P: Include additional metadata in XMP (flags, collections, VC's, etc.)

Report · May 22, 2011

Hi,

when letting Lightroom write all the picture settings to a xmp file, both the stacking and the collection settings are missing.

Basically, I'd expect to find just every work done about the picture in the xmp file (e.g. for use with other tools. If I put several pictures in collection, I'd like to use that information and the order of the pictures from other programs.)

Even worse, when making a virtual copy of a picture, it's settings do not appear anywhere in an xmp file.

regards

Report · Jun 09, 2014

Scaling issues are clearly not the problem, as Save for Web does a perfect job.

Report · Oct 26, 2014

I'm having a similar problem and posted it on the main Adobe communities forum and it was suggested that I post it here, too. To add to the comments above, these days photoshop will correctly render larger than 100% (if the source material allows, of course) if you made the raster layer a smart object after you import it, but not if you import it using the "place embedded..." file menu option (which is supposed to add the image to the document as a smart object and save you the extra step).

Here is the link to the original post in the other forum:
https://forums.adobe.com/message/6866...

"I'm trying to develop a retina workflow in photoshop for web projects. In doing this I found a strange irregularity in photoshop using smart objects and Photoshop CC 2014's new asset extraction.

Essentially what is happening is that when I import an image into an already open photoshop document and make that raster image a smart object (either by importing it using the "place embedded..." option or by converting the image to a smart object after placing it) I am getting different results when I try to extract those images at 2x using the new extractor. Of course you will have to perform a transform on the image to scale it down in the photoshop document after you make them smart objects (i.e. I know that 2x of the original smart object size will still be blurry — that's not what I'm doing). The image that is converted to a smart object after it's placed saves as 2x perfectly clearly and the one that was "place embedded..." comes out blurry as if it wasn't a smart object at all.

What should I do about this? I thought these two options were different ways of accomplishing the same thing. Honestly, I like to use the "place embedded..." option because it saves me steps, but it is the one that isn't working.

Thanks,

Ethan"

Report · Nov 21, 2014

Hi Ethan!

We are investigating this issue with smart objects! Will post progress here when I get to know more!

Report · Dec 04, 2014

+1. I'm trying to develop a web/mobile Photoshop workflow training for art directors and designers versed in print at my company, and I really want this feature to be locked in and working properly before I commit. We've adopted a mobile first interactive methodology here, so an easy workflow for high pixel-density displays is tremendously helpful and could probably save us many thousands or tens of thousands of dollars a year in time gained for all designers on both coasts.

Report · Jun 17, 2015

Yes, I'm getting the same behaviour Ethan. I think "Place Embedded" is the same as dragging an image onto the document - both do not upscale correctly in Generator.

No solution after you posted this 8 months ago... yikes.

Report · Jun 17, 2015

Thanks Divya. Any progress in the last 7 months?

Report · Jul 02, 2015

When marking images as "rejected" this flag appears be be saved in the local catalog but not in the XMP files. If I copy the XMP files for a project to another machine and synchronize metadata the rejected photos don't show up as "rejected" on the new machine. Other changes - eg. flagging files as "picks", changing the star rating or adding a coloured flag are copied across via the XMP file as expected.

Report · Jul 02, 2015

That the expected behaviour, and flags aren't the only information that's limited to the catalog. Use Export As Catalog to transfer all of the information between computers.

_______________________________________________
Victoria - The Lightroom Queen - Author of the Lightroom Missing FAQ & Edit on the Go books.

Report · Jul 03, 2015

I don't want to create a big catalog file just to transfer a few flags between machines.

If star ratings and "picks" are saved in the XMP file then surely the "rejected" flag should be there as well? I see no logical reason not to include it.

Report · Jul 03, 2015

I agree that it is inconsistent to include ratings and color labels but not flags.

This probably has its roots in versions 3 and earlier, in which flags were "local" to collections -- that is, a photo could have a different flag in each collection containing it. While it would be technically possible to store sets of settings in metadata, there would be lots of details making it much more complex than simply storing a "global" rating or color label.

LR 4 changed flags to be global, and according to Victoria's write-up at the time, one reason was "future compatibility with other applications". It would have made sense at that point to store the flags in metadata just like ratings and color labels.

(Note that a "pick" is a flag setting -- Photo > Set Flag > Flagged -- and is not stored in metadata.)

Report · Jul 03, 2015

Steve wrote, "I don't want to create a big catalog file just to transfer a few flags between machines."

Using File > Export As Catalog can be pretty fast if you just want to transfer metadata. Uncheck the options Export Negative Files, Build / Include Smart Previews, and Include Available Previews. On my machine, exporting a project with 260 photos as a catalog takes just a couple of seconds, and the catalog file is only 9.5 MB (about three times as large as the corresponding .xmp files). (On most machines, creating and copying 1000 files of 10K each (10 MB) is typically slower than creating one file that's 30 MB.)

To build on Victoria's comments, as a general mechanism, synchronizing just the .xmp files to transfer metadata has a number of issues that, while they may not affect you, would affect others wishing to transfer or synchronize metadata to another machine:

- LR doesn't use .xmp files for JPEGs, TIFFs, and DNGs.

- .xmp files don't capture a large amount of metadata, including: collections, stacks, virtual copies, develop history.

More generally, many, many people want LR to provide the ability to share catalogs and projects between computers and users much more seamlessly than the current mechanisms allow. It's the second most popular unimplemented feature request in this forum:

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

Report · Jul 03, 2015

Forum software managled my punctuation. Should read:

While it would be technically possible to store sets of [collection, flag] settings in metadata...

Report · Nov 25, 2015

Anything

Report · Nov 25, 2015

Generate doesn't yet produce sRGB images either, so it is far from ideal for producing web-ready assets.

Report · Dec 02, 2015

Yep, this is still an issue and it's a pain to work around, especially now with retina @3x requirements where old documents designed for @1x to be 50% as a workaround now have to generate @3x at 150% or we stray into weird 33.33333333% territory. Working at 100, 200 and 300% just makes way more sense.

Report · Jan 20, 2016

I've just found a way to generate raster smart objects @2X or @3x with Generate Image Assets! It's ridiculously simple and still hard to know!!

When you drag and place a raster image in Photoshop, it automatically converts to Smart Object. But that automatic smart object will not be exported to higher quality even if this is originally big!

The solution: Resize the automatically generated Smart Object to 100% scale. Then convert the automatic Smart Object to a Smart Object again!!! That's it!!! The next time you generate the asset, it will recognise the real image size from the automatic smart object!

I know it sounds stupid, but it really works!

Report · Jan 20, 2016

Anything?

Report · Jan 20, 2016

Yes, the workaround is discussed above. How the artwork is imported into your document will effect the success rate. It's clunky. I hope Adobe fix it soon and I can rely on Generate. It has plenty of other problems, the most significant being lack of sRGB support for all the files it creates (making them useless for online use).

Report · Feb 11, 2016

Hello I just want to ask also if the customize or sorting of photo in the catalog are also save on XMP files?

Report · Feb 11, 2016

No, sort order is not stored in XMP. In general, anything relating one photo to another (sort order, membership in collections, membership in stacks) is not stored in XMP.

Report · Apr 06, 2016

This still hasn't been fixed It's been over a year!?

Report · Apr 06, 2016

This still hasn't been fixed It's been over a year!?

Report · Apr 06, 2016

I'm assume after the steps is completed you can resize your smart object raster image to what you need in your layout and then it will do a better job of scaling @200%?

Report · Jun 30, 2016

Apparently the feature DOES WORK as expected as long as your high-resolution raster smart objects are of PSD or PSB file type.

This explains your findings that smart objects created from layers worked, but placed files didn’t. Creating a smart object from a layer yields a PSB file, which works. By contrast, if you place some PNG/JPEG/TIFF/etc. via File > Place or drag-n-drop, the file type is preserved. And for smart objects of any type other than PSD/PSB the export feature ignores the embedded/linked content, and simply falls back to scaling the rasterized version as it is stored with the layer, thus producing useless blurry pixel-bloats.

This holds true for Photoshop CC 2015.5.

Report · Jun 30, 2016

So, for every external file we drop in as a smart layer, we need to scale it up, drop it in a layer folder, and make that layer folder a smart object, then position it in our design as required. Then when we use Generate settings on that smart layer, all will be well?
It's a great tip... but boy, what a hassle.