Translation of tags into Russian

[obetz]

Is there a command to compare two ru.pm files? It is necessary to display the tags, the translation of which is different.

In addition to use a version control system, you need a good "visual" comparison tool. Not only for comparing ru.pm but all the day you sit in front of your PC!

IMO the best you can get is "Beyond Compare" from https://www.scootersoftware.com/

There are special deals several times a year, but even the full 60USD for the "Pro" version are worth every cent!

Try the demo for 30 (non-consecutive!) days and you won't be disappointed.

If you decide to trade time for money, there are also free tools, but not that powerful and polished, e.g. http://kdiff3.sourceforge.net/ http://meld.sourceforge.net/ and http://winmerge.sourceforge.net/

Oliver

[Jom]

IWTA, can you, like me, provide your first name, last name, age and photo so that all can see who is doing the translation and taking responsibility?

[IWTA]

IWTA, can you, like me, provide your first name, last name, age and photo so that all can see who is doing the translation and takes responsibility?

This is an inappropriate requirement on your part and has nothing to do with translation. 

[IWTA]

Phil
Rename, please, the Artist tag from the EXIF ​​section to Author.
Using one Artist tag for a photo and for audio files will be wrong. It is necessary to separate these tags. Manufacturers of cameras this tag has long been called Author and this is more correct.

=========

Today I noticed in the same .tif file two opposite values ​​for the ExifByteOrder tag. It looks like this:

Code Select Expand

ExifByteOrder - Big-endian (Motorola, MM)
ExifByteOrder - Little-endian (Intel, II)
This is normal?

[StarGeek]

Phil didn't decide what to name the tags in the EXIF group. He just followed the specification.  In this case, the tag is called Artist by the specification.  See page 39 of the Exif Version 2.32 pdf.

[obetz]

IWTA, be prepared to find many more inconsistent and misleading tag names between EXIF, IPTC-IIM, XMP and so on. It's not caused by ExifTool but by different standards.

Be very cautious about interpreting them especially if for any translation!

Translators have a huge responsibility not to make the mess worse!

Oliver

P.S.: I prefer not to use any translated tag names. I set metadata editing software to "English" although that's not my native language.

[IWTA]

Phil knows what I'm talking about.
On the first pages of this thread, the problem of translating tags of the same name from different sections was already discussed: https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php/topic,10241.msg53658.html#msg53658

I just need these Artists to give different names when translating.
When translating tags, I first of all rely on tag descriptions in technical specifications of different standards, if of course I can find them.
Here is what is written in the descriptions of this tag in the EXIF ​​standard:

Exif.Image.Artist - This tag records the name of the camera owner, photographer or image creator. The detailed format is not specified, but it is recommended that the information be written as in the example below for ease of Interoperability. When the field is left blank, it is treated as unknown. Ex.) "Camera owner, John Smith; Photographer, Michael Brown; Image creator, Ken James"

[Phil Harvey]

It would be a problem for many people (myself included) if I renamed the EXIF Artist tag, so unfortunately I think we have to live with this.

- Phil

[IWTA]

Phil
Forgive me, maybe I did not quite understand you correctly, but you used to write that there is an opportunity to make different translations for tags of the same name:

Then the tag names should be ObjectName and PersonName to avoid this problem

https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php/topic,10241.msg53658.html#msg53658

The tag "Artist" can not be translated into Russian, so that in all sections where this tag is found, the translation is correct. In one place will be the correct translation, and in the other wrong.
The word "Artist" in the Russian language is also there, but it has a narrower meaning. An artist with us is a person who is engaged in the public performance of works of art (this is an actor, singer, musician ...), but no one calls the artist a person who takes pictures. If a photographer is called an artist, it will make him smile.

[StarGeek]

The word "Artist" in the Russian language is also there, but it has a narrower meaning. An artist with us is a person who is engaged in the public performance of works of art (this is an actor, singer, musician ...), but no one calls the artist a person who takes pictures. If a photographer is called an artist, it will make him smile.

That sounds pretty much like the English definition.  The term is unusual to be applied to any photographer short of the level of Ansel Adams. 

[Phil Harvey]

Forgive me, maybe I did not quite understand you correctly, but you used to write that there is an opportunity to make different translations for tags of the same name

I was speaking hypothetically.  In practice, I can't change the names of any common tags without creating incompatibility problems for ExifTool users.

- Phil

[IWTA]

Tell me please, where did the Metadata Working Group go? The official website metadataworkinggroup.com does not work.
Who has metadata specifications from the Metadata Working Group?

I want to clarify the information on the tags:

Code Select Expand

Region Applied To Dimensions
Region Applied To Dimensions H
Region Applied To Dimensions Unit
Region Applied To Dimensions W

I don't want to translate tags whose meaning is not entirely clear to me.


I only know that this has to do with the size of the regions after resizing the image.
The specs seem to have described in detail how this works, but they are now unavailable.

[obetz]

Tell me please, where did the Metadata Working Group go? The official website metadataworkinggroup.com does not work.

https://exiftool.org/forum/index.php/topic,10030.0.html

Who has metadata specifications from the Metadata Working Group?

Feed the PDF link from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metadata_Working_Group to the Wayback Machine to get their guidance document, but this is not the right document to answer your question about the tags you mentioned.

You need to check EXIF, IPTC-IIM and XMP specs.

But even after reading them, there will be uncertainty.

And the usage of tags can change over time, see the EXIF "destination" coordinates being "repurposed" by MWG or whom?

[IWTA]

I found specifications on the Internet for the title of the document: "Guidelines For Handling Image Metadata". There is what I was looking for. Not only descriptions, but also examples in the pictures.

"Applied To"
Since the file may be modified by actors that are either non-compliant to this guidance or choose not to participate in image region metadata, it is critical to retain information about what the state of the image was when the region was specified. A Creator MUST store the region "applied to" width and height.

But even after reading them, there will be uncertainty.

Sometimes it happens! But not in this case.

[IWTA]

The document Guidelines For Handling Image Metadata turned out to be very interesting and useful for translators.

I will quote from this document interesting points in which there is a comparison of similar or identical tags from different standards:

5.1 Keywords
Information for the keyword property is available in:
IPTC Keywords (IIM 2:25, 0x0219) and
XMP (dc:subject)

5.2 Description
This area defines the textual description of a resource's content. Also known as "user comment", "caption", "abstract" or "description". Today, this information is represented in different ways; sometimes integrated and displayed as one field – at other times revealed separately. This document combines the different sources into one overall representation, called "Description".

Information for the description property is available in the following properties:
Exif ImageDescription (270, 0x010E)
IPTC Caption (IIM 2:120, 0x0278) 
XMP (dc:description["x-default"])

5.3 Date/Time
Information for Date/Time (Original) is available in the following properties:

Original Date/Time – Creation date of the intellectual content (e.g. the photograph), rather than the creation date of the content being shown
   Exif DateTimeOriginal (36867, 0x9003) and SubSecTimeOriginal (37521, 0x9291)
   IPTC DateCreated (IIM 2:55, 0x0237) and TimeCreated (IIM 2:60, 0x023C)
   XMP (photoshop:DateCreated)

Digitized Date/Time – Creation date of the digital representation
   Exif DateTimeDigitized (36868, 0x9004) and SubSecTimeDigitized (37522, 0x9292)
   IPTC DigitalCreationDate (IIM 2:62, 0x023E) and DigitalCreationTime (IIM 2:63, 0x023F)
   XMP (xmp:CreateDate) 

Modification Date/Time – Modification date of the digital image file
    Exif DateTime (306, 0x132) and SubSecTime (37520, 0x9290)
    XMP (xmp:ModifyDate)

5.6 Copyright
The CopyrightNotice information is available in the following properties:
Exif Copyright (33432, 0x8298) 
IPTC CopyrightNotice (IIM 2:116, 0x0274) 
XMP (dc:rights).

5.7 Creator
The creator is available in the following properties:
Exif Artist (315, 0x013B)
IPTC By-line (IIM 2:80, 0x0250)
XMP (dc:creator)

5.8 Location
The location of an image is one of the key pieces of information that consumers want to capture. Until recently location capture was often accomplished with post-creation keyword annotation. With the advent of embedded GPS, accurate location information can now be automatically inserted into image files at creation time. The Exif, IPTC-IIM, IPTC Core, IPTC Extension and XMP specifications all specify metadata properties that capture, with varying degrees of accuracy, either the location of the camera or the location of the image subject.
When storing location based information it's important to understand the difference between the two main concepts:
   
   "Location Created": This information describes the location where the image was created, the location of the camera during shot creation. The typical case is when a GPS receiver injects the current location into an image at shooting time (camera location).
 
  "Location Shown": This information describes the location of the main subject being shown in an image. For example, a picture of Mount Fuji would be tagged with the coordinates of where the mountain is located (subject location), although the picture may have been taken from downtown Tokyo.

In the latest specification (IPTC Extension 1.1), the IPTC has moved to a set of definitions that clearly differentiates between camera location and subject location defining both "Location Created" and "Location Shown" as a set of hierarchical properties (World Region, Country Name/ISO Country code, Province or State, City and Sublocation). The older [ambiguous] location definition (IPTC Core 1.0) is to be treated as legacy. This resolves any issues around the semantics of a textual location, and is clearly the way forward. Unlike keywords, which are unbounded, it is recommended that all location properties are being entered to form a valid hierarchy and avoid ambiguity (e.g. simply filling the City property as "Springfield", or State/Province as "Victoria" would represent multiple locations).
While the Exif specification allows for the capture of two sets of GPS location data, the Exif specification does not clearly state the purpose of the first set of coordinates vs. the second set (destination). This has led to a certain amount of confusion in the marketplace. In the consumer context, the camera location and subject location have often been treated the same. In case a semantic differentiation is made, it is very important to maintain these separate semantics. This specification will provide guidance for the creation of a clear, two part semantic (Location Created vs. Location Shown), the relationship of the GPS coordinate properties from the Exif specification and an algorithm for reconciling existing market implementations.

Internal and external modification times
Developers can understandably get confused between the internal modification time of Exif DateTime or XMP xmp:ModifyDate, and the external file modification time maintained by the file system. There is no intent that these be identical.
The intent is that software set the internal modification time to the current local time at some convenient point when writing a file. Preferably, this should not be significantly before closing the file, and the internal and external times will often be close as a consequence of this. The mention of "current local time" is intentional, it is reasonable and appropriate for xmp:ModifyDate to contain the local time zone offset.
Note that the external file system time can be significantly different, for example if the file is on an external server in another time zone. This difference and the possible "reset" of the external modification time if a file is copied are some of the rationale for having an internal modification time.
No specific guidance is given for the choice of displaying, sorting, etc., based on the internal or external modification time. That should be appropriate to the context, aiming to give users the most value and least confusion. When only looking at images, it seems reasonable to use the internal image modification time. When looking at files in general, it seems reasonable to use the file system time.