photoshop metadata

[egosbar]

hi all , im just testing out my new camera fujifilm hs50exr , very good so far and im just tweaking the camera settings , im interested in seeing all the metadata in photoshop , i can see it in bridge no problems

i want to see exposure compensation in photoshop when i open file info , i can see this in bridge

i also want to know if you can display metadata of each image all the time in photoshop instead of having to open file info

 

[Hoogle]

Does it not appear when you go to file > info

Alternatively I tend to utilise mini bridge when in ps

 

[Tom Mann]

Hey, Ego, what specifically do you want to do with the IPTC and EXIF info? Just look at it? Edit it? Search for photos with certain data? What?

If all you want to do is look at or edit the metadata, just download one of the small (but very capable) free metadata programs and keep it open at the same time as PS. Examples include: EXIFtool, EXIFtoolGUI, PhotoME, Opanda, JPEGsnoop, etc. EXIFtool, in particular, is much better than PS for such tasks.

If you want to search for particular metadata, e.g., search for a specific word in a caption, search for all photos taken using a specific camera or lens, etc. you should be using a program with significant DAM (digital asset management) capabilities, not a general purpose metadata viewer/editor. Lightroom (and some free add-on's) do quite well for this.

If you want to quickly enter new metadata, eg, add copyright info or location info to all the images from one ingest operation, the king of this niche is Photo Mechanic (by Camera Bits). It's been the favorite of news operations for at least a decade, and, IMHO is still the best available.

If I haven't hit on exactly why you want to do this, let me know and maybe I can help. I've spent a lot of time on this topic, myself.

Cheers,

Tom

 

[egosbar]

Hey, Ego, what specifically do you want to do with the IPTC and EXIF info? Just look at it? Edit it? Search for photos with certain data? What? If all you want to do is look at or edit the metadata, just download one of the small (but very capable) free metadata programs and keep it open at the same time as PS. Examples include: EXIFtool, EXIFtoolGUI, PhotoME, Opanda, JPEGsnoop, etc. EXIFtool, in particular, is much better than PS for such tasks. If you want to search for particular metadata, e.g., search for a specific word in a caption, search for all photos taken using a specific camera or lens, etc. you should be using a program with significant DAM (digital asset management) capabilities, not a general purpose metadata viewer/editor. Lightroom (and some free add-on's) do quite well for this. If you want to quickly enter new metadata, eg, add copyright info or location info to all the images from one ingest operation, the king of this niche is Photo Mechanic (by Camera Bits). It's been the favorite of news operations for at least a decade, and, IMHO is still the best available. If I haven't hit on exactly why you want to do this, let me know and maybe I can help. I've spent a lot of time on this topic, myself. Cheers, Tom

hi tom probably should be in camera forum but it does have to do with ps , i just want to look at it and compare , i will be testing this camera and its settings pretty extensively over the next few months , it would be good if all the metadata showed like in the bridge placard view , exposure compensation im working on with this camera as a default setting , it tends to overexpose a little , im testing -.33 and -.67 , all my images will be taken with this camera for the next few years so metadata comparisons will be a must to fine tune my settings , ive already got it working a lot better then the default auto shoot setting , im using aperture priority heres two images at 1000mm hand held , pretty good job considering 300mm was hard without a tripod on the dslrs , image stabilisation works well and i also took one hand held at 2000mm with acceptable results for 500 bucks i think its a great camera for what it is , not a dslr but i dont need one , i dont blow images up much anymore i can see it no probs in bridge i was really just wondering if ps had a feature similar to the bridge placard view ill check out some of the prgrams you mentioned thanks

first pic 1000mm default auto , 2nd pic 1000mm my settins , 3rd pic is at 2000mm all these are hand held and its of a palm tree trunk , just wanted to see a surface but it is acceptable for a 1000 optical x 2 digital

 

[egosbar]

tom my image at large file format jpeg says on the metadata 72ppi , i reduced the image size for posting here and now it says 240ppi , can you explain this for me

i also see on some camera forums that images have the metadata show when you hover on a picture , how do you get thistoo happen for your own images

 

[Tom Mann]

"... i was really just wondering if ps had a feature similar to the bridge placard view ill check out some of the programs you mentioned thanks ..."

Ahh, I now have a better idea of exactly what you need.

Photoshop has the info panel ( alt-shift-cntrl-I on a PC), but it can't stay open while you edit.

It sounds like, for some reason, you just don't want to leave Bridge open, so here's my suggestion.

Download a copy of Picasa (by Google), use it as a simple DAM (digital assets management) program so that you can easily find any image on your system, and when you want to find out the shooting info, just click the "i" button in the extreme lower RH corner of the screen. This turns on the "info / properties" panel, and it shows everything you want, in a very convenient, scrollable form.

Just leave it on, running in the background as you work on pix in PS.

FYI, I have used this program for many years now, have easily 250,000 images in its database, and it shows no sign of slowing down, hogging resources or any other problems. It's a real winner. I can't recommend it strongly enough.

T

 

[Tom Mann]

tom my image at large file format jpeg says on the metadata 72ppi , i reduced the image size for posting here and now it says 240ppi , can you explain this for me...

The ppi is absolutely utterly irrelevant for images on the web. The only thing that matters are the actual number of pixels in each direction. A few months ago, this question came up, so I posted an example where I changed the ppi to something utterly crazy like 5000 ppi and showed that it made absolutely no difference when the image was viewed in a browser. If you are interested, go to post #4 in this thread:
http://www.photoshopgurus.com/forum...62-few-questions-about-screen-resolution.html

...i also see on some camera forums that images have the metadata show when you hover on a picture , how do you get this too happen for your own images

To do this, I use an extension to Firefox called, "FxIF". I works fine even with the most recent updates to Firefox.

HTH,

T

 

[egosbar]

The ppi is absolutely utterly irrelevant for images on the web. The only thing that matters are the actual number of pixels in each direction. A few months ago, this question came up, so I posted an example where I changed the ppi to something utterly crazy like 5000 ppi and showed that it made absolutely no difference when the image was viewed in a browser. If you are interested, go to post #4 in this thread:
http://www.photoshopgurus.com/forum...62-few-questions-about-screen-resolution.html



To do this, I use an extension to Firefox called, "FxIF". I works fine even with the most recent updates to Firefox.

HTH,

T

most of my images will be viewed on the computer or tv or web , although i have a 32mb sdcard so i am taking pics at large resolution they are a bout 6mb a pic , dont think i need to take in raw unless i really know ill be blowing them up

what im wondering about is more to do with the photography side i guess but ill ask , my camera on 24mm takes at 72ppi and at full zoom i think it was 240ppi , ill probably have to re read the manual on this one but i would of thought a large image like 6mb would be more then 72ppi , im off to read the manual again haha thanks for your responses , off to fiji for a week so ill get some time to test it out

 

[Tom Mann]

"most of my images will be viewed on the computer or tv or web..."

- - - TV is like the web - just ignore the ppi. Only the dimensions of the image in numbers of pixels in each direction matters.
-------------

"...dont think i need to take in raw unless i really know ill be blowing them up..."

- - - RAW vs JPG has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with magnification / resolution. Only use JPG if you intend to do very little post processing to your images. Use RAW if you intend to re-adjust the color balance, fix significant exposure errors, bring out detail in the shadows, recover detail from nearly blown highlights, etc. Raw will give you the opportunity to make quasi-HDR images using only one shot. If you attempt these image tweaks with a JPG, you will be likely see considerably more noise, banding, and other artifacts compared to doing the same operations on a RAW file.
-------------

"...my camera on 24mm takes at 72ppi and at full zoom i think it was 240ppi...ill probably have to re read the manual on this one..."

- - - To be honest, that's one of the most bizarre things I've heard reported about a camera. I can't imagine why they would do something like that. Because this is so odd, I actually took the time to download the manual for your camera and search it for any mention of PPI or DPI. There was not a single mention of either in the manual, so I don't know what's going on. Double check that the ppi isn't being changed by some other mechanism.

That being said, let me re-phrase my previous comment about ppi, and do so more emphatically.

The *ONLY PLACE IN THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE* that the number in the ppi metadata field for an image file matters is if you are going to print the file using a printer connected to your computer, and your printer happens to be driven by a print driver that actually honors that number. In fact, most print drivers (whether for a printer attached to your computer, a photo kiosk, or an on-line printing service) simply ask you for the desired size of the image in inches and print your image at a ppi appropriate to fill the print given the pixel dimensions of your file.

Actually, now that I think of it, there are a couple other uses for the ppi number:

a) You should pay attention to it as a way to make sure that the pixel dimensions of your file are large enough to make a decent print, e.g., 300ppi if you are going to stick your nose right up against a print vs only tens of ppi if you are printing a billboard to which no one will ever get closer than 100 or 200 feet;

b) The ppi number for your display allows PS to correctly scale your images on screen (relative to real-world dimensions and their rulers).
--------------


"...off to fiji for a week so ill get some time to test it out..."
- - - That sounds absolutely wonderful! Have fun and, as they say, take plenty of pix!

Cheers,

Tom

 

[egosbar]

thanks tom for you replies i appreciate them , im leaving fiji today , the shangrala resort is the best . great holiday spot

the camera has done what i bought it for , im getting some good shots although its pretty poor in low light , produces a lot of noise at high iso

still got some tweaking to do with it for low light conditions , and processing in ps for low light pics