More EXIF and IPTC tags, please!

[theturninggate]

First of all, congratulations on the 1.6 release. It's great! Unfortunately, it's done nothing to address the thing I'd most like to see in a new PixelPost release. I want more tags for EXIF and IPTC data (XMP metadata).

XMP Metadata is more prevalent than ever, with major photo and work flow management software such as Aperture, Lightroom, Photoshop, and many lesser applications making it easier for photographers to organize their photos, and to keep the data accompanying each photo embedded in the image.

Magnificent as PixelPost is, it doesn't do much to promote or utilize all of this progress.

There are plugins like extra exif and the IPTC data plugin, but they leave much to be desired. Extra exif adds a bit of support for Nikon users, but doesn't do anything for the rest of us (I use Canon). And the IPTC plugin offers but a single tag that calls in everything, disallowing users from customizing the IPTC output - users cannot omit pieces of data, apply CSS classes, or rename output titles without editing the PHP powering the plugin.

PixelPost now supports keyword entry and tagging for uploaded images. If I've already tagged my images in my XMP data, why not allow those tags to be imported with the image on upload? If I've already titled and captioned my photo in the XMP data, wouldn't it be wonderful if PixelPost could call that information in the forms? And wouldn't it be grand if I could pull out individual items of XMP data to be displayed in my image information, the way that I can now display aperture, shutter speed and other basic information?

A part of the problem is that PixelPost currently relies upon the Exifer library, which, according to the author's website, is no longer being developed. Exifer 1.5 is a far cry from being a complete solution, and PixelPost's reliance upon this library effectively leaves its EXIF support dead in the water.

Professional photographers already making heavy use of XMP metadata would be more likely to begin using PixelPost if it supported the organizational efforts already present in their work flow. And PixelPost users would be more likely to begin using XMP metadata to organize their photo libraries, knowing that their photoblogging software supports it.

Just imagine the sorting possibilities users could employ in their archives!

PixelPost is a magnificent photoblogging application, but I would strongly encourage you to prioritize greater support for XMP metadata. Library organization in applications like Lightroom and Aperture relies heavily upon XMP metadata, and its these organizational attributes that help to set the applications apart from the competition and make them the premier applications in their class. XMP could do the same for PixelPost.

I hope you'll give consideration to these features for your next release, or at least for the heralded v2.0.

Cheers,
theturninggate

[dakwegmo+]

theturninggate I agree with you that PP could really benefit from better meta data support. In some respects, I think 1.6 was a step back and a step forward in terms of EXIF support. Moving this information into the database was a wise move, because it can keep all image processing functions contained to the admin panel, and makes it a lot easier to work with this meta data. However, the new exif functions ignore the maker note entirely, which leaves Nikon users out in the cold because that's where they hide they ISO information as well as other useful data.

I think the biggest thing holding the Dev team from switching to a more sophisticated EXIF system such as PHP Exif Library (PEL) or PHP's built in EXIF reader, is compatibility. PEL requires PHP 5.0, and many hosts don't configure PHP with EXIF support, so moving to either of these systems leaves some PP users or potential users with no upgrade path.

Ultimately, it will be necessary to leave the 1.x series to die, maybe providing security patches as they are needed, but stop development of new features and move on to PixelPost 2.x.

[Dennis+]

theturninggate: this fact is known in the development team and we are thinking about a better implementation.

For the rest:
PEL requires PHP5, like you stated, and that it is the main reason why we don't use it. PHP Exif support is nice, but this is a module that needs to be compiled in the PHP setup by your hoster.

In fact, we're thinking about a way to fix this in version 2.0. With all the changes we have done lately we decided not to change the exif routine. This will give to many compatibility issues, so we decided to take it slowly.

dakwegmo: I take it you're a Nikon shooter? Perhaps I can include the makernote again, but there were issues saving it to the database. These issues might have been resolved but I need photos for testing.

[dakwegmo+]

Originally Posted by schonhose

I take it you're a Nikon shooter? Perhaps I can include the makernote again, but there were issues saving it to the database. These issues might have been resolved but I need photos for testing.

How did you guess? ;-)

I can send you some photos to test, when I get home this evening.

[Dennis+]

Please do, we are exploring the possibilities as we speak. We can extract the XMP data and can use it. However, filling in the form with title and tags is a bit difficult when the image isn't on the server yet.