Tagging, cataloging searching hints and tips

[arthurking83]

Tagging and cataloging 101:

Hi folks, the topic up above is something that many newbies to photography don't concern themselves with.
They think, I don't really need to fuss with such stuff as I'm only doing this as a hobby/pastime/fun thing/etc.

There are many ways to catalog your photos, the primary one being a solid hierarchical archive system as a beginning.

That is, you may place your family photos in a folder(called a directory) named family.
You may place your Bali holiday photos in a folder called Bali 2015 or whatever.

Good(ish) but until you have collected an absolute ton of images, you don't realise the flaws inherent in such a system.

FWIW: I also use this hierarchical directory structure, and have done so from about day two!(not day one).
That is, for the first few hundred photos, I just used the folder structure that the software provided by default. So images went into folder 0006 and 0007 for a while in my My Pictures directory.

All images were called DSC_0001, DSC_0002 .. etc.
So that I had separation(in the different folders) so that different files didn't overwrite each other .. but the issue came if I collated some images somewhere else to share/display/upload/etc.

That is DSC_0001 in folder 0006 had the same file name as DSC_0001 in folder 0007. If I uploaded both those images(not the folders) to somewhere else on the same location it either overwrote one file, or asked if I wanted too .. etc. Painful and not ideal.
So your primary concern as a hobbyist photographer is to be sure you name each photo appropriately.
My file naming convention works for me in that it's quite simple where I name each file according to the camera it was shot with and then a never ending file sequence.
I like the DSC_xxxx system as it's easy to trace back to a day/date/series if an issue arose somewhere(this has happened before, and so I've used it for a long time.
As the number counter approaches 9999 and then resets to 0000, I pre-empt this point and change the file name from DSC_ to DSD_ on the camera.

In effect, I have images called D800E_DSC_0001, D300_DSC_0001 and D70s_DSC_0001.
The simple point is that it's all to easy to forget to rename something somewhere and lose stuff(which has happened to me very early on!) so with my system, which works perfectly for me, this has never happened again and if I need to trace an image somewhere called D300_DSD_0008, it's easy to do .. something like why am I missing D300_DSD_0009 in a sequence, such as a pano stitch effort or something.
The image transferring program automagically adds the prefix(or suffix if you like) to the images.

So at the most basic level of cataloging file name and directory location are really the primary start point.

Tagging: tagging is a system where a word is entered into the file somehow to give it a meaning or reference as to what that image relates too.
So I shot some landscapes in Bendigo late one day of an old ruined building. My keywords can be something like 'sunset' 'landscape' 'ruin' 'building' 'Bendigo' 'rural' etc.
it just gives me a way to find a type of image if I ever want too, or in some cases I can pinpoint where I was at a specific time and date if I need too.

If you haven't ever tagged your images and then searched them via a subsequently constructed catalog, you can't really appreciate the how important this is.
With a few thousand images and a year or two of images, it may not seem important.
I could easily locate an image of a chapel in Bendigo I shot a few years back, but what is hard to do, is locate all images of this chapel I shot in Bendigo .. ever!
I can find all the tagged images of this specific subject, but I know I have some more where I haven't tagged them.
The thing is, that I may have not specifically been to Bendigo on a particular occasion, but may have briefly passed through, so if I had been to Swan Hill, or Echuca instead and tagged the images as Echuca/Swan Hill instead .. Bendigo is a useless term to use to search for any of those items.
For those that don't know the area, Swan Hill/Echuca is beyond Bendigo and it's trivial to pass through Bendigo on the way there or back. The point is that your keywords, or more accurately tagged information are important, not where you thing you shot a series of images.

The point with tagged info is that there are a few types of this data. The one I use is called IPTC info. Keywords are another area of tagged data, as is GPS data, as is EXIF.
The most recent addition to tagged data created by the industry associations is Adobe's XMP dataset.
XMP encompasses all of the old style embedded data sets into one, but I have yet to see any real advantage of it, and have come across some limitations(for my purposes).

Those data types are separately allocated areas of a file that can be written too within an image.

This is just an intro into the IMPORTANT world of tagging images. I don't know the exact meaning of the word cataloging with respect to photography, and I've seen many notions of it ...
... but for me, cataloging is a system where the data of embedded or attached notations for a file can be searched to effect the location of a specific(or set) of file(s).

In the next post, I'll explain some of the hint's tips I've collated over the years, and some of the drawbacks of proprietary tagging systems I've dealt with.
This will include a now foolproof method I use to tag my images.

All and sundry are welcome to add their own points of views, tips, warnings etc, as well as ask questions. I'm curious as to what others do for tagging and cataloging and how they prevent a total failure of their systems too.

[arthurking83]

Tagging and cataloging 102: .....

Caveat Emptor!

Tagging or adding metadata is how you catalog files.
The method of cataloging varies from one program to another. Programs exist that are specifically for cataloging files, while others can catalog files and edit them too.
I've used most types and I've found that the best way to do it is via specialist software.

Almost certainly someone will chime in and declare Lightroom and Adobe Bridge as the bees knees for cataloging your image files(or video files, or whatever).

For them .. beaut! .. for me ..
Not a fan at all.

For a few years I used a program called IDImager, who also make some free software that helps to resize images or add watermarks or frames.
It was a great program, and I had v4 just prior to v5's introduction. I saw no need to pay for an update I didn't need, so stuck with v4 for years.
Problem is that support for all versions up to v5 were ceased with no updates at all, and the vendor changed the software to a new one called PhotoSupreme.
I trialled it but didn't like it as much(but I didn't really trial it for long tho .. maybe it's fantastic .. I dunno).
My issue was, what if they changed course again and produced a new software called PhotoBeneloventSupremo or something else? .. I like stability of software incarnations.

So I went back to a slightly awkward method, but in my mind, more surety in my tag information.
I shot images without cause for concern for about 4 or so years .. maybe 3 .. can't remember exactly. Lots of images tho many of which have no tag info in them other than the basic camera exif data.
I then found that Nikon's ViewNX2 could add tag info into the IPTC area of an image and so started that.
Of course there was no way to search for this info tho, so while it was good to have the ability, the issue of searching for this data was non existent.
I was put onto Lr(v3 back then) and started on this course for a very short while.
I noted tho that any metadata info I added, wasn't added to the file itself(other than for tiff or jpg files) .. so as the raw file is my primary concern Lr was (not entirely) useless really.
That is, it could create metadata info of some worth, and create a catalog to search, but only if you used Lr.
This is good if you only ever use Lr, but I don't use Lr to manage all my files/backups/data integrity checks etc.

As we all know, you need backups of your files if you care about them, and many folks will tell ya that once you lose them .. too bad .. and you live'n'learn the hard way.

So I didn't like the waste of money that Lr was and looked for something else .. hence IDImager.
I specifically asked the question of whether IDIMager can embed the metadata into the file, and the answer was yes(on another forum relating to the software) ...
..... used this until about 6 or so months ago as well as ViewNX2, so about 4 or so years.

The only problem was that neither software were very good at locating properly untagged files for me to slowly add tags too for a complete catalog system for my purposes.

A while ago I installed some new software which included(by accident) a Microsoft program called Photo Gallery. I realised my mistake and wanted to delete it. before I did, I had a quick look, and in a word .. hopelessly terribly useless for most purposes. (until!)

Anyhow, I had a small catalog built up partially with Lr, and then IDImager, and noted that IDImager could convert the Lr catalog I had and insert this metadata into it's own database(or catalog).
Awesome. But the idea struck me, why do I even need to convert the catalog at all?
Doesn't make any sense. Why not just have the data easily available for any new software to access as I see fit(which to me makes sense!!)
it's my data, and I want it available to me. If I have a word file,and want to convert it to .txt. or .rtf, or .odt .. or whatever, I can easily do this with so many software programs.
But it's not easy(of possible) to do this with Lr's catalog.

So I went on a search to find out as much of the ins and outs of tagging/metadata and cataloging as I could to satisfy myself that I can future proof myself from any major current blunders.

I once had about 70-80 thousand images uncatalogged most of which are raw files. Some remaining jpgs some tiffs, etc. Some of the tiffs are of very old photos from my folks past.
But the sticking point for me was why do most programs refuse to add metadata into areas that are reserved for metadata usage? just doesn't make any sense.

My info is not "THE RIGHT" info .. just info for anyone to contemplate.
I'm not a software fanboi in any sense of anyone's imagination. While I like Nikon's CaptureNX2 and ViewNX2 .. they are seriously flawed software, but with some great features.
I like Lr, but hate it's flaws even more so!
Same with IDImager .. and so on.
So my primary concern is that I don't want to be locked into a software vendor with my data!
if they give me all the freebies in the world for stuff I don't care about .. yeah why not! .. I'll lick myself in just as many folks seem to be keen to do.

So what am I on about? embeded tag data or metadata.
As I mentioned earlier, there is a form of embedded metadata in images called IPTC. This is what I use(because Nikon allows direct additions/editing into this area on their raw(NEF) files.

I do this via ViewNX2, and is my primary reason for sticking with it. For editing, it's extremely limited in ability .. handy but limited, but it allows addition of tag info which can be searched in a catalog
Seriously .. awesome.

IDImager could only add embedded data into an NEF via keywording only. It wasn't in the IPTC area of the file.
I'm not going to explain all the possible areas of embedded data in all file types, but just to explain that there are many and various. (search XMP for more info).
I like the IPTC method, because it's what I'm used too now.

Once again tho, software redundancy has reared it's ugly head, in that Nikon no longer support ViewNX2 and CaptureNX2(which both allow IPTC metadata editing).

So I started searching for more programs .. but programs that were also open in their overall usage. That is if I created a catalog I had access to it any way I like .. not with specialist software.

So the lightbulb for me came when I accidentally used (M$s) Photo Galley once, and noticed that it could read my Nikon ViewNX2 embedded IPTC info ...
I looked into a bit more, with a massive amount of effort and sarcasm, but there it was .. for some reason this pretty hopeless program can see my tagged data.

If I add bzmogofrxquildgn into a raw file .. Photo Gallery then sees it .. OK .. now what.
Strangely and out of curiosity I open Windows (File) Explorer and for a folder full of raw files, I can see the tagged info I created via ViewNX2 as well .. err .. OK then this is good(I think).
Are M$ spying on my photography habits?

NOPE! .. Photo Gallery for all it's major failings as a photo gallery software is creating a catalog for me .. without me doing anything other than now avoiding IDImager and only using VNX2 ...

once I looked into it a bit, this was a major yay moment for me!(in a big way).
1. I don't keep my files locally on my PC, they are only stored on external drives. I have three stashes of various types.
One current year's storage(usually about a few hundred Gigs. and to externally external drives of all the images .. about 1.5Tb each.

I tell Photo Gallery where my images are, and it catalogs them.
I can use any of the 5 computers in my house to see these images and search for them.
No Lr required on all five PCs .. just Photo Gallery.

I have briefly looked at how I can syncronise the photo gallery installations across various PC's to get them all in sync at the same time, but not too deeply.
But the point is that I can now search for any of my raw files now simply via Windows, Windows File Explorer and any related and integrated software. Windows knows the catalog I accidentally created.

So for my current and most likely future needs, I have a fully operating catalog system that is extensible across various systems too now.

Some side info relevant to any other cataloging/database creating software. While it may not be imperative for you now .. it may well be some time in the future(could be 20 or 30 years from now!)
if you value your catalog(or tagged info) be sure that the system is open. IDImager and hence PhotoSupreme is and creates an open source database that can be accessed via other software(Adobe's can be, but to what level and operability).

For me(and here's the crunch!) my catalog system is pure and simple. Keep your metadata embedded into the relevant files.
The catalog is effect is useless if you compare it to the actual metadata tagging it requires.

You can easily build a new catalog via any software if your images have the tag info in them.
Adobe's (and others) system of XMP side car files is more flawed.

Think of it this way: Adobe's XMP side car files are useless in Nikon's software which in turn are useless in turn in PhotoSupreme, which in turn are useless in PhotoMechanic .. etc etc.
Embedded data goes with the file.

The other point I wanted to make with M$ Photo Gallery is in order to operate with many raw files, you must have your manufacturers raw file codec installed. I've tried this only with Nikon(many thousand images) and Canon CRW files. Not only does it catalog them for use in Windows tho, it allows you to edit/update/correct/etc the metadata info into a better structured tag system once you realised you done it all wrong!

For any ViewNX2 users, once you get over the glacial pace of Photo Gallery, it's far more effecting at managing/adding and editing metadata into your raw files.

The other day Deb asked me when did we go to this meet. I used the search function in windows, added ap_meet, echuca and in about 1/2 a second I had some relevant files to view and dates to describe.

To me, this is what a catalog should do .. not send you through hoops to locate YOUR data.

[ricktas]

Great read AK and some really good information in there. I too think tagging is the bees-knees. I find I will search for a photo using tags more than any other search method.

Finding photos of a particular location, time of day, subject is easy to do if you have tagged your photos effectively when you originally import them from the camera/card.

[bcys1961]

I use Lightroom and find its keywords feature one of its most useful features. On import it automatically builds up directories by date. This is often not that useful unless he date is a memorable one - eg: 26th Jan or 25th April . But then you can also tag all photos on import with something more useful like a location or event. You can then go in and tag every photo individually if required. I have not really done this as much as I should but will do it as required. Currently I might have a general tag for say "Insects" but I have not gone to the extent of breaking this down further - ants, butterflys, moths etc... When AP has a comp on a subject ( like Ants) or colours ( like Yellow) then that is a prompt to go find all my photos that fit the theme and then I will tag them.

Also like the LR6 face recognition system which makes it easy to quickly tag all your photos with people in them.

[arthurking83]

Oh yeah. This Microsoft Photo Gallery also does face recognition too. It needs to be taught tho. I don't use it much and some anomalies exist(it sees toys as faces sometimes and stuff like that).

A cpl of screen shots.

searching the catalog via Windows search function:
The search criteria was simply ruin with this one.
catalog-tag Win_search_screencap.jpg
While this is now Win10, it also worked with Win7.

Searching via Windows File Explorer:
Search criteria was both ap_meet and echuca so it only returned the results from an 'ap_meet' relevant to any 'echuca' images.
I have many hundreds if not thousands of ap meetup images and other from Echuca over the years .. so filtering is also easily done too.
catalog-tag Win_explorer_search_screencap.jpg

So the simplicity and extensibility if this system is that it doesn't rely on software that you need to have purchased(a license or whatever) for multiple machines.

[Warbler]

Here's another tip for you then Arthur. You don't need MS Photo Gallery either. Windows Explorer can read that info already, and if you view it as a detailed list you can right-click above the filenames and choose which details you want Explorer to display. Once done, you can use that column as a sorting key. If you just want to look at one image, right-click on it and go to properties. It will display all your EXIF and IPTC data right there in Explorer. Do you get paid by the word BTW?

- - - Updated - - -

Like this

Untitled-2.jpg

[arthurking83]

..... Do you get paid by the word BTW?

LOL! I wish .. I'd have retired with a swag of D5's and one of each of Nikon's new FL super teles and a first class trip 'round the world!

The issue isn't about windows just seeing the data. it does that even when I just use ViewNX2 to do the tagging.
But VNX2 is all but dead(I just haven't fully accepted it just yet).
I just need a new way to tag the files where the tag data(in effect ITPC info) is added to the raw file itself.
I don't of any way that Windows itself can do it .. and stumbled on this by accident in Photo Gallery.

Prior to using Photo Galley tho if I did do a search for <insert keyword here> windows indexing is not as fast as Photo Gallery's is.
If you reboot, it doesn't seem to hold onto it or something either. That is Windows itself may well create a database to work from, but on reboot it takes a while to locate some files.
With Photo Gallery as the indexing provider, all searches are instantaneous in Windows/File Explorer.

The other thing with Photo Gallery and Windows. It didn't like the way I tagged some files.
as an example I'd tag Nikon 50mm f/1.2.
The / operator in Windows is different to the way it's used in ViewNX2.
In Photo Gallery, it's a sub category operator .. so in Gallery that Nikon 50mm f/1.2 was set as

Nikon 50mm f
1.2

where the upper part was the mother directory and the lower 1.2 part was a sub category of the upper part.

Spent a few weeks finding all of those stuff ups on my part and fixing them.

Had it been via VNX2 .. it'd have taken years tho.

With Gallery it was easy to fix tho, and find too .. just the tedium of doing tens of thousands of those fixes.

ps. Also notice that your files are all jpgs. All ok, but on my PC I tend to delete most jpgs(about 99% of them) and only really archive the raw files.
Can you locate the raw files only(or do you need to keep the jpg file close to the raw file to locate it).

note in my screen shot I should have scrolled down to reveal the NEFs.
So it seems I missed some jpgs in my archive too, and I'll have to rectify that when I can.
The point with Photo Gallery is that it operates nicely on raw files, that I tried both Canon CRW and Nikon's NEF successfully.

This is how stoopid I am too tho, I only just noticed the jpgs in my screen shot. I'll fix it and show the NEF files list it returns.

[Warbler]

ps. Also notice that your files are all jpgs. All ok, but on my PC I tend to delete most jpgs(about 99% of them) and only really archive the raw files. Can you locate the raw files only(or do you need to keep the jpg file close to the raw file to locate it).

No, I only chose that directory because I tagged it the other night after doing a job for Westpac. I only tagged the JPEGs. The client doesn't want the RAW files and I'll never be looking at them again either. They just get archived as is, and the client files get backed up elsewhere.

So here's a test for you Arthur. If you tag one RAW file using Photo Gallery, then close Photo Gallery and rename the newly tagged file using Explorer. Re-open Photo Gallery and tell me if the file tagging is still in the renamed RAW file. If it is, then you are right that it edits the RAW file. If not, then maybe it only creates a database. Maybe try to rename it using FastStone or something not MS to make sure.

- - - Updated - - -

Here's another one for you to play with. Microsoft Pro Photo Tools. Download it for free.


Untitled-3.jpg

[ameerat42]

BUT, no BUTTs, but BUTTEs in desert landscapes, does it DISPLAY raw file image thumbnails???...

- - - Updated - - -

Even in Win 8.1 I can't see mine.

[Warbler]

BUT, no BUTTs, but BUTTEs in desert landscapes, does it DISPLAY raw file image thumbnails???...

- - - Updated - - -

Even in Win 8.1 I can't see mine.

You've got to have the Codec installed AM. I Installed mine way back when I was using Vista...or was that XP? Never had to reinstall it since. Better get the google fingers going AM.

- - - Updated - - -

Here. Take your pick...
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=C...HKHLmAWb3oX4Aw

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, maybe not for you AM. You're Sigmoid aren't you?

- - - Updated - - -

Sigma RAW Codec for Windows

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=C...ec+for+Windows

[ameerat42]

Ta for that Warbs. I will chase it up. I use FastStone for cattle-dogg-ing and quick stuff like that.

BTW, do you know of ANYthing that will let your browser lighten/darken an on-line image on the fly without having
to copy it out to Pshop or so?

Ta.

[Warbler]

Is this a trick question? Adjust your screen....lol.

[ameerat42]

Nope. I've been searching for an add-on. I usually copy out images on AP/elsewhere and paste them into Pshop to "view them better".
Some are rather dark/light, and it becomes a bit tedious.

[Warbler]

No I don't. In Win 7 I just had photoshop opened in the background and dragged photos from say Ausphotography over the icon on the task bar and dragged it back over the photoshop workspace when it appeared before releasing the mouse button. It pasted the image as a *.bmp file. I notice win10 won't let me do that anymore.

[ameerat42]

OK, ta. I will keep lking.

[Warbler]

I believe this one may have your Sigma Codec AM, but it's not free.

http://www.fastpictureviewer.com/codecs/

[arthurking83]

OK, I've updated the screen caps.

Yeah Warbler, that was the point of my post re this topic.

I'm (almost)totally with you re not really looking at my archive all that much, but the images I do keep are all the raw files only.

As I displayed in the last versions of screen shots tho, some jpgs do get through and I'm extra cautious not to remove all jpgs willy nilly!

So it's a bit of a tedious process sometimes.

eg. if I just did a *.jpg search and deleted all images, on that search criterion, all my my kids' images would get deleted too .. as they used to use P&S cameras, or phones or whatever.

So the jpgs I do delete are selectively chosen from my confirmed archive of raw files only.

But I'll confirm that Photo Gallery does in fact add, edit, append and catalog the raw files too, as well as jpg files.

As you can see from my updated screen caps, the images I now searched for are predominantly the NEFs.

yes the raw codec has to be installed for both Windows(file) Explorer and Photo Gallery to see and edit tag data in the raw file.

Note I have had an issue not long ago after I installed Win7 too tho. I reinstalled Nikon's v 1.27 of the NEF codec but prior to my reinsall of Win7, I originally had v1.24.
I'd used Gallery for a few months prior to the Win 7 reinstall with no problems, and played with Canon raw files too to boot.

But after the reinstall and with the latest version of the Nikon codec, I couldn't get ViewNX2 and Gallery to interoperate.
That is, tags were either ViewNX2 or Gallery, but neither would recognise the others.

Much head scratching, and also some testing on my tablet(Win7) and no problem there.
it was just a glitch on this desktop for no reason.
I uninstalled the newer Nikon codec, installed the older codec and all was fine.
On the tablet, the newer codec was also fine.
Just to satisfy my curiosity tho, I reinstalled the later Nikon codec again, and now it's all fine again .. beats me why .. just one of those things.

Win10 and all still good.

In Canon world, I couldn't see anywhere to add tag info into the CR2 files at all. Maybe they have a separate program or something??

All I had at that time was DPP and Photo Gallery. If there is any Canon software to tag images, I just don't know of it .. not that it doesn't exist.

I can't for the life of me find Canon's actual latest raw codec(if someone can post an actual file or link .. it'd be nice). I found a link, but couldn't get the actual file.
Windows has a camera pack, which contains many raw file codecs .. can be used but at the time I loaded it, it was circa 2014 build and hence couldn't recognise the later model cameras(eg. 5Dr or whatever).
Use this Windows camera pack with some caution.

I don't have DPP installed gain as yet(on Win10) so from memory .. if you add tag data in Gallery into a .cr2 file, there was a small info window in DPP which recognised this added tag data too.
I think I only had a few 5DmkIII files to play with .. and one other lonely cr2 of I don't know what camera(it's a sample file from a camera filter conversion company).

Can't find a codec for Sigma's X3F files .. but haven't really tried hard either.
I'll see if I can find some Pentax PEF files .. but this point is moot as it's probably best to shoot in DNG on a Pentax.

And remember this cataloging info isn't for general sharing purposes .. it's simply about 'owning' your own data. Really only relevant and about raw file tagging for the purpose of keeping a tack of your archive.

Even Windows file Explorer can tag jpg files.

OH! and if you have the curiosity, once your raw file codec has been installed and confirmed working properly, you should also have the ability to add tag info on the raw file from within Windows (file) Explorer too.
Rightclick the raw file and select properties.
With the properties window now open, click on the details tab.
Scroll your mouse or cursor over many of the available fields .. such as tag, description, rating .. etc and a small highlighted box may appear. Add data there and you have raw file metadata capability there too.

It can be handy, but not really user friendly as a 'cataloging system'. Just an easy way to do the odd file here and there if required.

[arthurking83]

I did get it a bit wrong:

Because I assumed that ViewNX2 adds tags into the IPTC area of the image, and that both Gallery and Windows Explorer can add too or edit those same VNX2 generated tags, I assumed that the area of the raw file that both Explorer and Gallery write too was the same IPTC area.

I shood'a checked(I have the tools) .. but anyhow.

using Exiftool, with the ExiftoolGUI front end for it(I'm not a fan of commandline! )

Tagged via Gallery showing the gallery made tag info in the XMP area.
catalog-tag_via_gallery_viewed_exiftoolgui.jpg

A screen shot of exiftool showing the exif status. Note the selected tab on the RHS. I initially checked the IPTC area which was blank .. panicked a bit and then checked other areas.
the tag data is written to the XMP area(which actually makes sense).

Tagged via Windows file Explorer showing the same tag style.

catalog-tag_via_win_explorer_viewed_exiftoolgui.jpg

The anomaly at the moment(for me) is why is it listed in the subject heading in the XMP area?

Like I said tho .. ViewNX2 can see all or most tags, and VNX2 is very fussy with the file types you point it too, chucks a wobbly if the file is in any way not standard Nikon protocol.

catalog-tag_via_win_explorer_viewed_VNX2.jpg

So while it's an issue I want to look into just in case there is future issues for compatibility or something .. in effect it's not an issue.

I did find an interesting thing about Windows Explorer too tho. Initially when I added the first set of info(the tag_test_info_etc) all it did was allow me to add it.
As I added more info into other various areas, if the tag info was already recognised in its database, it comes up as a drop down list to select which ever you prefer(via tick marks).
So it's not as restrictive and rigid as I initially thought, but there are some strange location anomalies to be a bit wary of.

catalog-tag_more_via_win_explorer_viewed_exiftoolgui.jpg
eg. I also added more info(after the above screen shot from ExiftoolGUI) and added a comment and subject and title.
While the info added seems to make sense here(look at the XMP location names where the metadata is located .. under the XMP tab, the title is fine and labelled 'file explorer test title' the problem is that under the subject heading in the XMP tab, the same metadata is listed, and not the subject I added labelled 'file explorer test subject'.
The added comment 'this is not as bad as I thought' doesn't appear anywhere else other than Windows Explorer under the comments tab. Neither Gallery or VNX2 see this info at all.

While it's easy to get caught up in some semantics over who wrote what where and why can't the others see it .. in the long run I don't think it's important enough to worry about.
From a what if the worst happens point of view .. I think that the important part in all this .. at least for me .. is that the metadata is where it should be first and foremost .. in the file it pertains too.
From there a catalog can be made from which we then find our stuff.