Changes to Metadata field after import?

[lnh]

A bit of experimentation on a test database trying to figure out a reasonable workflow for transferring face name data and hierarchical keywords from Picasa to IMatch (knowing that at this time IMatch will only handle the hierarchical keywords). Not being a metadata guru, I'm not sure if this the expected result but:

Environment:
IMatch 5.2.6
All Metadata2 parameters set to default

File relationships:
Buddy:
Master Exp: \.(dng)$
Replacement Exp: ^_*//
Link Exp: ^(_*{name})[+\-_]*[0-9|a-z]*\.(jpg|jpeg|orf|cr2|rw2|raf|arw|tif)$

Versions:
Exactly the same as the buddy (I know this can be tricky, but like the ability to rename and move files from the master). Nothing checked off in the versioning tab.

Workflow:
1) use Adobe DNG Converter to create files for RAW formats.
2) Import into Picasa and face name (keeping data in the .ini file and not writing to the actual files).
3) run AvPicFaceXmpTagger to create hierarchical keywords which duplicate how I define things in IMatch.

The results here depend on what AvPicFaceXmpTagger can do. If it's a JPG it embeds the data inside the file. If it's a RAW format it knows about and old enough that it can read, it creates a xmp sidecar with the data. If it's a RAW it can't handle (probably because the software hasn't been updated in 4 years), it does nothing with that file. If it's a DNG, it embeds the face data and hierarchical keywords inside the file.

AvPicFaceXmpTagger places the hierarchical keywords in XMP-dc:subject for DNG, xmp sidecars and JPGs.

4) Import the results of step 3 into IMatch with the above specified buddies and versioning.

The results are pretty good at this point with all the IMatch hierarchical keywords exactly matching up and falling into the right places. However, IMatch takes the XMP-dc:subject hierarchical keywords and creates XMP-lr:HierarchicalSubject keywords which match the ones from above, but then flattens the XMP-dc:subject keywords. Is this flattening of the XMP-dc:subject keywords the expected behavior? If I want to create a versioning relationship where the DNG master propagates the hierarchical keywords, what should be set in the versioning tab to make this happen? In particular this is needed in cases when AvPicFaceXmpTagger couldn't handle the original RAW file, but could work with a DNG created from the RAW.

Figuring this out would also allow my workflow to just create DNGs from RAW and only import DNGs and JPGs into Picasa for tagging, and then relate the results back to the RAW files once the DNGs and JPGs + RAWs sitting on the sidelines hit IMatch.

Edit addition:
Checking off "XMP All Data" in versioning does seem to propagate the hierarchy, but it's unclear what other consequences might come from choosing this approach. I also tried just propagating "Categories" but this is where I ran into trouble with the above discussed conversion of XMP-dc:subject to flat keywords.

[jch2103]

A bit of experimentation on a test database trying to figure out a reasonable workflow for transferring face name data and hierarchical keywords from Picasa to IMatch (knowing that at this time IMatch will only handle the hierarchical keywords).

One alternative to importing the Picasa face tags as keywords is to use AvPicFaceXmpTagger to just import the face tags as XMP-MP (Microsoft Photo), and then create a data-based category based on the region name. Another alternative, if you're willing to let Picasa write to your images, is to create MWG face data-based categories. It would be nice if AvPicFaceXmpTagger were able to create MWG face tags, but that seems very unlikely to happen. Phil Harvey did create a MP-to-MWG face data conversion (http://u88.n24.queensu.ca/exiftool/forum/index.php/topic,4361.msg20763.html#msg20763) but I'm not sure it works. 

(I'm still dithering on whether/how to bring Picasa face data into IMatch, although I've done a few tests. In addition to the technical issues of which tags, etc., I'm still wrestling with the basic question of what format I prefer for names, especially given my collection of historical family images.)

Of course, these alternatives may not at all satisfy your work flow.

John

[lnh]

John,

Have you had any luck converting the Picasa XMP-MP generated by AvPicFaceXmpTagger via the .ini file approach to a XMP-MWG region using the exiftool script you referenced in the previous note? If I try

exiftool -config ExifTool_config_convert_regions "-regioninfo<myregion" FILE.jpg

it comes back with a warning, "No writable tags set from FILE.jpg"
From reading the thread it seems like that would be the syntax to convert from the AvPicFaceXmpTagger generated regions to mwg.

This is all way more complex than it should be.

[jch2103]

Have you had any luck converting the Picasa XMP-MP generated by AvPicFaceXmpTagger via the .ini file approach to a XMP-MWG region using the exiftool script you referenced in the previous note?
...
This is all way more complex than it should be.

No, I haven't tried it yet, which is why I offered the caveat about not being sure it works. There is a second page to that link where the issue is discussed a bit more, including a mention of a typo that would affect results.

I have done direct converts from within Picasa, but only for test folders. It seems to have worked fine to get the data to MWG tags. But as I said, I'm still trying to decide how to structure my names in the first place. Face recognition is the only thing I use Picasa for, and I have names set up as 'first last' but there are some drawbacks for handling old family pix (single/married/etc.).

You are so right that this is all way more complicated than it should be!

John

[lnh]

No, I haven't tried it yet, which is why I offered the caveat about not being sure it works. There is a second page to that link where the issue is discussed a bit more, including a mention of a typo that would affect results.

I have done direct converts from within Picasa, but only for test folders. It seems to have worked fine to get the data to MWG tags. But as I said, I'm still trying to decide how to structure my names in the first place. Face recognition is the only thing I use Picasa for, and I have names set up as 'first last' but there are some drawbacks for handling old family pix (single/married/etc.).

You are so right that this is all way more complicated than it should be!

John

I saw that second page, but the typo mistake seemed to relate to operations in the opposite direction (MWG to MS). Inside Picasa I can get MWG tagging in JPG files but DNG files don't seem to  incorporate the face tag info in it's XMP section, and keep it in the .ini file even if you select the option to store name tags in photo or do the experimental XMP option to write to XMP.

The one thing AvPicFaceXmpTagger does well is relating the names from Picasa to your hierarchical structure in IMatch. The whole process does work except the tagging format you end up with is MS rather than MWG. And since the possible future use of tag data in IMatch has been talked about related to MWG, this is important.  I'm planning on poking at exiftool some more to try and make this work.

[lnh]

Some good news... If you download the full exiftool distribution and use the convert_regions.config file found in the config_files directory, the region conversion from Picasa->AvPicFaceXmpTagger mp to mwg seems to work. Just did it with a DNG file. You do end up with both formats in your XMP, so a modification to the config file should allow you to delete the mp leaving you in a perfect state for import into IMatch.

Still this is all a lot of trouble, and I'm not sure there is enough benefit. Blasting through the face tagging in Picasa is pretty fast and the result of getting both hierarchical keywords which align with IMatch and MWG face region tags for future use does have some appeal.

[jch2103]

Thanks for digging into this further; should be very helpful to others. At some point, all this information should probably be recorded in a FAQ.

Inside Picasa I can get MWG tagging in JPG files but DNG files don't seem to  incorporate the face tag info in it's XMP section, and keep it in the .ini file even if you select the option to store name tags in photo or do the experimental XMP option to write to XMP.

This seems to be the case for NEF files also (I suspect for all non-jpg files).

Some good news... If you download the full exiftool distribution and use the convert_regions.config file found in the config_files directory, the region conversion from Picasa->AvPicFaceXmpTagger mp to mwg seems to work. Just did it with a DNG file. You do end up with both formats in your XMP, so a modification to the config file should allow you to delete the mp leaving you in a perfect state for import into IMatch.

I'm glad you found that convert_regions.config option; I need to try it for NEF files.

Still this is all a lot of trouble, and I'm not sure there is enough benefit. Blasting through the face tagging in Picasa is pretty fast and the result of getting both hierarchical keywords which align with IMatch and MWG face region tags for future use does have some appeal.

Yes, indeed. A related complication would be figuring out an efficient way to add new faces when new images are added to IMatch. Not to mention all the other (privacy-related) issues related to face identification.

[lnh]

Thanks for digging into this further; should be very helpful to others. At some point, all this information should probably be recorded in a FAQ.
...
Yes, indeed. A related complication would be figuring out an efficient way to add new faces when new images are added to IMatch. Not to mention all the other (privacy-related) issues related to face identification.

Was also thinking a FAQ would be helpful. I'll take a stab at a first cut, but would appreciate your review, editing and adding info. I'll PM (I assume this board has that function) you with a link to a dropbox or google drive file in the coming days.

In terms of workflow, if the images, new or old don't have people, then going through the DNG Convert->Picasa->AvPicFaceXmpTagger->Exiftool->IMatch pipeline holds no benefit at all. If people are involved, it comes down to how much you value the face tagging as people keyword tagging in IMatch can be very fast. For privacy, it comes down to a set of personal judgements which could be influenced by the desires of the individual people in the pictures, the venue where they are being shared, local laws, etc. Personally, for Fb use I create fairly low quality versions and strip out all metadata with Exiftool. When Fb suggests tagging, I reject them and might use first names only in the accompanying text and never speak specifically about locations either.