Description not written to Sony ARW file

[DigPeter]

I download images from camera with Downloader Pro.  This creates new file names and writes some basic XMP data, which includes a brief description, common to all files in the batch.  For Raw images, this data goes into XMP sidecar files.

After importing Panasonic RW2 files images into IMatch, all data from the XMP sidecar, including Description is displayed in the browser tag in metadata panel.   For raw ARW images from my recently acquired Sony RX100M3, all data from the XMP sidecar, except for Description is displayed in the browser tag in metadata panel.

JPG files from the Sony camera display the full XMP data, including Description.

The attached zip file contains a log file and a spread sheet giving the Browser metadata panel and xmp data for test files from each camera on separate worksheets.

Is there an explanation for this behaviour and how can the Sony ARW files be made to display Description?

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Mario]

Please provide a sample file which allows me to reproduce this effect.
Do your RAW files maybe contain an IPTC or EXIF description tag that is not in-synch with the XMP data written by DLP? If so, the Metadata Working Group mapping during the import may wipe out the XMP description, or rather replace it with the IPTC/EXIF description.

[DigPeter]

Please provide a sample file which allows me to reproduce this effect.
Do your RAW files maybe contain an IPTC or EXIF description tag that is not in-synch with the XMP data written by DLP? If so, the Metadata Working Group mapping during the import may wipe out the XMP description, or rather replace it with the IPTC/EXIF description.

I cannot answer the question. I have tried to send the file with FileZilla, but cannot connect.  I have sent you a message asking about the settings for this.

[Mario]

I have downloaded the ZIP file. It contains no XMP sidecar file for the .ARW file?
The ARW itself has no embedded XMP data, only EXIF metadata.
Interestingly, the file has a EXIF description tag, but this is empty. This is what I had guessed in my first reply.
IMatch maps IPTC/EXIF/GPS into XMP on import, and an existing, but empty EXIF description will be interpreted as such by EXIFTool.

[DigPeter]

I have downloaded the ZIP file. It contains no XMP sidecar file for the .ARW file?
The ARW itself has no embedded XMP data, only EXIF metadata.
Interestingly, the file has a EXIF description tag, but this is empty. This is what I had guessed in my first reply.
IMatch maps IPTC/EXIF/GPS into XMP on import, and an existing, but empty EXIF description will be interpreted as such by EXIFTool.

Sorry - here is the XMP file.  Description contains data, which is not shown in that tag when imported into IMatch.

How can description be in a raw file's exif?

If I import a jpeg from the same camera, IMatch does display description data.

The camera is Sony DSC RX100 M3.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Mario]

I had already guessed this in my very first reply above:

Your camera or some software writes an empty description into EXIF. It should not write that tag when there is no description.
And your other software writes a XMP description but does not bother to update the corresponding EXIF description. Which violates the rules set by the Metadata Working Group and causes conflicting information in the EXIF record in the image and the corresponding EXIF metadata in the XMP file. Not good.

When IMatch merges EXIF and XMP during the initial import, as required per MWG rules, the empty description in EXIF overrides the XMP description. Actually ExifTool does this, but it's correct nevertheless.

You need to keep EXIF and the corresponding parts in XMP in synch when you work with metadata. IMatch does this automatically, so check the other tools you use. If you enter a description in XMP, this description must be also written to an existing EXIF description tag in the RAW file. And when the RAW file also has an legacy IPTC record, the description there has to be synchronized as well. IMatch does this automatically, unless you explicitly disable MWG compliance, or mapping between XMP and EXIF via the advanced metadata options.

So, make sure Downloader Pro updates the EXIF description as well when it creates your "basic XMP data". Or let IMatch do it (very comfortable via a Metadata Template) so your metadata is correct from the start.

[DigPeter]

So, make sure Downloader Pro updates the EXIF description as well when it creates your "basic XMP data". Or let IMatch do it (very comfortable via a Metadata Template) so your metadata is correct from the start.

I have no problem with Downloader and Panasonic RW2 files  and there is no problem with the RX100 jpg files.  I do not think there are any other settings in Downloader.  So It would appear to be a glitch between Downloader and RX100 ARW files.  It is not huge problem, really, as I can easily write Description in IMatch.  This camera is a backup and used much less than the Panasonic.

[Mario]

Then download the image without any third party software (e.g. insert the card).
Check the image with ExifTool. If the image contains an empty EXIF description field, you know what the problem is. The camera should not write an empty description field (see also my post from above). If the camera does this, the only two ideas I have: remove the empty EXIF description field manually before adding the image to IMatch. Or make Downloader Pro update the EXIF description when it writes the XMP description. I would advice against disabling MWG compliance in IMatch or disabling EXIF synchronization or similar. It can be done, but it causes a lot of other issues you don't want to face.

Or, configure your camera to write something in the EXIF description. Most cameras support this, e.g. to add photographer name or something. Downloader Pro should copy the EXIF description into the XMP record when it downloads the file, and then, hopefully, updates both when you change the XMP description.

And maybe contact Sony and ask them why they write an empty EXIF description. They can fix this in a firmware update surely.

[DigPeter]

Then download the image without any third party software (e.g. insert the card).
Check the image with ExifTool. If the image contains an empty EXIF description field, you know what the problem is. The camera should not write an empty description field (see also my post from above). If the camera does this, the only two ideas I have: remove the empty EXIF description field manually before adding the image to IMatch.

Thanks for the explanation.   I have tried this in ExiftoolGUI, but cannot delete individual tags;  only edit them.

Or make Downloader Pro update the EXIF description when it writes the XMP description. I would advice against disabling MWG compliance in IMatch or disabling EXIF synchronization or similar. It can be done, but it causes a lot of other issues you don't want to face.

DLPro does not do this.

Or, configure your camera to write something in the EXIF description. Most cameras support this, e.g. to add photographer name or something. Downloader Pro should copy the EXIF description into the XMP record when it downloads the file, and then, hopefully, updates both when you change the XMP description.

I cannot find a way of doing this with this camera.

And maybe contact Sony and ask them why they write an empty EXIF description. They can fix this in a firmware update surely.

Maybe I will try this, but will not hold my breath.

Anomaly: There is a difference between IMatch's treatment of RX100 ARW and jpeg files.  Out of camera, they both file types come with a blank exif description field.   But (as already discussed),  after importing to the computer with DLPro, set to write data to Description, and importing into IMatch, the metadata browser does not show any data in the XMP description field for ARW files, but it does for jpeg files.  However, the Exif description field for both file types remains blank.

[Mario]

Can't follow. IMatch runs ExifToolin the same way for both files. Do both files have the same name? Did you upload the JPEG file so I can have a look? Does the jPEG contain XMP data?

I have already spent a lot of time with this. Please open a bug report so I can allocate another slot of time next week or the week or after that. Thanks. Please provide matching RAW and JPEG files unchanged (!!!!) with any other software, right from camera. It seems DLP is one source of trouble and I want to rule this out. Empty EXIF description will override XMP desciption when ExifTool runs the Exif2XMP argument file to perform the MWG mapping.

Important: If you have both a JPEG and a RAW with the same name in the same folder as the XMP, the XMP file is linked to both files (as per XMP specification). This may complicate matters further in your case and may require additional time from me to figure this out for you and then explain why it happens, and what you can do about this. Please make a bug report so I can allocate a time slot. The time required for this is way beyond a normal answer.

[DigPeter]

Can't follow. IMatch runs ExifToolin the same way for both files. Do both files have the same name? Did you upload the JPEG file so I can have a look? Does the jPEG contain XMP data?

I have already spent a lot of time with this. Please open a bug report so I can allocate another slot of time next week or the week or after that. Thanks. Please provide matching RAW and JPEG files unchanged (!!!!) with any other software, right from camera. It seems DLP is one source of trouble and I want to rule this out. Empty EXIF description will override XMP desciption when ExifTool runs the Exif2XMP argument file to perform the MWG mapping.

Will do.

Important: If you have both a JPEG and a RAW with the same name in the same folder as the XMP, the XMP file is linked to both files (as per XMP specification). This may complicate matters further in your case and may require additional time from me to figure this out for you and then explain why it happens, and what you can do about this. Please make a bug report so I can allocate a time slot. The time required for this is way beyond a normal answer.

They are no the same name - i.e. not taken with RAW+jpg.