Meta Data Import Progress Window

[ulim]

Hi,

after importing an iMatch 3 database of 30000 images, iMatch started to import metadata. When the progress window first came up, it said something to the tune of x/30000 images, estimated time remaining 18 hours, which soon went down to 8 hours. After letting it run overnight I checked the progress this morning and found that the progress bar went all the way to the right, but iMatch was still working on importing metadata. I could see this by the path of the file below the graph, which still was updated - every couple of seconds one file.

So it seemed that the process has slowed down and I restarted iMatch to get a new count. However, then it said 0/744 images and no estimated time remaining. Even though iMatch keeps on reading files, it doesn't update that count anymore and the progress bar is all the way to the right. Also, the grey, vertical bars don't update anymore as they used to in the beginning, although the red and green line still moves from right to left.

So my question: is there a way to check the queue for the files still to process? Or to get an estimation of the time remaining?

Will the process speed up if I run database diagnostics?

Many thanks in advance,

Ulrich

[Mario]

You can close this dialog and check the Info & Activity Panel to see what IMatch is doing.

Writing data to 30,000 files and then reloading all that data will fragment your database big time.
Run a Database > Compact & Optimize now to bring it back into shape.

Then retry.

Tip: You can also check the IMatch log file for errors (lines with E>) and Warnings (lines with W>).
IMatch also logs feedback from ExifTool and the Execution times (search for ET-Extract) .

If the progress overlay does not report anything, progress may be exceptionally slow. Maybe ExifTool hangs with some of your files.
The log file will show that.

[ulim]

Yay! The Info & Activity Panel reports what is happening and I can even see the queue shrinking. Thanks a lot for that tip.

Not sure if compacting and optimising helped all that much, but it certainly doesn't hurt and so I ran that as well.

Checking the logfile, ExifTool keeps on complaining about "Invalid CanonCameraSettings data". I didn't see any entries with "execution times" or "extract", though.

Anyway, the Info&Activity panel now estimates 2 hours, so I'm hopeful to get this done now.

cheers,

Ulrich

[ulim]

Hm, now it gets really weird. The queue is reduced, but soon after it is filled up again to 745. It takes a couple of seconds to process one file and the "idle time" indicator showed 28 minutes at one point and then it went down to 0 and now it is up to 4 minutes again. The database idle time always stay at less than one second - odd.

What is going on here? Is there a second queue that fills the first queue, once that gets under 745? What does the idle time field indicate?

Ulrich

[jch2103]

Checking the logfile, ExifTool keeps on complaining about "Invalid CanonCameraSettings data". I didn't see any entries with "execution times" or "extract", though.

If ExifTool starts complaining about specific files, the import process can become a lot longer. I've been in the position of having to clean up specific files before they would import properly. See, for example, https://www.photools.com/community/index.php?topic=1152.0 in addition to Mario's suggestions. Metadata issues can be very well hidden until you start using a great tool like IMatch 5...

[Mario]

Multiple operations are combined in the background processing queue - pending file imports, relation updates, write-backs.
Depending on your settings, IMatch may write-back files after import, or file relations cause updates of files already in the database, again causing write-backs.

If you switch the log file to debug mode (Help menu > Support) IMatch writes as much info as possible into the log. But even in normal log mode, IMatch logs all ExifTool warnings and error messages into the log, plus the execution times for each file. Search for ET-Extract to find the execution times for ExifTool, and for the closing bracket (starts with < ) of PTMetabase::ImportFiles, which lists the total processing time for each batch of files (including the ET times and all the time IMatch needs to load the data, update the database, file relations and  so on).

If you see warnings from ExifTool about invalid data or even error messages, this may slow down processing considerably. When ExifTool is forced to 'jump' all over your files because the metadata is invalid, ExifTool may take a rather long time to figure out the problem and to abort because of some checks Phil has added.

As jch2103 mentioned above, problems with metadata in files is often revealed only by ExifTool and IMatch, because other software is unable to read the metadata or to process it properly. In such cases, the IMatch log file is usually the best too to figure out which files are affected and then what to do next.

[ulim]

The only application ever to write meta data to these files was iMatch 3 (apart from the cameras) and my iMatch 5 settings are all pristine. I don't have any relations or data-driven categories, this is just an imported, flat database from iMatch 3.

Here is an excerpt of the log file in "Normal" log level, which lists no execution times:

08.03 17:37:07+ 3385 [0460] 01  W> ETWARN:Warning: Invalid CanonCameraSettings data - D:\Linenbilder\4\IMG_6148.JPG  'PTETWrapper.cpp(2006)'
08.03 17:37:15+ 7987 [0900] 01  W> ETWARN:Warning: Invalid CanonCameraSettings data - D:\Linenbilder\4\IMG_6146.JPGWarning: Invalid CanonCameraSettings data - D:\Linenbilder\4\IMG_6146.JPG  'PTETWrapper.cpp(3229)'
08.03 17:37:18+ 3261 [0460] 01  W> ETWARN:Warning: Invalid CanonCameraSettings data - D:\Linenbilder\4\IMG_6149.JPG  'PTETWrapper.cpp(2006)'
08.03 17:37:27+ 8096 [0900] 01  W> ETWARN:Warning: Invalid CanonCameraSettings data - D:\Linenbilder\4\IMG_6148.JPGWarning: Invalid CanonCameraSettings data - D:\Linenbilder\4\IMG_6148.JPG  'PTETWrapper.cpp(3229)'

And so on - this has been going on for a few days now. When I turn the log level up to "Full", then I see entries that are too long to post here. I've attached one example as a file.

It would be really helpful to find out how long this process is going to take. Is there any way to see the entire processing queue? I'd like to get a definite answer as to how many files are still to be processed, the Info & Activity window never goes beyond 745. As far as I know, iMatch could be caught in an infinite loop.

Many thanks in advance for any pointers,

Ulrich

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Mario]

The log file you have attached looks a bit garbled (Linux?) and is not complete.
Please attach the complete log file (zipped) because log files contain important info at the start and end.

If it's always the same files / folder, maybe a forced rescan works if you did not do it already.
From what I could decipher from the log file, ExifTool finds invalid Canon RAW data  - and this data was never touched by IMatch 3 or IMatch 5 - it's straight from the camera.

Probably you need to fix these files manually by stripping the damaged Canon RAW data.

IMatch does not run into infinite loops when it encounters files with bad metadata - except you have background write-back enabled (default is off) under Edit > Preferences > Background Processing and your files and setup cause a write-back immediately after the import.

[ulim]

Sorry for the garbled Log file, it's probably because iMatch is on my wife's Windows laptop and I'm using a Mac here and have to copy everything over.

So to get some clean data, here's what I did: switched off automatic write-back (yes, I had it on), turned the log level to full and let iMatch fill the category "unwritten metadata". It stopped at 745 images as usual. So now I had a queue of 745 files to write meta data for.

Then I restarted the application, so a new log file would be started. Then I manually selected all 745 files and told iMatch to write the meta data back. I then selected "copy log file" and zipped it, so as to avoid any encoding problems. I attached this Zip archive to this posting.

Perhaps I should produce a similar log file for the process of importing the meta data?

Many thanks for looking into this.

Ulrich

[attachment deleted by admin]

[ulim]

And now I've got a real gem!

While browsing through the latest batch of images I noticed one that I had seen before. I immediately switched the log level to debug, then clicked on the pen icon to write the meta data for just that file back and lo and behold: the file immediately reappeared in the queue of unwritten metadata and the pen icon came back as well. This is repeatable. I have attached the log file for this "zombie" that seems to always come back.

Perhaps the debug log can tell you what's wrong with this file?

Kind regards,

Ulrich

[attachment deleted by admin]

[ulim]

Ok, the extent of the problem is slowly becoming apparent to me (sorry, I'm an iMatch Newbie). There is no fixed queue size of 745 in iMatch and no secondary queue. These 745 files are the same files altogether and they just re-appear all the time. The meta data is written to these files without an ExifTool error message (see last debug log), but then they reappear in the iMatch queue.

So this seems to be an iMatch issue after all?

Should I post a bug report with log file and example image file?

Ulrich

[jch2103]

So this seems to be an iMatch issue after all?

It sounds like a metadata synchronization issue, likely between XMP and IPTC data. So, not an IMatch issue per se, but an issue exposed by IMatch 5. If you search the Forum, you'll find other mentions of this issue. Also see the Help re the Metadata settings.

It might be helpful if you post a sample image (be sure to zip it first to prevent the forum software from scrubbing metadata); you could also re-size it if it's a jpg, as that shouldn't affect the metadata and it would make for a smaller upload. Also, you might run your mouse over the image pencil, as it will tell you what's in the pending metadata write queue.

[ulim]

Thanks a lot for the tip!

I've since found out that some of the images have an IPTC keyword of "St; Wolfgang". When I changed the keyword to "St. Wolfgang", then these images are processed correctly and never re-appear in the queue. Other images with the same problem have keywords like "St; Florian" or "St; Wendel".

Now, whether these IPTC keywords are broken or not, I do believe that iMatch shouldn't act in this pretty confusing way, but I'll leave it up to Mario whether it is a bug or meant to actually work this way.

Ulrich

[jch2103]

Glad to hear you were able to figure this out. I think there was some discussion about this specific issue on the Forum earlier this year, but I can't find it right now. In any event, I'm pretty sure this is because of how ExifTool works, rather than something IMatch-specific (because IMatch uses ExifTool for metadata processing). In general, it's a good idea to avoid certain characters such as "|" (the pipe character) and ";" because they're commonly used as field separators.

As has been said many times on this Forum, metadata is a mess!

[Mario]

When IMatch imports a file with existing legacy IPTC data, it maps this IPTC data into hierarchical XMP keywords as per Metadata Working Group recommendations.

In order to detect hierarchical keywords which have been written into flat IPTC keywords using some sort of dot notation (e.g. "Location.Beach" or "Location|Beach" IMatch scans each keyword for specific hierarchy separator characters. By default, IMatch uses . and | but you can configure this under Edit > Preferences > Metadata. Do you perhaps enabled the ; there as well?

The idea is to allow users who somehow tried to simulate hierarchical keywords in IPTC, who used a script in IMatch 3 to store categories in keywords or who used a software which implements a similar scheme to import their existing keywords in a proper way, mapping them to hierarchical keywords and from there back to flat XMP subject and hierarchicalSubject. IMatch 5 only works with hierarchical keywords.
See also the corresponding help topic for details.

I tried to reproduce your effect.
I prepared a file with an IPTC keyword "St; Wolfgang" and switched IMatch to background write-back.
The file was imported without problems, IMatch imported the keywords, mapped them, and wrote the resulting XMP record back.
No infinite loop or anything.

It works the same when I disable background write-back (which is much better for performance!) and write-back manually by clicking the pen icon.

Please let us know if you changed any of the default metadata settings under Edit > Preferences > Metadata and Metadata 2 and also provide a sample image which produces this effect. You can attach zipped files up to 2 MB.

[ulim]

I have not changed anything. The ";" is the keyword seperator, whereas "." and "|" are the hierarchy seperators. I believe these settings are the default.

I've attached one of the problematic images. You need to put it in an iMatch 3 database and then import that database into a pristine iMatch 5, if you want to replicate what I did. Interestingly, in iMatch 3 this image seems to have the correct keyword "St. Wolfgang".

Perhaps the "." in the keyword is interpreted as a hierarchical seperator during import and then ";" is put into its place. So the keyword shows up as "St; Wolfgang" in iMatch 5, which triggers the writeback problems with ExifTool.

By the way, the image is a .gz archive, I had to rename it to .zip, because the forum software would not let me upload it otherwise.

Kind regards,

Ulrich

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Mario]

whereas "." and "|" are the hierarchy seperators.

With these settings, when IMatch reads the IPTC keyword "St. Wolfgang", it will produce a hierarchical keywords from it:

St| Wolfgang

that's how it should be, with the settings you use. The problem arises from the fact that it also copies the original IPTC keyword "St. Wolfgang" into the XMP subject (the flat keywords in XMP). So you end up with a file that has

IPTC: "St. Wolfgang"
XMP: "St. Wolfgang"
Hierarchical Keywords in XMP: "St| Wolfgang"

Since only the hierarchical keyword is 'new' IMatch will only write-back this keyword. The Metadata Working Group mapping carried out by ExifTool afterwards copies the flat XMP keyword back into IPTC. You end up with different keywords in IPTC/XMP and hierarchical keywords, and that's not good.

Solution: If you use . as a regular part of your keywords, make sure you don't configure IMatch to use it as a hierarchy separator. Un-check it in the Edit > Preferences > Metadata options. Then force a rescan of the metadata for your files using <Shift>+<Ctrl>+<F5> in the file window.

You can use the ExifTool Command Processor to check if the XMP/IPTC keywords in your files are synchronized. Just copy/paste from here:

-G1
-iptc:keywords
-xmp:subject
-xmp:hierarchicalSubject
-a
{Files}


Note: You may need to write-back twice to fix this and to synchronize keywords between XMP and IPTC.

Note: Unless you need the defunct and retired legacy IPTC data (which has been retired for 10 years now) you are usually better of using only XMP in your files. But that's another topic.

[mastodon]

Oh, that is a good news. I had that problem with the ".", too. Thanks! It will be a great help a short summery about IPTC import and handling, because lot of people use it, and it is so different in IM 3 and 5. (importing IPTC data to XMP, accent characters handling, this ". and ;" issue, how not to rewrite IPTC)
So, if some had his data only in IPTC record, then how to switch to XMP (importing data into XMP coinsidering the problems above). How to proceed if one want to fill XMP and IPTC records in paralell.

[Mario]

The problem is that keywords, by definition, are single words without punctuation or other special characters. Including . or ; or even | in XMP subject or IPTC keywords is prone to cause problems at one or more stages in your workflow. Even more so if you use more than one application.

IMatch is very flexible and allows you to control how punctuation characters in IPTC keywords should be interpreted - you only have to set the settings right. IMatch cannot 'know' by itself what you did to your keywords, or how you want to have them treated.

If you stuck to the recommendations, the automatic mapping between IPTC-EXIF-XMP-GPS forth and back in IMatch is fully automatic and guarantees excellent metadata quality across metadata standard borders. The real problem is that most users don't know a thing about metadata and use whatever software they come across to edit 'keywords' in their files. They are just not aware of the problems they cause when they edit keywords in applications like LR (XMP focus), Windows Explorer (sometimes IPTC sometimes XMP focus) or any of the applications out there which either only support IPTC or XMP, or both, but not right. Or which don't give a whosname about properly updating existing IPTC/XMP metadata and do the mapping. Because all this stuff is complicated.

LR solves this problem in part by hiding most of the metadata from it's users, allowing them to edit and see only maybe 50 tags or so. Apple software does allow users to do even less. Dumbing down things is the way to go for the mass of users.

IMatch uses the same approach, via the Default metadata panel layout. This layout is XMP only, contains only the frequently used tags you will also encounter in other applications. And it by default does a top-notch mapping between IPTC/EXIF/GPS on import (into XMP) and from XMP to IPTC/EXIF/GPS on export. A normal user with normal metadata will never need to think about all this.

IMatch defaults to an XMP-only workflow. Which means it does not create legacy metadata like IPTC automatically - following the recommendations of the IPTC committee and the MWG. But it detects existing legacy IPTC/EXIF/GPS data and synchronizes it with XMP. All this is done in the background, and you don't need to care.

Unless you did something to your metadata that requires you to set some special options in IMatch to make things work. This includes things like using punctuation characters in keywords, or using software which only updates either IPTC or XMP. Or using custom scripts to copy hierarchical IMatch 3 categories into IPTC metadata, using . or | or whatever separator. Or many of the other weird things users sometimes do to their metadata with various applications and then expect IMatch to somehow handle and fix that for them.

I have included tons of information in the IMatch help system on all these issues. In the Metadata options topic. In the Metadata Working Group topic. In the topics explaining image metadata and the relations between IPTC, EXIF, GPS and XMP. That's all that can be said about that. Users only need to read it, look at the metadata their files contain and then decide what they want and which options they need to use in IMatch.

Again, a normal user with normal metadata usually does not need to care about all this a bit. IMatch does the right things automatically. And that's a lot more than can be said about other applications out there.

[ulim]

Hi Mario,

as you suggested, I now disabled "." as a seperator for hierarchical keywords. I did not force a rescan, because I first have to manually fix some more images with unreadable EXIF data. But I will report back what transpires (btw, I already manually fixed all image keywords from "St; X" to "St. X").

The big problem for me as a user is to know which metadata fields I should use when. I don't care about IPTC vs XMP or whatever - I just want my metadata stored in the files. In iMatch I see fields like "Creation Date" and "Keywords" - no indication whether they are XMP or IPTC or EXIF. Of course I can drill down on each single field and will find out eventually, but that is pretty cumbersome and I have to remember to do it for every view I have.

In the metadata window I've tried to use only fields from "Dublin Core XMP", assuming that this is where the music plays these days. But in the File Viewer it's different: I have a sort profile with "Creation Date & Time", but no indication which metadata field this is actually backed with. To confuse me even further, there are now fields that are called attributes. And in the file window tip the fields are encoded as something like "File.MD.XMP::dc\creator\Creator\0", which shows what in iMatch 3 used to simply be "IPTC Byline". And "XMP::dc\subject\Subject" is what appears, when I select "XMP::Keywords" in the dialog. And there is another term for metadata called "Variables" and I have to click on "Tags" to get to the metadata fields. So many different terms.

I'm sure that it will all make sense at one stage and I certainly love the free configurability of most views and panels. And yes, there is always the help function. But a bit of "convention over configuration" could do wonders to iMatch

Ulrich

[Mario]

port back what transpires (btw, I already manually fixed all image keywords from "St; X" to "St. X").

You don't need to do that!
IMatch has no problems with keywords containing . as long as you don't configure it has a hierarchy separator.

And, you can change this (if you still want to) after the files have been imported. All files will be assigned to the "St. German" @Keyword category. You just select them all, change the keyword from St. German to whatever and save your change.

The big problem for me as a user is to know which metadata fields I should use when. I don't care about IPTC vs XMP or whatever

Easy. Just use the tags displayed in the Default Metadata Panel layout. They cover most of what old IPTC did, handle GPS and location data. Most users never will need more. These tags are also what you get in tools like LR or PS.

Dublin Core (the Metadata Panel Layout with that name if you mean that) is mostly used by scientists and not very widely used.

Tags is just the name used by IMatch/ExifTool to name a metadata tag. IMatch supports over 14,000 metadata tags right now.
What complicates things, is that Adobe (who is the inventor of XMP) names tags differently in the user interface than they are named in the corresponding XMP schema. And several of the tags which have been migrated from the old IPTC data into XMP have been renamed. Many have been dropped as well. But that's not within my responsibility. Blame Adobe, the IPTC committee and the MWG for that.

Variables are specific to IMatch. They allow you to use metadata in many features. I suggest you read the Variables help topic and the Metadata help topic, which explain all that. What tags and groups are. How IMatch makes it easy to work with them. Etc.

Or just stick to the Default layout and be done. Unless you want to customize IMatch, you usually don't need to learn about all this.

[ulim]

I don't blame you for metadata mess

I did take a look at the default layout of the metadata panel and there are a lot of "XMP Dublin Core" fields being used, so I wonder why you said it is mostly used by scientists and not very common? Perhaps you meant "Darwin Core".

There is also a "XMP Lightroom hierarchical Subject", which I would like to use instead of the previous IPTC keywords. Pretty cool, because I can edit that in contrast to "XMP Dublin Core Keywords", which I used previously.

Ulrich

[Mario]

I meant Darwin Core, sorry.
Dublin Core is a massive metadata framework/initiative/organization. Adobe based parts of XMP on parts of DC.

There is also a "XMP Lightroom hierarchical Subject", which I would like to use instead of

Don't. Please make sure you understand how IMatch works with keywords.
IMatch automatically uses hierarchical Keywords internally, and keeps them synchronized with (optionally) legacy IPTC keywords and the flat keywords which are part of XMP (xmp-dc:Subject).

Do not update IPTC keywords or XMP subject or XMP-lr hierarchicalKeywords manually. Use the Keyword Panel to view and edit keywords. Or work with the @Keywords category hierarchy. IMatch takes care for your keywords in the background automatically.

[ulim]

Hi Mario,

this "automatic" stuff is pretty confusing. It's probably great for advanced users, but I just want to do an extremely basic thing: edit a few metadata fields of my images. Browse/search them via those fields. That's all.

So I have created a custom layout in the metadata panel and it displays these fields:

- XMP Adobe Lightroom\Hierarchical Keywords (but I only use flat keywords)
- XMP Dublin Core\Title
- XMP Dublin Core\Author
- XMP Dublin Core\Description

I can edit these fields with my custom layout. Am I doing the right thing or not? If not, which fields should I put in my layout instead? I really don't want to open different panels to edit different fields. Everything should be together in one place.

I did fill the Thesaurus from my database in order to get a nice starting list of keywords. So this is one other feature that I use. But I don't use categories (I use the @Keywords category instead) or any other advanced features.

Ulrich

[sinus]

Hi Ulrich
in my layout I have basically these fields (in the same aspect as yours):

{File.MD.XMP::Lightroom\hierarchicalSubject\HierarchicalSubject\0} (in my layout Hierarc Keys)
{File.MD.XMP::dc\title\Title\0} (in my layout Title)
{File.MD.XMP::dc\creator\Creator\0} (in my layout Hierarc Keys) (in my layout Fotograf)
{File.MD.XMP::dc\description\Description\0} (in my layout Description)

{File.MD.XMP::photoshop\Headline\Headline\0} (in my layout Headline)

But of course, because these Metadata-stuff is so complex, I am not sure, if it is correct. But after all, we have to do something. 

You can see also my attachement.

Good luck!


[attachment deleted by admin]

[Mario]

this "automatic" stuff is pretty confusing. It's probably great for advanced users, but I just want to do an extremely basic thing:

The automatic stuff has been designed for entry-level users. As you say, it's automatic. All the complex metadata logic is performed behind the curtain.
But you start with a complex case already, because you used legacy IPTC data in your files. And since the world has switched to XMP data 10 years ago, you need to live with the legacy and IMatch has to map between your old metadata and the metadata format we use currently (XMP).

As I outlined in many places in the help file, a user who has no specific requirements should stick to the Default metadata layout. Or, when you create your own layout, stick to the Standard tags  IMatch supplies. These are accessible in the Tag Selector right on the first tab. I have created these standard tags to make things simple, e.g. using names like "Title" or "Description" instead of the long and complex XMP tag names.

I would suggest you use the Keyword Panel to edit your keywords. It not only has many advanced features for improving the quality and speed, but also ensures that changes made to hierarchical keywords are copied into flat IPTC and XMP keywords.

I have tried to hide all the complexity of metadata behind a curtain. Most users only ever use the Default metadata panel layout, not giving a second thought about all this metadata stuff. And if you consider all this as complicated, you probably should do that too. This also ensures that you enter the right things into the right place, and that the metadata you enter is compatible with a wide range of applications out there.

IMatch also ensures that, if your files still have old IPTC legacy metadata, the changes you make in XMP are copied into IPTC as needed.

[ulim]

Hi Mario,

thanks a lot for the tips, I am slowly starting to understand... slowly

I am absolutely prepared to adapt my workflow to modern XMP fields, I don't have my heart set on IPTC. So if you tell me, use these fields for future compatibility, then I will do so and just have to find a way to once copy over my IPTC content into these fields. If the IPTC fields aren't updated anymore, I don't care. I'll work with the XMP fields then. I'll just need the IPTC content moved over once.

If I understood you correctly, then the fields I should use are those that I avoided up to now. The reason is that I had absolutely no idea which IPTC or XMP fields these "standard tags" referred to. So I went the safe route and selected exactly the IPTC fields I used in iMatch 3 and when you told me to use XMP, I switched over to the XMP equivalents. So now I should switch over to the "standard tags", which are basically "iMatch Metafields" that are automatically synchronized to XMP and IPTC fields and whatnot?

The default metadata layout is way too complex for me. It contains too many fields, so I wanted to create a custom layout with just the handful of fields that I use. Also, I want to use my own headings, so I put every field in its own panel and thus have the name appear over the field, not to the left of it (that uses too much valuable screen estate, I need all the space I can get for the field value).

cheers,

Ulrich

[Mario]

Use XMP.
Use Standard tags.
If you have used legacy IPTC before, IMatch automatically fills the corresponding XMP tags from the IPTC data on import. IMatch 3 did the same!
Don't think about legacy IPTC, unless you work with agencies, clients or web services which still don't use XMP.
Don't manually change legacy IPTC data. IMatch automatically updates existing legacy IPTC data in your files when it updates XMP data.

Standard tags are about 50 of the most frequently used tags. Many of them are XMP tags which have mappings to legacy IPTC, e.g. headline, title, description.

All I could write here I have already written in great detail in IMatch help system. Check out the Metadata topic, the topic about standard tags. And the topic which explains why legacy IPTC is bad, how IMatch magically keeps everything for you in sync.

Keep it simple. Use the Default Metadata Panel layout. If you need to create your own layout, stick to the Standard tags, unless you have special requirements. For all else, please read the IMatch help. It's all explained in there, from multiple directions and heavily cross-linked between all related tags. Probably one of the best coverages of this complex topic.

Again, keep it simple. Just put your data into the Metadata Panel Default layout and it will end up in the right places - even when your files have old IPTC data.

[jch2103]

The default metadata layout is way too complex for me. It contains too many fields, so I wanted to create a custom layout with just the handful of fields that I use. Also, I want to use my own headings, so I put every field in its own panel and thus have the name appear over the field, not to the left of it (that uses too much valuable screen estate, I need all the space I can get for the field value).

It sounds like you may just want to make a custom version of the Default metadata layout. It's easy to do: just edit the Default layout (to delete the tags you don't want to see/use) and save it with a new name. That way, you can be sure of using the 'correct' metadata tags and keeping things as simple as possible.

[ulim]

Yes, I already did that and a few postings back I listed the fields that I used in my layout. But then Mario said I should not use these fields, but should use iMatch standard tags instead. So now I went back to my layout and wanted to change that, but I found out that the fields I listed are already iMatch standard tags. So now I don't know what to think

I have read the help file extensively, but it is not written in a way that I can find answers to my questions there. I wouldn't be here otherwise. It's great as a reference, when you already have a lot of context and just look for how a specific feature works. But it doesn't make a difference between basic and expert knowledge, so I need to sieve through a lot of advanced stuff without even knowing that I asked the wrong question to begin with

But kudos for the elegant search function and the zoom slider to the left of it. These don't need any explanation, great stuff!

Ulrich

[Carlo Didier]

The problem is that keywords, by definition, are single words without punctuation or other special characters.

That's one of the main reasons I just never started using keywords (only iMatch categories). Because what sense would it make to tag an image with two keywords like "Taj" and "Mahal" or "Eiffel" and "Tower" instead of simply using "Taj Mahal" and "Eiffel Tower".

[sinus]

The problem is that keywords, by definition, are single words without punctuation or other special characters.

That's one of the main reasons I just never started using keywords (only iMatch categories). Because what sense would it make to tag an image with two keywords like "Taj" and "Mahal" or "Eiffel" and "Tower" instead of simply using "Taj Mahal" and "Eiffel Tower".

First you could add such keywords (what are not soooo often necessary) with always the same sign, like
Taj-Mahal
Eiffel-Tower

And second, if you do not like, you could also search by Taj AND Mahal.

Keyword have limitation, but are very useful, in my opinion.

[Mario]

The problem is that there is no real hard standard about what keywords should look like.
In old IPTC days, keywords were limited to ASCI-only, one word phrases, with a maximum of 64 characters.
XMP has no real hard rules and many applications out there do all kinds of weird stuff with keywords.

IMatch handles keywords with spaces, commas, semicolons, - . and whatever just fine - you only need to make sure that you don't configure characters you use in keywords (e.g. a dot) as hierarchy separators. Because then IMatch will consider "St. Tropez" as the hierarchical keyword "St| Tropez". Which was the problem that caused this thread.

I use keywords with spaces frequently myself, for example. But you need to make sure that when you send the files to a web site/agency/customer/app that it is flexible enough to handle keywords consisting of more than one word or keywords with embedded punctuation.

[Ferdinand]

I use keywords with spaces frequently myself, for example. But you need to make sure that when you send the files to a web site/agency/customer/app that it is flexible enough to handle keywords consisting of more than one word or keywords with embedded punctuation.

Ditto.  +1