Issue When Assigning a Location Using a Metadata Template

[PandDLong]

I use the Locations function in iMatch for frequent photo locations.  I often use a metadata template to manually assign the Location information to selected files  (most of my files do not have camera provided GPS).

I just had some situations where it didn't seem to work.  After some experiments, it appears to be setting tags that are empty AND emptying tags that have data.

I have attached screenshots of the geo-tags (the GPS tags are XMP:Exif and all others are the IPTC Extension Location Shown and Created tags as per the panel headers; the tag labelled "GPS Source' is mapped to an IPTC Extension tag that I have repurposed). 

The two screenshots are the different results each time I apply the template (a screenshot of it also attached).  The results of applying the template alternates between these two screenshots.

My starting situation had been as per the first screenshot where I had entered the Country manually many days prior. Then when I learned more particulars of this vintage 1936 photo, I applied the metadata template and got the result as per the 2nd screenshot.

I have been using Locations and templates in this manner for a few years but don't recall this problem happening before.  However, this situation where I partially enter information before applying the template may be new as I have just started doing vintage photos where information is determined in pieces.

A side note, you will see the autofill indicator on some tags.  That is something new that I have just started to try out but this location is not part of my test set but I did delete the autofill template as a further test and it made no difference to the above.

Michael

[Mario]

Which takes do you use in your MD Panel layout? The official IPTC tags IMatch uses for location data, reverse geo-coding etc.
Location data is really complex, because it is a structured tag and many tags from different XMP specifications interact with each other, often 3 tags must be changed.

The MD Panel layout "6. IPTC Location" presets the location data (created and shown as needed), with coordinates, location info etc. These are structured and repeatable tags (see help). Setting individual tags from a structured tags by means of metadata templates is not really something that should be done.

Use reverse-geocoding. Or IMatch locations.
Or a completely filled AutoFill template which sets these tags.
Or use the specifically made MD Panel layout "6. IPTC Location" which was introduced in IMatch 2023 almost two years ago.

If have never used the "LocationId" tag you set in your template and I must read the IPTC specs first to see what it does, if it is linked with any other tags and why you see the effect you see. Until I find time to look into your issue, I recommend you don't do this and instead enter location data via one of the "official" ways.

Since you are reporting a bug, I will move this thread into the bug report board so it stays on my to-do list.
I will look into it as soon as a I find a free time slot.

Update

Quick check revealed that this only happens when you combine individual location tags (?) with the option to apply an IMatch location. Split your template into two (one for the loc, one for the id) as a work-around until I've had time to analyze this.

Ps.: The IPTC says that the location id is a globally unique identifier for the location (from a map service or something). Setting it to a random text is maybe not a good idea, unless you are sure that the file will never be used outside your environment.

[PandDLong]

These are the standard tags - I also have a panel with the structured tags (as per "6. IPTC Location") and I use the Metadata Browser standard panel a lot when I am diagnosing a "maybe" issue.    In all cases, this issue is the same.  

I have been using iMatch Locations and this type of metadata templates for over 4 years - without any issues (that I've noticed).

I did a little further testing and the issue only occurs if some of the structured tag elements are already populated.  If I delete fully the contents of the structured tags (using "6. IPTC Location" panel) then it all works perfectly.  I suspect that it worked fine for me for years as I never partially identified a location and then applied the template later.

Yes, the work-around is good, once I remove setting the individual tag from the template it acts as expected.   It is easy to enter that one tag after the template is applied - especially as it a controlled vocabulary supported by the iMatch Thesaurus. 


I also researched the "LocationId" tag before I began using it to be sure it wouldn't cause problems - it should be fine as my sharing of files is family and friends only.  However, one day I may need to move this piece of data and then I can rely on iMatch to do it across my entire database!


Definitely a low priority item as there is now an easy work-around.

Thanks for your research.

Michael

[Mario]

The issue is caused by the way how MT templates set location data, when combined with setting other metadata tags at the same time. The "set location" is an "atomic" task, performed by the metadata engine in the IMatch database. It deals with all the location created / location shown complexity, linked tags in different XMP namespaces and suchlike. Metadata hell.

Combined with setting other tags, the MD template produces a series of database operations and tries to integrate the tag stream created by the set location task to roll everything into one update and undo task ("Edit > Undo Change Metadata"). This is complex and apparently not working correctly.

Since it works this way basically since IMatch 5 (or something like IMatch 2017) and so far only one user was affected by this, I rate this as a low prio issue (with an existing work-around) and will look into this when I have some free time.

I hate bugs and bugs usually come first. But I'm currently maxed out with testing and preparing IMatch 2025, moving to a new distributor, making what feels like a million new screen shots for the IMatch help and all web sites (due to the new user interface look) etc. This has to come first, IMatch 2025 is already late.