Problems with IPTC fields using xnview and Photoshop

Ideas for improvements and requests for new features in XnView Classic

Moderators: XnTriq, xnview

Post Reply
kardinal
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:47 pm

Problems with IPTC fields using xnview and Photoshop

Post by kardinal » Thu Oct 20, 2005 12:54 pm

hallo,

if I write the IPTC-fields with xnview they are not mapped in a useful way to corresponding fields when using e.g. photoshop and vice versa.
I don`t know much about standards but I had assumed that for example "Title" in xnview means the same as in Photoshop.

As the content of most of the fields appears again but in unexpected fields when using in each case the other program I suppose, that there is no problem with saving but with translation or mapping of field names so they are associated in a wrong way and so they appear in unexpected records/fields.

An example:
In Photoshop the field "File->file information -> general -> title" seems to be the Title-field. I expect this basic field in the first record (in photoshop it is called "general") at the beginning.
But in xnview the content of this field will appear in "Edit IPTC Data -> Origin -> object name", that is record "origin" hidden at the end of IPTC-Menue.

I never would have a look for the title of an image in this hidden record "origin". I had supposed it e.g. in the record "general" at the beginning.
That means, I would map the field "caption -> headline" in xnview with photoshops field "general -> title" and not "origin -> object name".

On the other hand, the field "caption -> headline" of xnview appears in Photoshop in record "source -> headline", there it is as hidden und unexpected as the example before if this field is supposed to be the real headline or title of an image.

So I think one of these assignments is wrong.

This problem is similar with some other fields of the IPTC-data.

If you can agree with me and also think that this is a confusing thing which should be changed my suggestion to solve the problem would be to adapt the using of IPTC-fields to the most typical way - perhaps adobe is wrong, I don´t know but photoshop is used by hundred of thousand professionals so I think they made a quasi standard where xnview could approximate better than vice versa...:-)

What do you think about this? Or am I completely wrong and you think everything should stay as it is?

Thanks a lot for reading and perhaps answering this!
have a good day

User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 31747
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Problems with IPTC fields using xnview and Photoshop

Post by xnview » Thu Oct 20, 2005 1:57 pm

kardinal wrote:if I write the IPTC-fields with xnview they are not mapped in a useful way to corresponding fields when using e.g. photoshop and vice versa.
I don`t know much about standards but I had assumed that for example "Title" in xnview means the same as in Photoshop.

As the content of most of the fields appears again but in unexpected fields when using in each case the other program I suppose, that there is no problem with saving but with translation or mapping of field names so they are associated in a wrong way and so they appear in unexpected records/fields.
Could you send me a sample with IPTC, please?
Pierre.

kardinal
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:47 pm

Post by kardinal » Thu Oct 20, 2005 9:35 pm

Hello,
i use two versions of photoshop, one at work (v7.0) and one at home (v6.0). Now I´m at home and I see the version at home has a different layout of the IPTC-data windows. There the content written with the one program appears in the correct fields of the other program as I would expect them. From xnview to photoshop as well as vice versa.

So the problem seems to be a problem with the newer photoshop-version.

Now I cannot say which one is the "official" or "typical" one nor can I say how the current versions of Photoshop (CS) handle this issue. I´m in my office at work not until monday so I will send you an example on monday.

In which form do you need such a sample? Is it enough if I attach an image with a IPTC-data-set to your email-address? Or do you want a plain text as is

record 1 field 1 <content>
record 1 field 2 <content>
...
record N field 1 <content>

I also made a small table where the fields of IPTC-data of xnview are opposite of the IPTC-fields of photoshop so you can compare which fields do not fit together. But this table also is in my office so I can give you this not until monday as I only have photoshop v6.0 here, sorry for that.

Casually, is it possible that the use of IPTC-data is not possible with gif-files?

Thanks for your help
kardinal

User avatar
Olivier_G
XnThusiast
Posts: 1423
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Post by Olivier_G » Thu Oct 20, 2005 9:57 pm

I think that PS 6 uses the "old" IPTC IIMv4.1 (but more widespread) just as XnView, therefore you don't get any issue...
...whereas PS 7 and CS have a bug in synchronizing their newer IPTC Core (XMP) implementation with the "legacy" IPTC IIMv4.1. From IPTC website:
A severe problem was found with Photoshop 7.1 and CS 1 (aka V8 ): Data input to one of the IPTC Core fields in the built-in Description or Origin panel are not saved to the XMP Packet. Please DOWNLOAD the fix package from the "Resources" panel to the right. This problem does not apply to Photoshop CS 2.
Olivier

kardinal
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:47 pm

Post by kardinal » Fri Oct 21, 2005 8:07 am

so in my opinion the problem is solved, at least in regard to xnview - the problem is one of photoshop, isn´t it?
Perhaps xnview eventually will be upgraded to the newer IPTC Core but the current one also is a valid and whitespred one. That is what counts for me - thank you very much to all who helped here
kardinal

If one can give me an advice wether or how I can attach IPTC-data to a gif-image I would be grateful too.

Post Reply