Metadata bug

@Stephen Marsh wrote:

Here you can see that it is going to use its own preferred proprietary XPTitle tag, then fallback to other tags if that data is missing... It is obviously using the XMP-dc:Description as a fallback when no XP tag is found, duplicating the entry that Adobe correctly wrote as the description.

Very interesting, Stephen!

Here are the Dublin Core (dc) tags:

• dc:title
• dc:creator
• dc:subject
• dc:description
• dc:publisher
• dc:contributor
• dc:date
• dc:type
• dc:format
• dc:identifier
• dc:source
• dc:language
• dc:relation
• dc:coverage
• dc:rights

Jane

Note: I used ExifTool to inspect the metadata for both Adobe and Windows metadata additions.

1) When I add the comments/description I want in the "Description" box in Photoshop, it shows as both "Title" and "Subject" in Windows Explorer, but not "Comments".  And, as noted above, Photoshop does not read the metadata in Explorer's "Comments" field.

Adobe is writing the following entries:

IPTC:Caption-Abstract

XMP-dc:Description

IFD0:ImageDescription

Let's take a look at what metadata Windows writes:

IFD0:ImageDescription

IFD0:XPTitle

XMP-dc:Title

XMP-dc:Description

Here you can see that it is going to use its own preferred proprietary XPTitle tag, then fallback to other tags if that data is missing... It is obviously using the XMP-dc:Description as a fallback when no XP tag is found, duplicating the entry that Adobe correctly wrote as the description.

As for the Windows "Comments" it is a non-standard entry outside of Windows:

IFD0:XPComment

2) When I add the metadata in Windows Explorer as "Subject", Photoshop does not read nor retain it.  If Photoshop is writing to Explorer's "Subject" field, why doesn't it read from that field?

Windows is writing the following metadata:

IFD0:XPSubject

As previously written, the XP entries are used in Windows, not in Adobe. It is only writing a single entry with no redundancy/fallback as with the other entries where there are 4 used!

3) When I add the metadata in Windows Explorer to "Title", Photoshop reads it as both "Title" and "Description".  If Photoshop writes to Explorer's "Title" field from its own "Description" field, why does it also populate its own "Title" field when reading from Explorer's "Title" field?  (Note that this behavior is only observed when the metadata is entered in Explorer.  Metadata that appears in Explorer's "Title" field because it was saved from Photoshop, does not do this and only appears in the "Description" field in Photoshop.) 

Again, let's take a look at what metadata Windows is writing:

IFD0:ImageDescription

IFD0:XPTitle

XMP-dc:Title

XMP-dc:Description

The XPTitle is proprietary, so Adobe doesn't read that. As it is also being written to the XMP-dc:Title and XMP-dc:Description and IFD0:ImageDescription it is obvious why Photoshop displays it twice in two separate fields.

I hope that this helps to answer your question, it is not a bug in Adobe software, the issue originates with Microsoft. Both MS and Apple are going to do what they do for the "benefit" of their respective operating systems.

@Kevin Stohlmeyer 

I agree that that is where the disconnect is. Microsoft is unlikely to change because they are using the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) standards.

Jane

The previous discussion topic mentioned can be found here:

https://community.adobe.com/t5/photoshop-ecosystem-discussions/metadata-error-title-and-subject-same-but-not-the-same/m-p/13391455

@jane-e and there is the disconnect. Photoshop utilizes IPTC IIM Schema, not Dublin Core.

It's been discussed for years and some people have created scripts to transpose to the DC format:

https://community.adobe.com/t5/bridge-discussions/enter-dublin-core-xmp-in-bridge-metadata-window/td-p/5422490

@Lumigraphics wrote:

You'd think that Adobe and Microsoft would get together on this one, eh? 

When everyone uses Dublin Core, there is no issue! 

Dublin, btw, is the one in Ohio, and I don't think I need to say what the "dc:" in their tags stands for. 🙂

Jane

The problem is what shows up in the Explorer Properties window. dc:subject is shown as "tags", for example.

And the Comments field is ignored by Adobe. There is no easy way to read or write to it.

Bottom line, don't enter metadata into Properties if you want to later read it in Adobe software.

You'd think that Adobe and Microsoft would get together on this one, eh?

For what it's worth, Microsoft is not wrong in their naming of the fields. They are using the standard Dublin Core naming conventions:

• https://www.w3.org/wiki/DublinCore

• https://www.dublincore.org/resources/metadata-basics/

Jane

I get what are you explaining and understand the issue. My point was I see the issue as with Windows Explorer not Photoshop.

Sorry, but you are both missing the point of my bug report.  I get it, my thousands of  files  with Explorer "Comments" are not going to show up in Photoshop or Bridge metadata.  That is a problem for me to solve at a future date.  Here is the crux of my bug report:

1) When I add the comments/description I want in the "Description" box in Photoshop, it shows as both "Title" and "Subject" in Windows Explorer, not one or the other.

2) When I add the metadata in Windows Explorer as "Subject", Photoshop does not read nor retain it.  If Photoshop is writing to Explorer's "Subject" field, why doesn't it read from that field? (Note this is in contradiction to what Lumigraphics explained)

3) When I add the metadata in Windows Explorer to "Title", Photoshop reads it as both "Title" and "Description".  If Photoshop writes to Explorer's "Title" field from its own "Description" field, why does it also populate its own "Title" field when reading from Explorer's "Title" field? (Note this is also in contradiction to what Lumigraphics explained)

While I see the advantages of using Bridge, I can't completely abandon Windows Explorer as I am not the only one looking at these files and can't ask everyone to switch to Bridge just because I do.  I'm just pointing out inconsistencies in how the metadata interacts with Windows Explorer.  It is NOT a 1:1 relationship as Lumigraphics implies. 

My husband is a QA engineer, so I know that the way I reported the bug (pretty thorough testing, coming at it from both sides) might be helpful to the developers, if they ever see it.