9 comments

  1. Carl Seibert says:

    Breaking news: It turns out you CAN do a NOT search in Lightroom!

    A viewer on my YouTube channel left a comment wherein he explained that you can use a Smart Collection as a workaround for the missing Filter or Find functionality. And here is my recap of his comment:

    *Go to Collections and make a new smart collection. You can reuse it, so you can name it whatever you want. I called mine “AA_NOT_SEARCH”.

    Smart collections use the same filters that you have in the Filter or Find interfaces, but there’s a little plus sign at the right that you click to add additional filter statements.

    *Just click the plus and add a second line.

    *Choose “Match all of the follow rules” in the pulldown at the top.

    *Use the pulldowns to make your first line be your main search, like “Caption contains words [some search terms]” (Note that “Contains” puts an OR operator between search terms, like “Contains Any Of”. “Contains Words” or “Contains All” are probably what you are looking for.)

    *Put your NOT statement in the second line. ” Keywords doesn’t contain [some keyword]”.

    *Click ‘Save’. And you’re good to go.

    Note that both the Caption and Keywords fields in the first column are under the ‘Other Metadata’ flyout.

    *To reuse the Smart Collection, right-click on it and choose ‘Edit Smart Collection’.

  2. Todd Poole says:

    Hi Carl,

    As a subscriber to David Riecks controlled vocabulary, do you suggest adding/appending my newly created and thought out keywords to that database or keeping them separate? I shoot high school and college sports in the Burlington Vermont (and outlining) area. I would also include sports portraits, team photography and event photography as a description of what I shoot.
    Davids’ list only contains a half dozen cities/towns in Vermont (oops, now just remembering to use the location fields, not keywords, for locations). I do think that School names, team names are important metadata for my use and others. So would those keywords and appropriate child keywords be added to the list?

    • Carl Seibert says:

      Hi Todd,

      What I would do (your mileage may vary) is start my hierarchy, or hierarchies, at the top level in the left column, separate from your existing ControlledVocabulary one(s). I would backup (Save) everything, then Merge in my own file(s), then make final edits with the interface in the Structured Keywords panel. Or, you could build your hierarchies from scratch, right there in the panel. Then backup again. (I’m assuming for some reason you’re using Photo Mechanic here. If you’re using Lightroom, you’ll need to translate as we go along. But the principles are the same.)

      I would think the advantages of doing it that way would be that it’s way easier to build a keyword file if it’s to start at the top level, rather than to make it fit into the middle of an existing hierarchy, and I would think navigation would be easier with fewer levels. (As you can see in the illustrations in this post, I did actually build my own this way.)

      If you use the Find function, it doesn’t matter where the keyword you seek might be; you get to choose in the Find dialog. But if you navigate to the keyword, then whatever path makes the most sense for you is what you want to build. (You might start at “`MyKeywords”, or you might have one hierarchy for high schools and another for colleges, or one for golf and one for football, for example.)

      In your case, place names are commingled with institutional names. “Burlington Central High School” (I made that up) is certainly keyword material. But they might play a game in, say, the CapitalOne Arena in Washington, D.C. In which case, you have a place name that isn’t the location of the photo. So, you’re probably stuck with places in your keywords, one way or the other. Depending on software, “Burlington” might or might not return a photo with that keyword. If you want to be sure that “Burlington” does hit that photo, you would do “Burlington, Central, High, School,”

      (Of course, school names (hopefully conforming to style) and playing venues will probably be in your captions, too.)

      Now that I’ve brought it up, there’s the matter of “High School”. It’s a style issue, for sure. Your style is probably “High School”, but if there are a few “H.S.” entries, a synonym would help. And “high school” is a category of pictures and would most certainly be denoted in the keywords. But “High School” may or may not be part of the name of the school. “Acme Prep”, say. So, “high school” should probably be a keyword of its own. Same for “college”.

      So many fiddly decisions go into a keywording plan.

      By the way, if you are using Photo Mechanic, the location fields allow you to chose from a list. I built mine from Census data. (South Florida has about 100 municipalities. Nobody knows the correct names of all of them.)

      I hope this helps.

      -Carl

      • Todd Poole says:

        Thanks Carl! And yes, I am using PM for a few months now. LR and PS are my down stream editors (in my work flow) respectively. Using PM for culling and exclusive meta.data.adder….
        T.

  3. Cami says:

    Referring XnView, how many keywords / max. characters can be added to a image, not affecting, without a performance penalty?
    Thank you.

    • Carl Seibert says:

      In the old IIM standard (and I can’t lay my hands on my copy right this second) Each individual keyword was limited to 64 characters. I don’t recall if there was a limit to the total size of the keyword field. In the XMP, there are no limits.

      If by performance you mean search/Digital Asset Management performance, I don’t think it really matters for XnView, because XnView doesn’t really have much in the way of search or DAM functionality.

      In terms of XnView writing metadata, considering how tiny metadata is comparing to the image itself, I can’t imagine noticing a difference one way or the other.

      If you mean performance as in page load times on the web, each character is a byte, basically. (well, two, if you consider that most fields, like Keywords, appear in both the IIM and XMP.) For most images, the IIM and XMP data blocks are four to eight KB or less, combined, unless an absolutely outrageous amount of metadata is there. The Exif can be a little bloated if it contains over-large previews. Altogether, we’re talking about only a few milliseconds of load time with most normal bandwidth, something on the order of well under a tenth of a second, usually.

  4. Keith Bamber says:

    I just wanted to say how valuable I found your blog and video. (only the first of the latter sofar). I am only an enthusiast but it is by far the best introduction I have read in many years that I have studied and practiced photography. Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.