Thanks Tony, useful.
Wonders: is there a tool for searching a whole folder / network / etc
for embedded data?
tt
Mike
_____________________________
*Mike Ellis *
Thirty8 Digital: a small but perfectly formed digital
agency:http://thirty8.co.uk <http://thirty8.co.uk/>
* My book: http://heritageweb.co.uk <http://heritageweb.co.uk/> *
Tony Harris wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> EXIF data is camera/date/time data, so yes not descriptive. I can't recall
> if this can include GPS data, but I think it does.
>
> But to just reiterate again why I'm using IPTC, it is primarily for my
> institution, end of really. It enables staff to catalogue and search and
> use the images. We all know that we cannot control what happens outside of
> the institution, so we are just doing the best we can.
>
> Regards
> Tony
>
> *Please note my new telephone number – 020 7211 2426*
>
>
>
> [image: cid:image001.png@01CF86F9.22C2BC80]
>
> *Tony Harris*
> Digital Media& Photography Officer
> Government Art Collection
> tony.harris @culture.gov.uk<[log in to unmask]>* |* 020 7211 2426
> [image: cid:image002.jpg@01CF86F9.22C2BC80]@govartcol [image:
> cid:image003.jpg@01CF86F9.22C2BC80] /governmentartcollection |
> www.gac.culture.gov.uk
>
>
>
> On 9 June 2015 at 11:10, Mike Ellis<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Yes, even I with my terrible geek cred was able to extract, read, write
>> EXIF data. So it can't be that hard... Flickr: my understanding is (tell me
>> if I'm wrong) that this tends to be camera metadata, not descriptive?
>>
>> But - in a scenario where writing this data would cause a considerable
>> bump in workflow, is there enough real-world usage to justify the time and
>> expense doing it? That's really the practical question, I think.
>>
>> Back to watermarks, I say :-) (I don't)
>>
>> tt
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>> _____________________________
>>
>>
>> *Mike Ellis *
>>
>> Thirty8 Digital: a small but perfectly formed digital agency:
>> http://thirty8.co.uk<http://thirty8.co.uk/>
>>
>> * My book: http://heritageweb.co.uk<http://heritageweb.co.uk/> *
>>
>>
>>
>> Mia wrote:
>>
>>> I'm sure most geeks can figure out how to access EXIF data pretty
>>> quickly... And isn't it used extensively on Flickr?
>>>
>>> To ask a different question, can a museum worth its name justify creating
>>> *more* orphan works?
>>>
>>> Cheers, Mia
>>>
>>> Sent from my handheld computing device
>>>
>>> On 9 Jun 2015, at 10:55, Mike Ellis<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>> Some more really interesting stuff, thanks everyone.
>>>>
>>>> Even given the wave of positivenesses from the list, I'm still dubious
>>>> from any kind of practical perspective (Google doesn't use it, social - the
>>>> only way stuff gets shared in any quantities, really - strips it out, and
>>>> not one of the people I've asked outside our [very specialist] sector know
>>>> what IPTC or EXIF data is or how to access it).
>>>>
>>>> BUT the resounding response from the list is clearly "yes, use it" :-)
>>>>
>>>> I totally accept that this might be useful for professional researchers,
>>>> and from a geek point of view I'm impressed by the possibilities. I also
>>>> really like that these images can potentially carry all their data with
>>>> them, meaning the orphaning of images from their metadata could potentially
>>>> become a non-issue.
>>>>
>>>> But - I'm looking at a scenario in which there is already a relatively
>>>> complex workflow, and the overhead of adding this stuff is potentially
>>>> considerable, so I have to ask whether the greater good is being served by
>>>> doing it. The impression I'm getting is - no, not really.
>>>>
>>>> So I think what I'm taking away from this from a practical point of view
>>>> is really this: if it can be done without making your workflow much more
>>>> cumbersome, you might as well do it. So that's useful, thanks.
>>>>
>>>> <sorry>There's also a terrible irony - sorry to bang the drum again -
>>>> that we're all dead keen on IPTC and EXIF but are surfacing (object) images
>>>> on pages which often have really, really terrible SEO.</sorry>
>>>>
>>>> Anyway. Thanks all!
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _____________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Mike Ellis *
>>>>
>>>> Thirty8 Digital: a small but perfectly formed digital agency:
>>>> http://thirty8.co.uk<http://thirty8.co.uk/>
>>>>
>>>> * My book: http://heritageweb.co.uk<http://heritageweb.co.uk/> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Angela Murphy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Best article on this is
>>>>> http://www.controlledvocabulary.com/blog/embedded-metadata-wont-help-seo.html
>>>>> Not updated recently but the text makes clear how it could help -
>>>>> and the many cases for embedded metadata not least the prospect for it
>>>>> to be used increasingly in the future.
>>>>>
>>>>> Angela
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9 Jun 2015, at 12:00, James Morley<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>> I've asked this question on the list before and the answer was a
>>>>>> resounding
>>>>>> 'no' but I'll ask again as it seems pertinent, and things move rapidly
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do any search engines, major or specialised, extract and use image
>>>>>> metadata
>>>>>> in indexing and rankings? It strikes me that there could be huge
>>>>>> benefits
>>>>>> to doing this in terms of search accuracy, certainly for object based
>>>>>> collections. Also, if they did it would encourage people to add
>>>>>> metadata
>>>>>> and also it would encourage sites not to strip it out. Until the
>>>>>> spammers
>>>>>> got stuck in of course, so perhaps another argument for them to pursue
>>>>>> image analysis/recognition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers, James
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> James Morley
>>>>>> Work: labs.europeana.eu / [log in to unmask]
>>>>>> Personal: www.jamesmorley.net / @jamesinealing
>>>>>> Also: www.whatsthatpicture.com / @PhotosOfThePast
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8 June 2015 at 23:42, Reser, Gregory<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Jeffery's Exif Viewer is very good. On Firefox you can add the
>>>>>>> plugin to
>>>>>>> your button bar for one-click viewing.
>>>>>>> http://regex.info/exif.cgi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Embedded MetaData Explorer has a nice UI
>>>>>>> http://embedmydata.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Greg Reser
>>>>>>> UC San Diego Library
>>>>>>> 9500 Gilman Drive, 0175K
>>>>>>> La Jolla, CA 92093-0175
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Phone: 858.246.0998
>>>>>>> Skype: gregreser
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
>>>>>>> Of Ben
>>>>>>> Rubinstein
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, June 08, 2015 2:29 PM
>>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: IPTC / EXIF
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Mike,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The National Portrait Gallery embed half a dozen IPTC fields concerned
>>>>>>> with title, caption, 'instructions', copyright etc into all the
>>>>>>> images for
>>>>>>> their online collection (but not images published through the CMS),
>>>>>>> on top
>>>>>>> of whatever data comes from the image production chain.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We implemented this six+ years ago, and I don't know whether there's
>>>>>>> ever
>>>>>>> been evidence about how useful it is. But (once there's an automated
>>>>>>> pipeline
>>>>>>> anyway) I don't think it adds much effort to the process, and I think
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>> comes into the category of why wouldn't you do this? (Obviously, I
>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>> speak for the NPG.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (On a related topic - there's an excellent extension for Firefox,
>>>>>>> "FxIF",
>>>>>>> which (in spite of the name) puts the IPTC data of any image a
>>>>>>> right-click
>>>>>>> away. On Chrome I've only been able to find extensions which read
>>>>>>> the EXIF
>>>>>>> data, nothing that reports IPTC data - does anyone have a
>>>>>>> recommendation?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ben
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 04/06/2015 10:33, Mike Ellis wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi all
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does anyone bother embedding museumy IPTC / EXIF data into
>>>>>>>> (collections) images as part of their digitisation workflow?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If so, why? I'd suspect that a "so that people knew where the image
>>>>>>>> came
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> from"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> reason may be one - but in reality do people actually _know_ about
>>>>>>>> this data in order to get back to the source organisation? Or are
>>>>>>>> tools like Google "upload an image" search or TinEye actually more
>>>>>>>> used?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also - given that there is evidence that almost all social media
>>>>>>>> sites
>>>>>>>> strip out some or all of this data, is it still worthwhile?
>>>>>>>> (http://www.controlledvocabulary.com/socialmedia/)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> cheers!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ****************************************************************
>>>>>>> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>>>>>>> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>>>>>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
>>>>>>> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
>>>>>>> ****************************************************************
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ****************************************************************
>>>>>>> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>>>>>>> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>>>>>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
>>>>>>> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
>>>>>>> ****************************************************************
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ****************************************************************
>>>>>> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>>>>>> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>>>>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
>>>>>> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
>>>>>> ****************************************************************
>>>>>>
>>>>> ****************************************************************
>>>>> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>>>>> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>>>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
>>>>> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
>>>>> ****************************************************************
>>>>>
>>>> ****************************************************************
>>>> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>>>> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
>>>> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
>>>> ****************************************************************
>>>>
>>> ****************************************************************
>>> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>>> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
>>> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
>>> ****************************************************************
>>>
>> ****************************************************************
>> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
>> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
>> ****************************************************************
>>
>
> ****************************************************************
> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> ****************************************************************
>
****************************************************************
website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
[un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
****************************************************************
|
