Lightroom: Ability to see EXIF data

  • 8
  • Idea
  • Updated 7 months ago
  • (Edited)
I would like to be able to see more, and probably all, of the EXIF data store by my camera.

There are many reasons for this; I am sure each person can supply their own!
Photo of Photographe

Photographe

  • 243 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
  • frustrated

Posted 7 years ago

  • 8
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 777 Reply Likes
What data are you looking for and not seeing?

Photoshop should already show you all the data it knows how to read.
Photo of Photographe

Photographe

  • 243 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
Chris, it's great to see someone from Adobe respond so quickly.

There is a LOT of information in EXIF that is not displayed by either LR or Bridge. I have another request about one specific piece of Nikon information: the focus point. Also, all of the items that you can choose in a camera's "shooting menu" are typically stored in EXIF, but only a few are displayed in LR/Bridge.

Btw, LR and Bridge do not display the same info. Some things are displayed in one, but not the other, I believe.
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 777 Reply Likes
Again, we need specifics. Some data is not readable because it is in the manufacturer's proprietary "maker note" and we can't decipher their meanings. If it's in a documented EXIF field, then we should already be showing it.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 376 Reply Likes
All the info in maker notes is plain text in standard tif blocks, at least for most mfr models. In the case of Nikon, its even clearly documented, I dunno bout the others. I would think Adobe could just fish it out and display it "undeciphered". The users know how to interpret it. The only deciphering needed, IMO, is to unescape the few fields that have some uuencoding (e.g. GPS). I mean if ExifTool & ACDSee can do it, Adobe can too, no?

PS - Apple is harvesting focus points from maker notes to display in Aperture for various models.

Surely Adobe can figure this out...
Photo of Babar_e

Babar_e

  • 138 Posts
  • 23 Reply Likes
I would love to have Maker notes exiftool can as you said Rob, so I would expect lightroom could as well. As for other EXIF field I can give examples:
GPS: I cannot see the bearing, ....
EXIF comments are not there
microsoft XMP to tag faces is not there
,...
even if it is not a full featured DAM if lightroom could at least display all the available metadata so that it can be searchable, then it would be great.
Also it would be great to be able to edit most of them such as the time ,...

Anyway thank's for listening
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 376 Reply Likes
I think Adobe could implement native support for Exif metadata that is all inclusive - even if its manufacturer proprietary..., as exiftool can do now.

In the mean time, I just made a change to ExifMeta to include *all* of a photo's Exif data in Lightroom as a big block of text in right-hand library panel for viewing (not usable in lib filters nor smart collections). There is also the long-standing capability to select *any* individual fields that *can* be used in lib filters and smart collections.

Whatever exiftool supports, Lightroom supports too via ExifMeta.

PS - ACDSee supports all exif metadata too - deciphered, formatted, in database for searching & sorting... (including maker notes)
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 772 Reply Likes
Again, we need specifics. Maker notes are proprietary, and almost entirely undocumented - that makes them kind of difficult to support correctly. We can try, but we may not succeed where the manufacturer is going out of their way to make the data inaccessible.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 376 Reply Likes
Chris, I really don't know much about it. I just blindly used ExifTool output to populate metadata fields without interpretation. ACDSee supports everything, but I don't know how they did it, or whether they do it for all mfr models... Maybe somebody else can provide the specific information you need.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 376 Reply Likes
Quote: "Maker notes are proprietary, and almost entirely undocumented - that makes them kind of difficult to support correctly. We can try, but we may not succeed where the manufacturer is going out of their way to make the data inaccessible."

- I think in the cases where the manufacturer is truly going out of their way to make the data inaccessible, then forget it - but in the case of Nikon, its plain text data in standard tif metadata format - dunno 'bout the others...
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 376 Reply Likes
Once again I'm in a quandry:

I think this is a really good idea. So good that I wrote a plugin which does exactly what you are asking for, and although its not as seamless as native, its good enough for me, for now.

So do I vote for this request?

I feel sorry for people who can't tap all the exif metadata in Lightroom, because they aren't willing to put up with ExifMeta's "seams", or they don't know about it, or they don't trust plugins, or are embarrassed to admit they are intimidated by them..., but I don't have any missing metadata whatsoever in my copy of Lightroom.
Photo of Mark Sirota

Mark Sirota

  • 146 Posts
  • 29 Reply Likes
Photo of Photographe

Photographe

  • 243 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
LR doesn't test or support plugins, so they are not an answer to every problem.

In my view, plugins are a viable alternative if they are either (i) a temporary solution pluging-up a hole in one version of LR that is to be addressed in the next version or (ii) or so unique or creative or go beyond the core functions of LR or cater to a specific isolated use, that Adobe couldn't be expected to replicate them, provided that Adobe does something to boost confidence in plugins.

Consider that LR has free access to the system and now to a user's online accounts as well. I can't just haphazardly add 40 plugins (which still wouldn't plug-up all of the holes, some of which have been known since LR 1) to my system. There needs to be some transparency, control and testing of plugins before I jump in, and then I will pick only a handful of really useful things.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 372 Reply Likes
Adobe doesn't provide technical support for 3rd party plugins, of course, but they do support them by way of investing a substantial part of Lr development resources so they can be written by 3rd parties and used by the Lr user-base... Maybe an Exif viewer should be your foray into plugins...

In any case, judging from Adobe's response, I don't think you can count on complete Exif metadata support in Lr4. Given that, you may want to make a prioritized list of which items are most important, since they are more likely to add them for you, if they know which ones you want most.
Photo of Photographe

Photographe

  • 243 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
I meant to say "Adobe doesn't test or support plugins..." but I can't change it.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 372 Reply Likes
All plugins on the exchange are tested by Adobe QE.

PS - that includes ExifMeta and Jeffrey's...

Not pushing - just correcting...
Photo of Kilian Wasmer

Kilian Wasmer

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Unfortunately not all EXIF-fields are available in the library. (Only via plug ins such as Jeffrey’s “Metadata-Viewer Preset Editor”)

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Lightroom: More EXIF-fields.
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 483 Posts
  • 81 Reply Likes
There’s quite a lot of metadata in a document that Photoshop can show (File info) that isn’t visible in LR which would be nice. There’s all kinds of useful data found in File Info>Advanced that isn’t visible in LR. The Adobe Photoshop Properties for examples provides the embedded ICC profile that would be useful to see somewhere in LR (and to use with a Smart Collection).
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 376 Reply Likes
+1 vote for embedded ICC profile
Photo of Robert

Robert

  • 10 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Hello,

I would also like to have additional Olympus Exifs visible in Lightroom. The info drive is very interesting to determine whether the image is part of a hdr or bracketing.



Best wishes Robert
Photo of Robert

Robert

  • 10 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Is there any information available whether Adobe plans to add this feature, especially the extended exifs for Olympus cameras, into the next Lightroom release ? Up to now, it has not been added, although there were several updates in between.

BR Robert
Photo of Robert

Robert

  • 10 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
In the latest version of Lightroom Classic this feature is not available. Is it that difficult to add this to the exif menu ? 
Photo of Alan Harper

Alan Harper

  • 409 Posts
  • 78 Reply Likes
Hi Robert.

It is clear that Adobe is not going to satisfy your request, so you might want to think about how to get what you want.

I need to access the "macromagnification" data, which is a proprietary field put in raw files by Canon.

I first move that data to a field that is easily accessed—in my case the "event" metadata, which I don't otherwise use—with exiftool:
$ exiftool -overwrite_original_in_place -tagsFromFile %f.CR2 "-event<Macromagnification" *.xmp
Then I use Jeffrey's Data Explorer plugin to create collections for each value of the event field, and I assign a unique keyword to the files in each of these collections. It is sort of a PITA, but it works.

You can run the exiftool command from the command line, or you can get John Beardsworth's Capture Time to EXIF plugin to run the command from within Lightroom.

As they say, "It is better to light a candle..."

A
Photo of Arnold Bartel

Arnold Bartel

  • 164 Posts
  • 38 Reply Likes
I use Rob Cole‘s ExifMeta plug-in. Although it‘s several years old it still works great.