Skip to main content
Known Participant
May 11, 2011 8:12 PM UTC
Released

P: "Data/Time digital" not shown correctly in Lr 3.4

I recently noted that in Lr 3.4 the metadata field "Date/time digital" does not show the correct date any more. It always shows the date/time of the other two date/time fields.
I've tested my catalog again with Lr 3.3 and there it shows correctly. This seems to be bug introduced in Lr 3.4.

This topic is closed to new replies. Start a new post to keep the conversation going.

43 replies

B+Warde
Adobe Employee
Adobe Employee
May 16, 2011 4:44 PM UTC
Thanks Sven, I've reported this bug to the Lightroom engineers.

-Ben
Translate
johnrellis
Legend
May 14, 2011 4:55 PM UTC
The issues discussed here are some symptoms of more extensive problems with LR 3.4's handling of metadata dates. See my problem submission:

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...
Translate
Known Participant
May 13, 2011 7:56 PM UTC
Thanks for the explanation. This appears to be a bug to me -- when you change the capture time to a specified date and time, it changes every date it's got. It probably shouldn't change DateTimeDigitized.

MWG guidance allows for separate concepts of "Original Date" and "Digitized Date". It does not suggest that they be mapped together, but that appears to be what LR3.4 is doing. I think this is a bug in the new metadata model.

Changing the date in Lightroom should only affect the "Original Date", not the "Digitized Date", IMHO. I could see people also wanting to change the latter, so perhaps that's worth a feature request, but I feel that the current behavior is a bug.
Translate
Legend
May 13, 2011 7:33 PM UTC
Thanks. I've asked someone from the Lightroom eng team to review both topics.
Translate
johnrellis
Legend
May 13, 2011 7:23 PM UTC
I don't think they're necessarily related. I just happened to notice the XMP:MetadataDate time zone issue when I was looking at metadata for this topic, and I remembered that others had noticed the same thing, so I wanted to get it recorded. But I don't see offhand any relationship between the two topics.
Translate
S_BellerAuthor
Known Participant
May 13, 2011 7:23 PM UTC
Yes, Mark, what I've done is I changed the capture date/time using Lr's "Edit capture time" (or similar) command in the Metadata menu to change the date to the original capture date and the time to 00:00:00 (because I don't know it).
Maybe I should add that I did not export the changed metadata from Lr to the TIF file - hence the TIF file is still the original one.
Translate
Known Participant
May 13, 2011 5:08 PM UTC
Here are the relevant metadata fields, as reported by exiftool v8.5.6 using "-a -G0:1 -s":

[EXIF:IFD0] ModifyDate : 2009:03:13 15:21:10
[EXIF:ExifIFD] CreateDate : 2009:03:13 15:21:10

These are the exiftool names for EXIF DateTime and DateTimeDigitized.

So where is the 1988 date coming from? Is this something you did in Lightroom after Import? It doesn't show up in the original.
Translate
S_BellerAuthor
Known Participant
May 13, 2011 4:48 PM UTC
Hi, since the TIF test file is about 25 MB and I did not want to change it in any way in order to keep it as it was imported in Lr, I've uploaded it on a web-drive:
Here is the access (which I keep live for a week):
http://www.mydrive.ch/login
user: test@bonnies
password: testlr3

Hope that helps - and I hope that I will get back my information as it used to be in Lr3.3.
Thanks
Sven
Translate
Legend
May 13, 2011 4:43 PM UTC
Hi John, is the issue you just posted http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh... related to this topic?
Translate
johnrellis
Legend
May 12, 2011 4:59 PM UTC
I just reviewed my catalog of scanned images. Looking at images that were imported and had their capture date/time changed using LR 3.3, some have the metadata field XMP:CreateDate set to the scan date (correct), and some have it set to the same value as XMP:DateTimeOriginal (the capture time, which is incorrect). LR 3.4 is displaying the value of XMP:CreateDate in the "Date Time Digitized" field of the Metadata panel.

I can tell from the metadata that there was a different workflow involved for the two sets of images, but I'm not sure as to the details. There's pretty clearly a bug somewhere.

As soon as you post a problem image, we might learn more about what's happening in your catalog.
Translate