17:34 PMIf you want to not deal with IPTC data, then you should probably remove it rather than just ignoring it.

So, to give you some context about my main interactions/editing of metadata as a whole (and highlight my current gaps/limits in knowledge)... So, it's not so much that I don't want to deal with IPTC data, it's more that I just don't get exposed to the data down to that level and so I genuinely could not tell you whether 99% of my images have IPTC tags or 0%.

PART 1: As a test...

• I created a blank MP4 file
• Via Windows/properties I set the Title to Title set from Windows property dialog
• In many cases this is the max depth I'm aware of in terms of which properties are being stored, where, i.e. I'll set other properties and may import or manipulate those properties in Excel, AtomicParsley or some other tool, but I only know that data point as being the Title, I don't know if that's in a Microsoft tag, an XMP one, IPTC, all 3 or another tag entirely.

So, going full-circle - the reason for asking my questions initially and trying to understand whether "I should we be manually creating IPTC tags" was in essence trying to understand whether I should...

• Carry on as I am, i.e. reading/writing tags at a "Windows"-level (and not worry whether the info is being stored in IPTC or XMP as I'm trusting EXIFtool (or A.N.other tool to manage that lower level storage for me)
• Start setting IPTC tags explicitly so that for at least the scripts I write / metadata edits I make, I know for certain that they are updating/creating IPTC tags (in addition to others like XMP, etc)

PART 2: Following your comment, I thought I'd try to dig into this a bit deeper and clarify / educate myself (although this is what led to my 'worse than I thought' comment above :) )...

• I used EXIFtool to do CSV export (using the default, i.e. "common" options)
• The only column in the CSV containing Title set from Windows property dialog was Title
• I know from another discussion we had (thanks!) that EXIFtool can include the tag groups with -G, so I did second CSV export
• That CSV clarified however that the data is in...
• NOT Microsoft, XMP, IPTC... but QuickTime:Title
• Which isn't even on the list / one of the ones I was thinking of! ;D

Lol, like I say my hope was this would give me a better grasp on how IPTC might come into play (or at least show whether Windows was ignoring this in favour or say XMP for example), unfortunately in actuality this has probably muddied the water more than ever, lol.

Quote from: Martin Z on April 23, 2023, 04:44:54 PMFirstly, just to be clear* when you say Description, as you referenced Caption-Abstract (and thanks to your table above, I could cross-reference!) - I'm assuming that you're referring to... [what I, being more Windows/File property-centric, would generally refer to as]... Title? (please say yes! :)

No, I mean Description, as in the the Dublin Core XMP-dc:Description (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/XMP.html#dc).  When I use the monspace colored font set with [tt][/tt] (see text just below the edit box), then I am listing the exact name of a tag.  When I use it otherwise, I will either give the context and probably capitalize it and put quotes on it, e.g. IPTC standard "Description", Windows property "Title", or just as a generic term where it will probably be lower cased.

The IPTC Description (https://www.iptc.org/std/photometadata/specification/IPTC-PhotoMetadata#description) has two corresponding tags, IPTC:Caption-Abstract and XMP:Description.  The MWG standard also adds EXIF:ImageDescription.  Windows says I don't give a damn about standards and uses unrelated tags.

Quoteas this is an amalgamation of different tags into 1, this is a composite tag?**

Composite tags (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/Composite.html) don't exist outside of exiftool.  Exiftool creates them on the fly based upon other tags in the file.  I will also use the monospaced font for Composite tags.

Quote[PS - Hope you like disambiguate, had to google that one! :)]

I used to heavily edit the wiki for an MMO, so I used it a lot.

Quoteit's more that I just don't get exposed to the data down to that level and so I genuinely could not tell you whether 99% of my images have IPTC tags or 0%.

This is why, unless you're really interested in the minutia of metadata, I always suggest using a Digital Asset Management (DAM) program of some sort (Adobe Bridge or Lightroom, DigiKam).  They provide a layer between the files and you to properly reconcile the data.  Most people don't really need to know where the data is located.

Side note, this unfortunately leads to people thinking that the file system timestamps are important, when it is the actual embedded data that is important.  This is what lead people to think that Google was deleting data from their images when they did a Google Takeout when the only issue was the loss of some file system data, which will always be lost when you upload a file to a website.  The unfortunate result of this is that people are going to lengths to copy the data back into the files, which is actually overwriting the original correct data with less accurate data.

QuoteI can carry on as I am in effect, i.e. reading/writing tags at a "Windows"-level (and not worry whether the info is being stored in IPTC

This is perfectly acceptable.  Windows will reconcile the data for you, albeit in it's own non-standard way.

QuoteXMP as I'm trusting EXIFtool (or A.N.other tool to manage that lower level storage for me)
Start setting IPTC tags explicitly so that for at least the scripts I write / metadata edits I make, I know for certain that they are updating/creating IPTC tags (in addition to others like XMP, etc)

As I said, unless you're actually interested in the low level details, use a good program that will take care of the details for you.

QuoteThat CSV clarified however that the data is in...[/color]
NOT Microsoft, XMP, IPTC... but QuickTime:Title
Which isn't even on the list / one of the ones I was thinking of! ;D

You jumped from image metadata, which is simply a universe of madness, into video data, which is a multiverse of madness.  QuickTime/video data has 3 subgroups and often the same tag name can appear in all 3 subgroups and in some cases, even multiple times in the same subgroup.  For example, Description can appear in the Keys group, the ItemList group (3 separate times!!!), and the UserData group.  Additionally, videos can hold all the regular XMP data, so there can be XMP-dc:Description.  To add to the fun, Adobe will only read the XMP data, but most other programs will read the Quicktime data.  And which tag those read can vary from program to program.

Obligatory xkcd
(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png)

Quote from: StarGeek on April 23, 2023, 06:39:02 PMYou jumped from image metadata, which is simply a universe of madness, into video data, which is a multiverse of madness.

I like it.  Sounds like a quote from some Marvel movie. ;)

But, oh so true!

- Phil

Quote from: StarGeek on April 23, 2023, 06:39:02 PMI mean Description, as in the the Dublin Core XMP-dc:Description (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/XMP.html#dc).  When I use the monspace colored font set with (see text just below the edit box), then I am listing the exact name of a tag.

OK cool... Should I always assume that it's a XMP tag?
(Just thinking where there are multiple tags with the same name like Microsoft:Description (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/Microsoft.html#:~:text=Description,-no) and QuickTime:Description (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/QuickTime.html#:~:text=%27desc%27-,Description,-string/))

---

Quote from: StarGeek on April 23, 2023, 06:39:02 PMComposite tags (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/Composite.html) don't exist outside of exiftool.  Exiftool creates them on the fly based upon other tags in the file.

Cool, thanks for the link and think that now clears it up in my head now... (FYI): I had seen in a few apps that Composite tags were listed separately to EXIF and seemed to imply it combined data from different groups - but reading the page again now (and with your extra info/context), I think I see my confusion... (To check): Composite tags DO combine data from different groups, incl. fields outside of EXIF, BUT the composite tags themselves exist within EXIF, so if you only loaded say XMP, Microsoft, Quicktime groups you would get no composites, but if you added EXIF as well, Composite tags would then be accessible, right?

---

Quote from: StarGeek on April 23, 2023, 06:39:02 PMI always suggest using a Digital Asset Management

Hmm, that's interesting - as in, I've worked with DAMs in a work setting but from what I've seen they've been pretty heavy duty (designed for things like product catalogues, or official company-wide media libraries, where there is a change-control approval process, etc)... I've never really thought of using one in a personal capacity.

That said, I'm not sure if it qualifies as a DAM - but my end goal is probably to manage the data in a SharePoint list (I work in SharePoint professionally, so am pretty familiar with it).

---

Quote from: StarGeek on April 23, 2023, 06:39:02 PMSide note, this unfortunately leads to people thinking that the file system timestamps are important, when it is the actual embedded data that is important.

(https://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_md6ffmIo0q1qltqg1.gif)
Urgh, I would say don't even get me started, but you've done it now so it's too late! :-D

On the topic of timestamps (and metadata):
• One of my gripes is that most apps will update the 'modified' timestamp when you change the metadata. Yes for some instances this may be valid/useful, but it's really annoying when I say I delete some junk text from a title or add a keyword to an image and then Windows changes the modified date to today... NO, the image that was taken in 2019, hasn't been MODIFIED today(!).. urgh
• To make matters worse, this problem can be metadata-destructive, i.e. say the image didn't have the Date Taken date stored, and you were relying on the Date Modified being in 2019 to find the image. Trying to remove/clean-up the metadata in this case deleted/corrupted the data you were previously relying on
• Now, all my files are backed up with OneDrive...
- Which is great on one hand as in the case of the above, I can actually go and see a full time-stamped change history (and even restore the previous version if needed) and this has let me retain/recover metadata more than once!
- However it also creates some interesting scenarios (especially in the case of rolling back old files) as this can mean Windows shows a Modified date that is earlier than the Created Date... So apparently the file was modified before it even existed!? :-D
• Side note: It also frustrates me that PNGs and ICOs have virtually no metadata at all (I know PNGs are more complicated as they can store EXIF I believe, however support is limited at best so lets skip that for now), but anyway, I would like to put Metadata in EVERYTHING but sadly sometimes it just isn't an option.

[Side note: I was REALLY optimistic about "File Meta", which is a Windows app that lets you extend the File Properties for different types and so you CAN store keywords, title, description, etc for an ICO file... However the metadata is emulated (stored in a separate DB/file) so again, as I use OneDrive quite a lot to access files remotely and/or peace of mind in case my HDD died - I really would've preferred if this somehow hacked the metadata into the file's data itself somehow, but c'est la vie]

---

Quote from: StarGeek on April 23, 2023, 06:39:02 PMYou jumped from image metadata, which is simply a universe of madness, into video data, which is a multiverse of madness.

Lol, fair enough - I did realise after I posted that choosing an MP4 example probably didn't help but I didn't clock that at the time and in my defence it was just the sense of dismayed, thinking I will take the time and try and get to the bottom of this, I'll do some edits and then trace them through using EXIFtool which should give me a much clearer understanding of whether the data is being stored in EXIF, IPTC or XMP... So, eagerly awaiting to find out which of the THREE it was, having the result turn out to be (from my naïve perspective) a FOURTH option was just hilarious (and soul-destroying!) :-D

TLDR - Yes, metadata is absolute chaos! :-)

Quote from: Martin Z on April 26, 2023, 02:54:09 AMOne of my gripes is that most apps will update the 'modified' timestamp when you change the metadata. Yes for some instances this may be valid/useful, but it's really annoying when I say I delete some junk text from a title or add a keyword to an image and then Windows changes the modified date to today

A very common gripe in Photos.app forum is that moving images around often changes the file dates and people get mad when the original date is "lost". I wish Apple would provide a setting to preserve image and movie file dates, if possible.

I usually use the exiftool -P switch (Preserve file modification date/time) to prevent that and GraphicConverter does this by default.

BTW recently I wondered why a very tiny metadata change did not get backupped. The backup app uses file size and modification date to determine if a file should be updated on the destination. The app's author sounded a little irritated when I mentioned that exiftool -P switch, and said that is a flaw in the exiftool utility, but they call it a "feature" ;-)

The backup app has an option to check also md5 checksum but that makes the backup process much slower. I tested this and noticed that the md5 checksum is changed to another value with such exiftool's +1 second change in ExifIFD:DateTimeOriginal. I was somewhat surprised to find that if the md5 checksum is reverted back to the initial value if I the change ExifIFD:DateTimeOriginal back -1 second with exiftool.

I prefer to let exiftool or GraphicConverter to adjust image and movie file creation & modification dates the same as their internal metadata dates so it is easier to spot errors in dates. In macOS 13 those tools can readily set way older file dates than 1970 but the old dates (1900, for example) are usually reverted to something like 2036 after a reboot so the backup app sometimes re-clones such images although they are not really modified.

But anyway, that backup issue is so rare that I do not mind and use the default backup settings.

- Matti

Quote from: Martin Z on April 26, 2023, 02:54:09 AMOK cool... Should I always assume that it's a XMP tag?
(Just thinking where there are multiple tags with the same name like Microsoft:Description (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/Microsoft.html#:~:text=Description,-no) and QuickTime:Description (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/QuickTime.html#:~:text=%27desc%27-,Description,-string/))

It depends upon the context and the file type.  For the most part, yes, it would be the XMP:Description.  But for videos, it would also include the Quicktime:Description, specifically, the ItemList:Descripton.  Basically, whatever exiftool will write by default to that filetype.  IMO, Phil has done a fantastic job of picking the right group to write to for the various file types.

The Microsoft:Description tag isn't writable by exiftool (gah, 3 different versions of Microsoft:Description!) but basically I also won't be talking about anything that is marked with the "Avoid" flag.  Those would have to be specifically named anyway.
(https://i.imgur.com/dDuiqmt.png)

Quote(To check): Composite tags DO combine data from different groups, incl. fields outside of EXIF, BUT the composite tags themselves exist within EXIF, so if you only loaded say XMP, Microsoft, Quicktime groups you would get no composites, but if you added EXIF as well, Composite tags would then be accessible, right?

Composite tags are a group unto themselves.  And you would have to check the page to see what is combined.  In some cases, they will pull from specific sources.  For example Composite:DateTimeOriginal in an audio file such as MP3, will pull from four different specific ID3 group tags.  For an image, it will pull from three tags, DateTimeCreated, DateCreated, and TimeCreated.  Note that these do not have a group indicated.  Additionally, DateTimeCreated is itself a composite tag, created by combining IPTC:DateCreated, IPTC:TimeCreated.  So it can be created from specifically the IPTC:DateCreated and IPTC:TimeCreated, aka DateTimeCreated, or any other DateCreated, and TimeCreated tags, which could include XMP-photoshop:DateCreated, Microsoft:DateCreated, Red:DateCreated/TimeCreated, RIFF:DateCreated, etc, etc. (At least I think that's what will happen, I don't have any samples of these other tags and filetypes).

QuoteHmm, that's interesting - as in, I've worked with DAMs in a work setting but from what I've seen they've been pretty heavy duty (designed for things like product catalogues, or official company-wide media libraries, where there is a change-control approval process, etc)... I've never really thought of using one in a personal capacity.

They can also be called image management programs and there are plenty that are specifically designed for personal/photography business use.  The most well know is Lightroom.  IMO, the best FOSS option is DigiKam, though Darktable might be better if you want a DAM/editor in the same vein as LightRoom.  Picasa was another example.  I use IMatch (https://www.photools.com/imatch/), as it uses exiftool on the backend, has extremely powerful metadata options, and can index a huge amount of filetype beyond just images and videos.

QuoteOn the topic of timestamps (and metadata):
• One of my gripes is that most apps will update the 'modified' timestamp when you change the metadata. Yes for some instances this may be valid/useful, but it's really annoying when I say I delete some junk text from a title or add a keyword to an image and then Windows changes the modified date to today... NO, the image that was taken in 2019, hasn't been MODIFIED today(!).. urgh

But that isn't the purpose of the file system modify time... at least that's what my understanding is.  Going way back, it would be how to tell if a file needed to backed up.  The time stamp isn't there to indicate if the image has been modified, that's what the EXIF:ModifyDate is for.  It's there to incidate when the file itself has been modified.  Which it has been if you edit the metadata, indicating it needs to be updated.  Now a days, the often is an Archive attribute, at least on Windows, so depending upon the software, it might not be as important.

Quote• To make matters worse, this problem can be metadata-destructive, i.e. say the image didn't have the Date Taken date stored and you were relying on the Date Modified being in 2019 to find the image. Trying to remove/clean-up the metadata in this case deleted/corrupted the data you were previously relying on

This can vary by file source.  Photos and videos should have the embedded time stamp set.  Screenshots, from what I've seen, usually have the time stamp as part of the name.  Other social media sources will have any such data stripped.

I understand that figuring how to embed the time from the file system is beyond what most people are willing to invest the time in learning how to do, but if it's important, then it should be learned.  At the very least, if the file is properly backed up, you can always restore from backup to get the time right.

Quote• Now, all my files are backed up with OneDrive...

This is something that you might want to be careful about.  At some point, I read that Microsoft does not consider OneDrive to be a backup for images, that it will edit the metadata on files stored there.  Of course, I can't find the source any more, but it might be worth checking out.  Specifically, OneDrive would at the very least add XMP:LastKeywordIPTC and XMP:LastKeywordXMP, two Microsoft specific tags, to files uploaded that contained a IPTC:Keywords or XMP:Subject.  I can't follow up on this as I'm not willing to install OneDrive on my computer.

Quote• Side note: It also frustrates me that PNGs and ICOs have virtually no metadata at all (I know PNGs are more complicated as they can store EXIF I believe, however support is limited at best so lets skip that for now), but anyway, I would like to put Metadata in EVERYTHING but sadly sometimes it just isn't an option.

PNG files can support XMP and EXIF (EXIF used to be non-standard and IPTC is non-standard), but you are correct in that software support is limited, though it is growing.  I believe Google Photos has since added support for EXIF in PNGs.

Myself, my use of PNG files is limited, mostly for quick screenshots that I upload and don't keep a local copy.  Anything that I need to keep lossless is going to be saved as a tiff, as that has decades of metadata support. 

Quote[Side note: I was REALLY optimistic about "File Meta", which is a Windows app that lets you extend the File Properties for different types and so you CAN store keywords, title, description, etc for an ICO file... However the metadata is emulated (stored in a separate DB/file)

Hmmm... I faintly recall looking at it and I thought that it saved the data in the Windows Alternate Data Streams.  So that way the data would travel with the file.  At least, as long as it was on a NTFS drive.  Hard to tell now, as any search I do on "File Meta" always adds data to it.

This Voidtools forum post (https://www.voidtools.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10315) seems to confirm that.

Hi @StarGeek,

Apologies for the slow reply (remember reading this a while ago but lost track of it, however I wanted to take the time to reply), thanks for your info!...

---

RE: XMP (usually) when referring to tag names -- Cool, thanks for clarifying... again, I wasn't trying to be facetious or anything, mainly I thought I would ask in case there was a general rule in the metadata community (e.g.: "when people refer to a tag, always assume X unless they specify something else", etc) but if it's more just common sense / context-dependent, that's cool, think we should be on the same page from now on.

---

RE: Composite tags are a group unto themselves -- Ah / hmmm, OK cool... I would be lying if I said I was 100% clear (as in, I didn't realise MP3's had EXIF data in them, etc) but for the sake of brevity and not taking up any more of your time on this random thread then am happy to leave this for now (think I understand them enough to be going on with). Thanks

---

RE: IMatch -- Hmmmmm! Admittedly, I was sceptical but I checked out the page and IMatch looks quite promising!...
└  Just FYI #1 - to edit in-image metadata I have been using GeoSetter (https://geosetter.de/en/main-en), and 'Microsoft Photo Gallery' (which is *OLD* and even discontinued by Microsoft), however it also does non-cloud face recognition, storing the face data in-image and helps manage system-wide tags (cleaning up un-used tags, renaming tag from X --> Y and updating all files, creating tag hierarchies, etc).
└  Purely FYI #2 - For metadata collection, I am using a few tools like...
  - Gallery-DL (https://github.com/mikf/gallery-dl) (with custom JSON➡️CSV➡️EXIFtool script)
  - WebTools-NG (https://github.com/WebTools-NG/WebTools-NG) (with custom CSV-mapper script) for Plex
... although have to admit it is extremely time-consuming trying to wrangle all these tools and scripts and everything else together! -- maybe one day I will give up and have a nice, simple, stress-free life.... nah! 🤣

---

RE: PNG files can support XMP and EXIF [...] but you are correct in that software support is limited
└  That is cool, but for context in terms of my main aims/goals: one of the main underlying things I want to improve is, urgh, I guess I would call it "non-program-specific metadata searching for file discovery"
└  As in... Be able to search for, and files based on their metadata (ideally embedded) whether that's the person tagged it the photo, the location tag, the genre of the MP4, the Client referred to in the Excel file, the Author of the PDF document, or whatever it is... Now, yes I am using Windows (so Windows search is the key limiter), but if it can't read a EXIF/XMP tag in a PNG image, then yes it is great, BUT it does kind of limit it for me as I will have to do specific searches, in a specific app to find those images.

---

RE: FileMeta "I faintly recall looking at it and I thought that it saved the data in the Windows Alternate Data Streams"
└  WOW, so yes 100 bonus points to you good Sir!... TBH, I kept it slightly vague as I 'Alternate Data Streams' are beyond my understanding of files|filesystems|NTFS|file metadata/properties|ACLs|etc (and also, I didn't want to confuse potentially yourself or other future readers) but you are totally right!
└  NB: Again, without really knowing anything about 'Alternate Data Streams', my main takeaway from reading the various pages on FileMeta (https://github.com/Dijji/FileMeta/wiki) was essentially that the data was stored 'in system' so if it was emailed, uploaded to a website, directly copied to a non-NTFS USB drive, etc (i.e. basically anywhere where the direct NTFS-chain is broken) then the metadata would be lost... Assuming that's right, then again, overall a great idea and interesting project so kudos to the team! - but for me, it just seemed like there was too much of a chance of me spending tens/hundreds of hours adding loads of custom metadata to files, and then losing it all in say a Windows corruption, HDD failure, backup not actually capturing the 'Alternate Stream' info, etc - so I decided not to go down that route.

---

Cool, think that is everything.
Thanks once again for your help, info and time, I will try and check out IMatch sometime!

Cheers,
Martin

Quote from: StarGeek on April 23, 2023, 06:39:02 PM(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png)

PS -- I have to admit, I don't get a lot of xkcd jokes (I know, and can feel the shame/judgement already) but yeah think I have seen this one before and it is PARTICULARLY good! 🙂

... One of my other favourite ones is where the guy is on the phone to tech support, he has already done a lot of troubleshooting and limiting down the problem to 1-2 specific tech issues that he can't fix himself, is trying to explain this but is dealing with SUPER BASIC first line like "have you turned it on/off"... [WHICH I CAN 100% RELATE TO!! lol]... eventually gets put through to someone, she is amazing, sorts his problem in 2 seconds and tells him next time you phone up, use the secret password "foobar" (or whatever) to skip ALL the basic stuff and come through to me
└  Then he wakes up and was all a dream! 🤣😭

Will post the image below (although in fairness it is not quite as clearly painful (and so hysterical) as I first found it the first time I saw it, hence the extended description above)...

(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tech_support.png)
[Size limited for page readability, right-click and open in 'separate tab' to view fullsize.

---

PPS -- Also, this one is great just because it is actually REALLY. REALLY GOOD ADVICE (and explained really well, while also super simply)...

(https://fractionalciso.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/xkcd-correct-horse-battery-staple-password-strength.png)

Quote from: Martin Z on May 13, 2023, 11:23:13 AMI didn't realise MP3's had EXIF data in them, etc

They don't.  The Composite:DateTimeOriginal for mp3s is comprised of
ID3:RecordingTime
ID3:Year
ID3:Date
ID3:Time
The Composite tags page (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/Composite.html) shows what each composite tag reads.

QuoteJust FYI #1 - to edit in-image metadata I have been using GeoSetter (https://geosetter.de/en/main-en)

Geosetter's metadata editor is pretty good and can easily be used as a editor on its own without even touching the geotag options.

Quoteand 'Microsoft Photo Gallery' (which is *OLD* and even discontinued by Microsoft)

ehhh, it depends to much on Microsoft specific tags that nobody else use.

Quotehowever it also does non-cloud face recognition

I'm pretty sure that most software that does facial recognition is local, not cloud.  I haven't heard of a cloud based one.

Picasa had decent recognition for it's time.  Newer software, such as DigiKam and Imatch, have significantly better recognition. One of my favorite things is when I tag a cosplayer in Imatch and it then finds the same person, different costume, 10 years earlier, and as part of the background crowd.

Quote- Gallery-DL (https://github.com/mikf/gallery-dl) (with custom JSON➡️CSV➡️EXIFtool script)

I have this installed but it never works on any site I try it on. Though I've never dug too deeply into it.  Instead, I have a very old version of WaterFox installed that allows the use of legacy extensions so I can keep using a very powerful image downloading one.

Quote- WebTools-NG (https://github.com/WebTools-NG/WebTools-NG) (with custom CSV-mapper script) for Plex

And instantly turned off because it doesn't describe what it actually does.  "WebTools-NG is designed to help users of Plex Media Server, maintain their server/s and media" is very vague and if I want to know more, I have to go digging for info.  This is always a pet peeve of mine where authors assume you already know what their program does.

Quote└  WOW, so yes 100 bonus points to you good Sir!... TBH, I kept it slightly vague as I 'Alternate Data Streams' are beyond my understanding of files|filesystems|NTFS|file metadata/properties|ACLs|etc

The analogy I use is that ADS are simply sidecar files, like XMP, and they automatically follow the file.  Except when you move the file to a non NTFS drive.  And you don't get to see them and have to jump through hoops in order do so.  My experience with that was with a digital comic organizing program.  Because RAR is not an open format, the program would add its data to the ADS, unlike zip files, which would get the data directly embedded.

Quote from: Martin Z on May 13, 2023, 11:38:11 AM[Size limited for page readability, right-click and open in 'separate tab' to view fullsize.

And limiting the size is new to me.  Though just clicking on it toggles between big and small on my browsers.

QuotePPS -- Also, this one is great just because it is actually REALLY. REALLY GOOD ADVICE (and explained really well, while also super simply)...

Most of my passwords are 16 characters jibberish because I use a password manager.  On top of that, since I own my own domain, I can create a new email for every site to add to difficulty.  And the individual emails has alerted me a couple times that a site has had a breach because I started getting spam to those addresses that wasn't from the site it was connected to.

But for a few main passwords, I do use that xkcd option.

Quote from: Martin Z on May 13, 2023, 11:23:13 AMI didn't realise MP3's had EXIF data in them
StarGeek: They don't

Ah, OK I've realised where I went wrong now (thanks)... I had mis-learnt / remembered something you told me earlier about composites...

Quote from: StarGeek on April 23, 2023, 06:39:02 PMComposite tags (https://exiftool.org/TagNames/Composite.html) don't exist outside of exiftool.  Exiftool creates them on the fly based upon other tags in the file.  I will also use the monospaced font for Composite tags

... I thought it was Composite tags don't exist outside of **EXIF** (i.e. the framework/data structure) rather than **EXIFTOOL** (i.e. the app), my bad - thanks once again for clarifying!

Quote from: StarGeek on May 14, 2023, 12:06:43 PMI'm pretty sure that most software that does facial recognition is local, not cloud.  I haven't heard of a cloud based one.

Ah OK, to be fair that may be entirely correct - I was conflating (and perhaps assuming) two things together, namely...
[1] Whether the face recognition is performed locally or in the cloud
[2] Whether the recognised faces are stored in the file or a separate database (and it is really the second option that I find more useful).

I fully appreciate your other comment about limited other apps using the Microsoft:People tags however the 2 other face-recognition apps I tried to use (Microsoft Photos, included in Windows 10) and Google Image's native face-detection... They both detected faces, I went in and named those people, but if I ever re-installed Windows (which I do every 12 months-ish) or took the image in/out of google, all the info was lost and I had to start from scratch... i.e. **RE-NAMING** people I had already named before... **RE-SPLITTING** results (where it had thought person A was person B, etc).

I recognise that Photo Gallery is old and far from the best but as it saves it's data into the images and saves me hours of tagging effort, re-tagging the same people in the same photos it's an acceptable evil I guess (at least for me).. PS -- GeoSetter has a nice interface for detected Microsoft:People, essentially the same as IMatch.

Quote from: StarGeek on May 14, 2023, 12:06:43 PMRE GalleryDL: I have this installed but it never works on any site I try it on

Yeah, in fairness I recognised from the offset it was a very powerful/cool utility (so I persevered with it) but yeah it was quite difficult to use/configure, especially in the beginning... I don't know quite what it is, as in there is *SOME* documentation but what is available just doesn't really cover all the parameters in anywhere near enough detail I think, or just assumes if you're configuring X you also know that you have to configure Y and Z and have done this (which obv. as a new user you don't) so the learning curve was pretty steep and unforgiving -- once you get rolling though it does become a lot easier to use!

Quote from: StarGeek on May 14, 2023, 12:06:43 PMRE WebTools-NG: And instantly turned off because it doesn't describe what it actually does.

To be fair, it is not the BEST tool... I used to use another tool that was designed solely for metadata extraction (and worked well) but at some point this was discontinued and rolled into WebTools-NG. From using WebTools-NG it seems like they want to developed it to be a multi-functional plugin but last time I checked it was essentially a wrap of the metadata extractor and just 1 other thing. So a WIP I guess, which I won't blame anyone for.

Quote from: StarGeek on May 14, 2023, 12:06:43 PMThe analogy I use is that ADS are simply sidecar files, like XMP, and they automatically follow the file.

OK. So do they exist as physical files on the O/S, as in can I copy them explicitly to a exFAT drive or attach them to an email (like I could a .xmp sidecar) or do they now quite work like that?

Quote from: StarGeek on May 14, 2023, 12:21:32 PMMost of my passwords are 16 characters jibberish because I use a password manager.  On top of that, since I own my own domain, I can create a new email for every site to add to difficulty.  And the individual emails has alerted me a couple times that a site has had a breach because I started getting spam to those addresses that wasn't from the site it was connected to. But for a few main passwords, I do use that xkcd option.

It's interesting... Not to get TOO far off topic or anything but the main point of the XKCD comic (at least considering the average person) is that making your password LONG is much better for stopping your account from being hacked as making your password COMPLEX (but short)...

I also use a password manager (shout out to: BitWarden (https://bitwarden.com/), lol) but personally prefer PASSPHRASES rather than PASSWORDS as they both contain a mix of lowercase, uppercase, symbols, numbers - but when you have to type the password in, say if I am accessing the site from a friends computer or logging in from my TV, etc it's a lot easier to type "Elephant3.Tycoon.Mountain" than "^zPJ7662A@zPYUKescg%gG8Pb" (but both are 25 characters).

Lastly, just an acknowledgement that passphrases do have SOME vulnerability to dictionary-based attacks, especially with cracking tools getting better and things like password munging (so this advice may not age perfectly well). The main point I was trying to make really, was just that if you are anything like my mum (who uses "Catherine7" to login to all her websites) 🙈, PLEASE use a password manager, please make your passwords UNIQUE, and make them LONG! :-)

Quote from: StarGeek on May 14, 2023, 12:21:32 PMRE Manually shrinking images attached to posts: Though just clicking on it toggles between big and small on my browser

Ah, I did not know that!.. Nice tip, thanks!

Quote from: StarGeek on May 14, 2023, 12:06:43 PMGeosetter's metadata editor is pretty good and can easily be used as a editor on its own without even touching the geotag options

Good point, to be fair I probably use it 50% for geotagging and 50% for general metadata input/correction... It has a nice "copy and paste" feature where you can copy an image (mark it as a template/reference), hand-pick the 5, 10, 20 images you want to modify then "paste" the metadata, which bring up a sub-menu where you can select which tag groups you want to copy... So if you want to copy the keywords (only), or apply the same geo-location (but not keywords), etc - it's very handy for that... and FREE! (which is one of my favourite prices!) :-)

Quote from: Martin Z on May 16, 2023, 12:39:43 PM

Quote from: StarGeek on May 14, 2023, 12:06:43 PMThe analogy I use is that ADS are simply sidecar files, like XMP, and they automatically follow the file.

OK. So do they exist as physical files on the O/S, as in can I copy them explicitly to a exFAT drive or attach them to an email (like I could a .xmp sidecar) or do they now quite work like that?

It's complicated.  Yes, technically, they are another file, hidden behind the one they're attached to.  They take up drive space the same as any other file. You can copy them out into another file.  You can even read them directly into exiftool, as I did in this post (https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php?topic=14134.msg76075#msg76075) which reads the "Zone.Identifier" ADS that chromium based browsers attach to any file it downloads.  But extracting them isn't really a simple thing.  In theory, you would just add a colon to the file name and then the name of the ADS.  But I really haven't found any program which can really read them easily. And even some of Windows command line programs won't read them.

Bah, I remember reading that the basic Notepad on Windows can read the ADS.  Well, not from the file select window.  You have to run it from the command line
Notepad file.txt:hidden.txt

So technically, yes, you could copy them to an exFAT or attach them to an email.  But you would have to extract them from the main file and copy/attach them separately.  They won't travel to a non-NTFS location.  If you try, you should get a popup like this
(https://i.imgur.com/KiyacVI.png)

Though I just realized that I haven't seen that popup in a long time.  I have TeraCopy set as the default copy program because it re-reads and verifies the new file.  But it doesn't copy the ADS or give that warning.

QuoteI also use a password manager (shout out to: BitWarden (https://bitwarden.com/), lol)

I also use it.  I used LastPass for the longest time, even paying for it when it was $12/year.  But then they got sold, the new owners jacked the price up and limited its usefulness.

Cool, thanks for all the info on ADS files... I will have to give them a bit more thought on whether I want to make them part of my metadata paradigm (and possibly re-consider using something like FileMeta again). I'd be lying if I said I understood them 100% but I certainly understand them a lot better than I did a fortnight ago -- thanks!👍🏼

Quote from: StarGeek on May 16, 2023, 07:01:27 PMI also use it.  I used LastPass for the longest time, even paying for it when it was $12/year.  But then they got sold, the new owners jacked the price up and limited its usefulness

Lol, the similarity is getting even weirder!...  I also started used to use LastPass (think it was my first non-browser password manager actually)

I switched to BitWarden 2-3 years ago though, as:
•  Like you say though, they jacked up the prices and completely nerfed the free account (that's why I left)
•  They made it so unless you paid, you could only access your passwords by phone OR computer, not both
•  Most critically (although luckily I had already left and deleted by LastPass account) - they got hacked last year (https://blog.lastpass.com/2022/12/notice-of-recent-security-incident/) [backup link (http://web.archive.org/web/20230511054827/https://blog.lastpass.com/2023/03/security-incident-update-recommended-actions/)]
•  The hacker stole 'customer metadata, backups of all customer vault data, MFA Database (authenticator seeds + telephone numbers), API secrets, 3rd-party integration secrets'
•  Worst of all, everything except the customer vault data was unencrypted (or encrypted but the hacker also stole the relevant decryption keys)

-- Not exactly great for a digital security company! 🙈

Quote from: Martin Z on May 23, 2023, 12:23:25 AMI switched to BitWarden

Try to use KeyPass. It is security strong, opensource and portable =)
Also you can keyfile backup to google drive. If anybody get this file - he get nothing =)

Quote from: lmiol on May 25, 2023, 06:05:38 PM>  I switched to BitWarden
Try to use KeyPass. It is security strong, opensource and portable =)
Also you can keyfile backup to google drive. If anybody get this file - he get nothing =)

Lol, at the risk of going wildly off-topic (and don't get me wrong, definitely in a jokey way rather than actually wanting to get into an argument/debate about it 😁)...

BitWarden is also...
✅ Really secure (AFAIK)
✅ OpenSource
☑️ Portable (not sure)*
✅ Hosted for free in the cloud
✅ Hostable by you locally if you prefer
✅ Has built-in MFA ("TOTP") functionality**
✅ Is totally awesome! 🙂

* If you are self-hosting, then I guess you would pretty much need to run some kind of virtual server/service, so that your phone and other devices can check their local copy for passwords you might have updated on another device, etc -- so am not sure if portable (at least how I would think of it applies that much)

** TOTP support is "extra" but the price is very low (less than $1/month), and this also gives you additional benefits like 'emergency access' etc... Speaking purely personally, the convenience of having all my passwords, one-time MFA codes and any extra notes I've made (answers to security questions, etc) in one place is amazing! 👍🏼

( FIGHT!.. FIGHT!.. 🤣 )

I don't know if I messed up originally or if it was changed, but the Windows Rating property for videos is Microsoft:SharedUserRating. I've updated the original post.

There are other posts in these forums mentioning SharedUserRating, but I was pretty certain at the time that it was Microsoft:Rating. Now to find all the times in other forums where I said it was the wrong tag.