Imatch und DXO5

[Belenos2017]

My workflow is: raw development with DXO - all other work with metadata with Imatch. The new DXO5 now offers various options for handling metadata - see the attached image. So that I don't get problems in Imatch - what is the best setting in DXO5?  Export with EXIF only?

[JohnZeman]

I also process my raw images with DxO PhotoLab 5 but when it comes to metadata I do it all with IMatch and I haven't head any problems doing it that way.

The one metadata thing I will do with PhotoLab though is to click the little thumbnail icon (see attachment) that means PhotoLab is confused as to which metadata to use, the metadata PhotoLab wants to assign to the image? or should PhotoLab read the metadata IMatch has entered into the image?  I always tell PhotoLab to read the IMatch metadata from the image.

Again, I've never had a problem doing it that way.

[RobiWan]

I think the point is whether IMatch should also manage the exported files. If yes, then I think the best setting would be to leave all fields blank and create appropriate rule in IMatch (Versions). If no, then select the fields you need.

Robert

[JohnZeman]

For me it doesn't matter since I have my IMatch file relations configured so IMatch writes the metadata to my exported versions.  This works because PhotoLab never writes metadata to the raw file and it doesn't matter if it writes to the exported versions since IMatch overrides it.

In other words either way should work just fine.

[Mario]

Before I would let this software write or modify metadata, I would very carefully examine what it means  by EXIF, IPTC, Keywords... I can already smell metadata mess.

I'm sure the application vendor can provide you with a detailed documentation of

a) the tags/fields they write when you enable these options
b) if they implement the MWG rules and the new IPTC mapping rules (IMatch does both)
c) if they deal properly with hierarchical keywords and mapping/flattening between XMP::dc and XMP::lr if they do
d) If they implement and stick to all the broad and subtle rules and recommendations of the XMP standard and the IPTC standard

If they don't, consider the metadata support random, incomplete and potentially harmful. Just my 2 cents, from experience.

Also, visit the user forum of DxO and look for metadata-related bug reports.

If somebody wants to give some some good time and laughs, please use a fresh image, fill in everything you can in DxO and let it save the metadata.
Then send me the image and the XMP sidecar file (if the XMP was not embedded) so I can have a look. Just that I know what's coming.

[Jingo]

DxO 5 for me too but I only use it as a RAW editor/Exporter to JPG... so haven't done any metadata work in the RAW files.  My JPG's only are managed in IMatch and my RAW files are simply left alone.  Since my folder structures and filenames are same between RAW and JPG - if I ever needed/wanted to re-edit a RAW image, I can find it quickly and simply via the JPG in IMatch. 

[DigPeter]

@John Zeman
There was an issue with DXO5 regarding handling metadata.  Has this been solved?

[Belenos2017]

I tried to find something in the DXO forum - complete disaster: The forum is very confusing and chaotic, no comparison to the wonderful Imatch forum.
Keyword search: "Metadata" - ZERO result.
Keyword search: "IPTC" - ZERO result.
Coincidentally, I found a post with a long discussion about keyword handling errors - useless, waste of time.
Here DB amateurs tinker with something they know nothing about. Therefore: Hands off working with metadata in DXO!

[Belenos2017]

@Jingo - that's exactly the way I go too, DXO exclusively for raw development.
So my question was: How can I prevent DXO from doing anything with my metadata?
If I click "Nothing" in the DXO export window, even the exif data in the developed jpg-file is deleted - such nonsense! But with "Versioning" in Imatch I can fix that.

[Mario]

I tried to find something in the DXO forum - complete disaster: The forum is very confusing and chaotic, no comparison to the wonderful Imatch forum.

The IMatch user community is wonderful because many wonderful people hang out here, help each other, learn about DAM and IMatch. Wonderful indeed.

[Jingo]

@Jingo - that's exactly the way I go too, DXO exclusively for raw development.
So my question was: How can I prevent DXO from doing anything with my metadata?
If I click "Nothing" in the DXO export window, even the exif data in the developed jpg-file is deleted - such nonsense! But with "Versioning" in Imatch I can fix that.

So - my workflow doesn't include ANY export of metadata to the JPG except EXIF... do you have your export to disk setup as this?



This provide me with a file with the following metadata in the JPG in Imatch (full exif - no other metadata):


Even if I have the other variables in DXO checked off - since I'm not adding any metadata to DxO (or any step after import to PC), the resulting JPG does not have any invalid data.  All metadata is then added to the JPG in IMatch... rinse and repeat for every photo shoot.

Hope this helps!

[JohnZeman]

@John Zeman
There was an issue with DXO5 regarding handling metadata.  Has this been solved?

Peter I don't really know the answer to that because I ignore the metadata in DxO, IMatch handles it all with its file relations/versioning propagation.

All of my metadata settings in PhotoLab (for everything including exporting) are default.

[RobiWan]

If I click "Nothing" in the DXO export window, even the exif data in the developed jpg-file is deleted - such nonsense!

Why is this nonsense? For me is this exactly correct - You have RAW and maybe XMP sidecar file. You develop your edit and export this in a new JPG and tells the software "do nothing with metadata" is the correct behavior.

[Mario]

This can be argued over.
Even a plain JPG created by an image editor "should" have some kind of minimal EXIF data, like image dimensions, orientation, software/ sed to produce the file, created timestamps etc.
Even if you decide not to copy any EXIF data over from the original file. Which is probably a smart thing do to - since most of the data embedded by a camera becomes invalid anyway once you have modified a file in an editor.
But a basic set if EXIF data gives software down the line some minimal info to work with.

[DigPeter]

@John Zeman
There was an issue with DXO5 regarding handling metadata.  Has this been solved?

Peter I don't really know the answer to that because I ignore the metadata in DxO, IMatch handles it all with its file relations/versioning propagation.

All of my metadata settings in PhotoLab (for everything including exporting) are default.

Thanks