Thomas

thank your for your comprehensive thoughs about using our metadata. The
IPTC members have set up a "Photo Metadata" working group to deal exactly
with the considerations and concerns you address. (see
http://www.iptc.org/pages/wp_main.php#photometadata) I will circulate
your posting to our internal group and this will help us to understand
user needs better.

At one of our recent meetings we discussed the misuse of fields, so we
know about this issue but we concluded it is very hard to drive users to
apply exactly the semantics the field was created for.

Once again I have to emphasize the goal of the "IPTC Core" was only to
replicate in XMP the metadata fields from the existing "IPTC metadata"
header which are based on the IIM standard and the "Image Resource Block"
technology.

One of the goals of this IPTC working group is to consider extensions to
the Core, whether it will be called "IPTC Core 2.0" or if we will have
named extension will be decided later. But please be aware this will not
be done within a few weeks, we worked on the creation of the Core for more
than a year.

Regards

Michael

On 7 Nov 2006 at 1:50 Thomas Wiewandt wrote:

>
> Michael:
>
> Thank you for your comments on my first posting. I appreciate the
> background information and the specifics you have offered. Sorry to have
> been so slow in responding, but this reply required more research and
> time
> than expected. I feel the need to expand my comments and pose more
> questions.
>
> My primary concern with metadata fields resides within the File Info menu
> in Photoshop, specifically CS2. Do Adobe reps participate in your IPTC
> Core working group? I believe that Photoshop is the primary program in
> use by most professional photographers, the agents who represent us, and
> those who license rights to our images, so most of my comments pertain
> specifically to Adobe's metadata
> panels.
>
> Because AGENTS today play such an important role in the dissemination of
> photographic images via the Internet, the IPTC metadata fields in
> Photoshop must address the needs of both the image-makers (the CREATORS)
> and their representatives (typically stock photo AGENCIES). The vast
> majority of photographers who supply images to agencies are not staff
> photographers; they are independents. Typical agencies now represent
> hundreds or thousands of different photographers, and invariably they
> play
> by their own rules.
>
> I would urge you to scout a few of the major picture agency websites to
> examine how these image distributors are actually using the IPTC panels
> provided in Photoshop (try Alamy, GettyImages, and Corbis for starters).
> These "industry leaders" seldom follow your guidelines, and I propose
> that this is at least partially due to the lack of attention that has
> been
> given to their needs. All of the bigger and more aggressive agencies
> intentionally remove the creator's IPTC contact information and sometimes
> insert their own. For them, a photo is a commodity, not a work with an
> independent creator behind it; and they don't want buyers contacting
> photographers directly. Don't be surprised to find an agency's name in
> the Copyright Notice and Source fields as well. No one appears to be
> using these fields as
> intended.
>
> Clearly, your group has devoted much of the IPTC Core to the rights and
> interests of image Creators. But in practice, the Core is being applied
> quite differently. So, your team might now want to consider some new
> approaches, and I offer the following ideas:
>
> 1. All IPTC fields intended for the Creator should be named as such on
> the Photoshop panels. For example, if "Source" means "Image Creator" or
> "Copyright Holder," the field should be explicitly labeled as such. Doing
> so would help to eliminate confusion between the Image Provider and the
>
> Creator.
>
> 2. If no field is offered for an Agent's image identification
> names/numbers, they will continue to usurp the Title field intended for
> use by the image creator. Both parties need a place for their "Image
> Identifiers"; and to make this work in Photoshop, a separate "Title"
> field
> under a different name would be required for an agent's use. To be most
> useful, both ID's should appear on File Info's opening panel (the
> Description page), with direct links to fields within the IPTC metadata
> panels. For clarity, the image-maker's "Title" field could be re-named
> "Creator's Identifier" and a new field for the party representing that
> image could be named "Provider's
> Identifier"
>
> 3. Fields should be provided on the IPTC Contact panel (or on the
> non-
> IPTC Description page), for an Agent's Contact info; without it, agents
> will be encouraged to usurp fields not intended for their
> use.
>
> 4. Nearly all agencies are tacking their company names onto the Creator's
> "Copyright Notice," even though the work was not created under a
> "work-for-
> hire" agreement. They are using the typical Credit Line format ((c) John
> Doe / Agency Name) in the Copyright Notice field. Agents expect their
> company name to appear up-front and prominently displayed to users, and a
> CREDIT LINE field on the non-IPTC Description panel would probably solve
> this conflict of
> interest.
>
> Last but not least, as you undoubtedly know, Adobe has also entered the
> image distribution business. They, too, have ignored some of your key
> IPTC Core
> guidelines.
>
> So where are we really
> headed?
>
> Thomas
> Wiewandt
>
> tom@...
>
> www.wildhorizons.com
>
>
> ___________________________
> Thomas
> Wiewandt
> Wild
> HorizonsĀ®
> P. O. Box
> 5118
> Tucson, AZ
> 85703
> Tel.520-743-4551;
> Fax.520-743-4552
>
> E-mail:
> tom@...
> Website:
> www.wildhorizons.com
>
> Courier Deliveries
> Only:
> 5757 West Sweetwater
> Dr.
> Tucson, AZ 85745
> USA
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS

==================================================
Sent by:
Michael Steidl
Managing Director of the IPTC <mdirector@...>
International Press Telecommunications Council
"Information Technology for News"
Visit us on the web at http://www.iptc.org