Lossless "export" of images with embedded metadata?

Spelinke, you've done a lot of work on this subject and I'm grateful to you. I want to stay on the Mac, but I plan to create my own database, so I can fully control it. I enjoy using FileMaker Pro, and after seeing your test workflow examples, feel you would, too.

I haven't used FMP to manage a photo library, but googling this (2014-05) taught me you can set the Prefs to include the photo in the database, or link to a folder. I like the latter idea as the database will run faster. With either option, FMP says you can include a thumbnail. I'd also be able to edit the photo file without breaking the link, then write text to a related field.

I have a huge library of cards and a few hard drives to catalog. With FMP, I'll likely create barcodes for the media, print labels, and use a hand scanner as a first pass, then delve into the individual, metadata-containing files, creating fields to contain my metadata. FMP will already parse the EXIF, Hope this is helpful to other forum readers.

Maybe you should look at Media Pro 1 as it can embed all of the IPTC info into the files.

As well as the EXIF fields:

OT

I came upon this discussion while trying to determine how I can add keywords comments to my photos that I have exported from iPhoto [onto an EHD because I want a backup other then TimeMachine].

The explanations helped a lot. I really appreciate responses from you so very knowledgeable people.

Here is my current dilemma -

Keywords:

I like using something like Finder to search for photos because when I export [kind:"original"] from iPhoto I can assign specific locations.

For example, when I download photos from my camera naming the event by date and description, I then export to the EHD.

iPhoto: 2015-02-02 Glenford Cemetery

export to the proper folder: Genealogy/cemeteries/RI/Scituate/Glenford

The event is exported using event name for the new folder under Glenford.

The problem with this is that I need to further categorize my photos.

For example, I'd like to add more information that I can search on: Glenford or a Cole headstone.

Even more so, I've got a zillion scanned images from town hall old, old record books.

I have at some point decided to keep the original file names as they are downloaded from the camera, so renaming doesn't seem to be the solution. My cousin does this, but I'd like to take a whole folder and assign 'Glenford' to a keyword or 'Scituate Town Hall' and also add something like 'Marriage'. To complicate it even more, those town hall records have several records of interest on each page.

I could assign a keyword to the whole Scituate town hall scans, then individually add keywords to appropriate photos. I hope.

Didn't seem like I wanted to use Preview and thought for some reason I couldn't export keywords from iPhoto.

Read this review regarding Preview: http://lookingabout.blogspot.com/2007/05/dont-use-preview-on-mac-to-write-exif.h tml

"It turns out that in the process of writing the keywords to the .JPG file, Preview would delete the YCbCrPositioning tag from IFD0 but not update the entry count for the IFD. That would corrupt the structure for pretty much everything following the now missing entry. This turns out to be a fair amount of stuff."

Looked at Phil Harvey's EXIFTool. Really want a GUI.

So, back to this discussion. Looks like no problem exporting from iPhoto. I get to keep my keywords and the original photo even though I select JPG and maximum quality. Now that means a HUGE file. I tested adding a keyword to one file in iPhoto which was 1.5MB. After export at maximum quality, it was 6.8MB. Got the keyword. So helpful for searches either in Finder or iPhoto.

So, could you please tell me again:

(1) Exporting retains the quality of the image. I don't understand the part about the image being the same and the file being different. I tried to follow one of the links above, but it is no longer active. Is there another link?

(2) There was a comment about the quality of the image as it is downloaded from the camera and the export quality from iPhoto. I've been exporting 'original' thinking I wouldn't be losing anything. I want it exactly as it is on the camera...or so I thought. I want the best possible.

(3) Would it make any difference if I downloaded from the card directly to Finder [and keep the card for a year or more as LarryHN - I think- suggested] then import to iPhoto to view and do little things like albums, books, etc? Is the quality the same? Does iPhoto change the quality of the photo?

I hope I've explained my question properly...or at least so you can understand what I am getting at.

Thanks again for all of your help.

There is a very important distinction you need to make:

A file is not a photo. Neither is it a song, nor a novel or a letter to grandma. A file is a box. The type of box used varies depending on the material that goes into it. So, sound files can be stored in boxes that terminate in .aiff or .mp3. Photos in boxes that terminate in .tiff or ,jpeg. The box is attuned to the specific requirements of the data it contains. It's a really key distinction. So, write your novel. It's a collection of words in a very specific order. It's stored in a .doc file. But the file is the storage mechanism. It's not your novel. This distinction gets even more important when you consider image files. .tiff is an image format. It's a box designed for visual media.

Jpeg is not an image format.

Huh? But my camera shoots jpegs, right? Well, no it doesn't. It shoots Raw sensor data that is interpreted by the camera into a photograph. This photograph is then compressed (to save space) and the compression format is Jpeg. Jpeg is a compression format. Think zip but for images.

When you view a Jpeg file the image is decompressed so you can see it. So, really, a Jpeg is a tiff image (or similar) compressed. So, once you got this distinction between file and image, then it's easy to see what iPhoto does. When you export, it takes the image from within the existing jpeg, and puts it into a new Jpeg. Same image, New file.

Now because it's a new file you can change some characteristics - for instance the amount of compression used. (This is the Jpeg Quality setting) So a high quality jpeg uses less compression than a low quality one. But because it's a new file it can even export a maximum quality - which uses less compression than your camera did - hence a larger file size than your camera.

Why is this important? Because jpeg is a so-called lossy format. Everytime you edit and then save a jpeg it chucks away some data. The file size gets smaller. Eventually the quality of the image is compromised. Obviously the larger the file size, the longer it takes for that to happen. (Note this only occurs if you edit and save a jpeg, not viewing it.)

Does that make sense?

2. Exporting at the original setting will produce exactly what came from your camera.

3. No.

1 - A file is a holder of a photo - like a person can ride in a car but the car is not the person nor is the person e car - the car attributes have nothing to do with the person's attributes just like the attributes of a file have nothing do with the attributes of the photo in the file

2 - Exporting the original gives you exactly what you imported from the Camera - no changes of any sort

3 - no - iPhoto makes no changes to the photo unless you do

However IMHO you are going at this wrong as your organization system is time consuming and very inflexible

and you can not export the original and keep the keywords as they are not part of the original - if you want to export the photo as you have modified it in iPhoto then you do not export the unmodified one (the original)

And you are worried far too much about image quality - the loss from a single regeneration is too tiny to worry about (or even notice) and since iPhoto uses non-destructive editing your exported photo is always one (and only one) step removed form the original - no need to concern yourself with this

LN

Terrence and LarryHN,

Thank you so much for your detailed response.

I remember reading years ago while working in PhotoShop [on a PC] that each time I saved the project I lost something. I saved constantly so that if the computer crashed or the app crashed I'd have the latest and greatest.

Then, I started saving with a new file name. Don't think that was a good idea.

But, then again, I couldn't see the difference anyway.

So, going with LarrryHN's response, I am OK adding keywords when I download form the camera then do the export to the EHD. That's the best time to add keywords, anyway, while the event is fresh in my mind.

But, playing catch-up will be a bear.

Thanks again for taking the time to explain all of this.

LarryHN,

I am not sure about what you mean about organizing my files. Is it exporting them to the EHD for backup other than TimeMachine or how I organize the folders? I cannot see how I could organize my images in iPhoto as I have them on the EHD drilling down from folder to subfolder, etc.

I'm open to any suggestions.

Terrence,

About the file size and image quality.

I tested exporting as JPEG to keep the keywords; first as 'Maximum' quality then as the next option 'High'.

What a difference in size! Original was about 6MB; maximum was about 11 MB; and high was almost 4MB.

So, it's the compression that sets the file size. Exporting as maximum quality would produce a better image? Could I even tell the difference viewing in something like Preview? Might have been good for PhotoShop I used on the PC, but am using PixelMator on the Mac.

But, my primary reason to export is to have another copy of every photo on another hard drive outside of iPhoto which gets backed up in TimeMachine.

Oh, does this mean that iPhoto is just a viewer and a cataloger of sorts where I can do minor editing and add keywords? A one-stop-shop for most stuff a non-professional like me would use?

My original concern was getting keywords into the files easily like at the time I download the event. Exporting as maximum will almost double the space I need.

Thanks again

When you export from iPhoto you get a file (that does contain a photo - but is not the photos) so once you export you will be organizing files rather than photos - you state that you want these as a backup - then why would you reorganize them? You can do what you wish but it seems to me that you are making things very complicated unnecessarily and complicated things tend to fail

Yes - compression sets the file size - as to a better image - it does not change the image - the image is what it is - more compression does through away data and if you compress too much you will reduce the amount of data available there for reducing the quality - again the best is to export as a TIFF since that is uncompressed and throws away nothing - it also is extremely large - only you can make the trade off of size verses quality

iPhoto is not a photo viewer - it is a photo manager with some editing capability - and designed as a one stop program for non-professional users - Aperture is the big sister professional photo manager with many more features and capabilities

LN

Exporting as maximum quality would produce a better image? Could I even tell the difference viewing in something like Preview? Might have been good for PhotoShop I used on the PC, but am using PixelMator on the Mac.

No. Exporting at maximum quality gives you a file with more data - .i.e. less compression. So, no and no. It has little to do with the image quality, more to do with the data available for editing.

But, my primary reason to export is to have another copy of every photo on another hard drive outside of iPhoto which gets backed up in TimeMachine.

So decide on what you want to export and do that.

Oh, does this mean that iPhoto is just a viewer and a cataloger of sorts where I can do minor editing and add keywords? A one-stop-shop for most stuff a non-professional like me would use?

It's the word "just" that I don't get. But yes.

My original concern was getting keywords into the files easily like at the time I download the event. Exporting as maximum will almost double the space I need.

Then use High.

If you're worried about subsequent editing - either by Photoshop or Pixelmatr, use it as an External Editor:

You can set Photoshop (or any image editor) as an external editor in iPhoto. (Preferences -> General -> Edit Photo: Choose from the Drop Down Menu.) This way, when you double click a pic to edit in iPhoto it will open automatically in Photoshop or your Image Editor, and when you save it it's sent back to iPhoto automatically. This is the only way that edits made in another application will be displayed in iPhoto.

Well, you see, I started off with the majority of those photos on the PC and brought them over to the Mac. Then I imported to iPhoto.

So, to keep them organized the way they were on the PC, I continued with that scheme. If I ever had to go back to the PC then, I wouldn't have to go through the export process for all of the photos. It's still easier to find photos in Finder, that is why I wanted a way to do keywords....to make it even easier.

Don't use iPhoto. It replaces the Finder for things to do with your photos. Use some other app or learn to use iPhoto. Trying to use both is only making your life pointlessly complicated. Seriously.

So, right now, there is no need for me to export as maximum or tiff unless I wanted to work with a specific image in something like PhotoShop or Aperture. I don't have either. Had PhotoShop on the PC, but did not get into much more than simple layers, etc. I like to do cutouts and add as a layer to another photo. PhotoShop was easier.......ah......larger file - more pixels to work with????? Cleaner job of cutting out what I want to put into another image?

I will set my preferences to edit with Pixelmator - not thrilled with Pixelmator, but......

This will be so much better than the long way around of finding and then opening the image in Pixelmator.

Which brings me to another thing I noticed. If I do a quick edit in iPhoto, the file is saved, but I can undo. That's fine. But, what if I really want to keep the original and the edited version [saved with a different name]? I like to compare changes like - did this crop look better? or did it really look better before enhancing?

I took a quick look at Aperture to see how expensive it is. Relatively cheap....maybe. I expected $100s, but maybe it's not capable of what I thought. I'll look through their documentation again.

Found this "When you want to create an alternate version of a photo, iPhoto duplicates the photo. Aperture stores as many variations as you want in a single image file. That’s big news, because it eats up far less hard drive space than storing duplicate photos. Aperture makes it easy to keep track of all those versions, too, so you can use different ones for different projects."

Thank you so much for all of your help.

I hear you.

Thank you.