Is there a way to import XMP data into original RAW files?

I am one of those that used Aperture for years thrn were forced to migrate out of it.

I used a tool called Aperture Exporter to export my RAW files out of Aperture into something moreumivrrally readable.

Well, it exported RAW+XMP files for each file. Now I'd like to consolidate those files info and only have one file, the RAW file, no more XMP files.

I'm trying FastStone Image viewer and a few other viewers. Another thing is that I want to avoid data-base driven apps from now on. I've been burned. Another reason why I want my data to be in the RAW files themselves.

Is there an app that will importantly the XMP data to corresponding RAW files based on namkng, etc.?

Thanks.

No, what you are asking to do is not possible or merging is at least not advisable. Except in terms of importing the files into another database, such as Lightroom, PhotoSupreme, ACDSee, Damion, etc.. These programs will store both for you & in their own format & or separately. While some or all of these programs can FORCE the XMP to be written into the RAW file as you ask, IT IS NOT ADVISABLE, as then the "new" created RAW file is or may not be read by other programs at all, never mind just the XMP info. The new "edited" RAW file is no longer the original RAW file & so it's no longer a "RAW" file as the original camera RAW file was.

Certain non-raw XMP info is supposed to be outside of the RAW file as a separate file.As well, if you do force the RAW file to change / add XMP info from another program, then other programs are or may not be able to read the "new" RAW file.

The ONLY way you can do the combination merge is to convert the RAW file + XMP files in to the DNG format, which does contain both & was designed to contain both. Both must be in the same folder during the conversion process. However, if you do some research, there are pros & cons to the DNG format & also with some DAM programs.

One can use both, convert to DNG for certain workflows or software & keep the RAW Files + XMP as back up or do the opposite.

I'd advise that you ALWAYS keep the XMP info files, as they are tiny anyway. Lose the Aperture XMP at your peril if you value that XMP data. If you don't value it, then just delete them.

Or perhaps I'm completely wrong & someone can give you better advice or explanation.

My main reasoning for this one file issue is to be able to simply back up to services like Amazon Drive and view files on any device without extra xmp info being outside the photo itself...

enzofsilva said:

My main reasoning for this one file issue is to be able to simply back up to services like Amazon Drive and view files on any device without extra xmp info being outside the photo itself...

Click to expand...

Then as mentioned, DNG is for you (and there are other advantages):


https://www.cnet.com/news/adobe-offering-new-reasons-to-get-dng-religion/

http://thedambook.com/dng-verification-in-lightroom-5/

exiftool -tagsFromFile SRC_XMP_FILE DEST_FILE

Wildcards are accepted. Try on a file copy first.

Documentation: http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/exiftool_pod.htm

Modifying the proprietary RAW files is rarely a good idea. Why not use your DAM to import the XMP metadata? I use FotoStation Pro and you can easily import XMP metadata and also create a custom XMP schema to access the entire metadata set including any metadata that is not in the standard XMP and IPTC fields.

A-Frame said:

Modifying the proprietary RAW files is rarely a good idea.

Click to expand...

You've probably heard of Photo Mechanic. What do you think they are doing with ratings and labels? They embed into XMP block of a raw file.

Xasan said:

A-Frame said:

Modifying the proprietary RAW files is rarely a good idea.

Click to expand...

You've probably heard of Photo Mechanic. What do you think they are doing with ratings and labels? They embed into XMP block of a raw file.

Click to expand...

Still not a great idea and few producer treat raws as anything but Read Only.

digidog said:

Xasan said:

A-Frame said:

Modifying the proprietary RAW files is rarely a good idea.

Click to expand...

You've probably heard of Photo Mechanic. What do you think they are doing with ratings and labels? They embed into XMP block of a raw file.

Click to expand...

Still not a great idea and few producer treat raws as anything but Read Only.

Click to expand...

See, we three do not agree on everything!

Canon DPP writes back. To write to original raws or to make a backup first is user's choice. OP is thinking of modifying copies. Most of the damaged raw files come from the camera anyway.

Xasan said:

digidog said:

Xasan said:

A-Frame said:

Modifying the proprietary RAW files is rarely a good idea.

Click to expand...

You've probably heard of Photo Mechanic. What do you think they are doing with ratings and labels? They embed into XMP block of a raw file.

Click to expand...

Still not a great idea and few producer treat raws as anything but Read Only.

Click to expand...

See, we three do not agree on everything!

Canon DPP writes back.

Click to expand...

To their own file format; safer. Now maybe it’s FUD but should 3rd party software write back to every raw file it ‘supports’ and can it do so correctly and safely?

Xasan said:

To write to original raws or to make a backup first is user's choice. OP is thinking of modifying copies. Most of the damaged raw files come from the camera anyway.

Click to expand...

Or potential damage (and perhaps some legal issues) in writing back to the raw.

Was it (and there are many variations) created for this?


Sidecar files, also known as buddy files or connected files, are computer files that store data (often metadata) which is not supported by the format of a source file.

The part about supported is a question to ponder.

FWIW, I’m not a fan of sidecar files.

digidog said:

Xasan said:

digidog said:

Xasan said:

A-Frame said:

Modifying the proprietary RAW files is rarely a good idea.

Click to expand...

You've probably heard of Photo Mechanic. What do you think they are doing with ratings and labels? They embed into XMP block of a raw file.

Click to expand...

Still not a great idea and few producer treat raws as anything but Read Only.

Click to expand...

See, we three do not agree on everything!

Canon DPP writes back.

Click to expand...

To their own file format; safer.

Click to expand...

For better safety, they append, to the end. Something goes wrong, data is intact. Nikon was writing into the middle, less safe.

Member said:

Now maybe it’s FUD but should 3rd party software write back to every raw file it ‘supports’ and can it do so correctly and safely?

Click to expand...

One needs to realize that raw files may contain format errors and EXIF structure violations right out of camera. That is not just because of firmware bugs, but also by design.

XMP block is a slightly different matter, writing XMP is very safe, also by design. That's why AP staffers feel safe using Photo Mechanic for a number of years.

Member said:

Member said:

To write to original raws or to make a backup first is user's choice. OP is thinking of modifying copies. Most of the damaged raw files come from the camera anyway.

Click to expand...

Or potential damage (and perhaps some legal issues) in writing back to the raw.

Was it (and there are many variations) created for this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidecar_file

Sidecar files, also known as buddy files or connected files, are computer files that store data (often metadata) which is not supported by the format of a source file.

The part about supported is a question to ponder.

Click to expand...

Raw and jpg definitely support XMP blocks.

Member said:

FWIW, I’m not a fan of sidecar files.

Click to expand...

Neither am I. My line is that encapsulating XMP blocks into raw file copies is safe and useful.

Xasan said:

digidog said:

Xasan said:

digidog said:

Xasan said:

A-Frame said:

Modifying the proprietary RAW files is rarely a good idea.

Click to expand...

You've probably heard of Photo Mechanic. What do you think they are doing with ratings and labels? They embed into XMP block of a raw file.

Click to expand...

Still not a great idea and few producer treat raws as anything but Read Only.

Click to expand...

See, we three do not agree on everything!

Canon DPP writes back.

Click to expand...

To their own file format; safer.

Click to expand...

For better safety, they append, to the end. Something goes wrong, data is intact. Nikon was writing into the middle, less safe.

Xasan said:

Now maybe it’s FUD but should 3rd party software write back to every raw file it ‘supports’ and can it do so correctly and safely?

Click to expand...

One needs to realize that raw files may contain format errors and EXIF structure violations right out of camera. That is not just because of firmware bugs, but also by design.

XMP block is a slightly different matter, writing XMP is very safe, also by design. That's why AP staffers feel safe using Photo Mechanic for a number of years.

Xasan said:

Xasan said:

To write to original raws or to make a backup first is user's choice. OP is thinking of modifying copies. Most of the damaged raw files come from the camera anyway.

Click to expand...

Or potential damage (and perhaps some legal issues) in writing back to the raw.

Was it (and there are many variations) created for this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidecar_file

Sidecar files, also known as buddy files or connected files, are computer files that store data (often metadata) which is not supported by the format of a source file.

The part about supported is a question to ponder.

Click to expand...

Raw and jpg definitely support XMP blocks.

Xasan said:

FWIW, I’m not a fan of sidecar files.

Click to expand...

Neither am I. My line is that encapsulating XMP blocks into raw file copies is safe and useful.

Click to expand...

Yes writing XMP block is often safe with reliable apps that follow the XMP specs. I did run into issues writing metadata to Nikon RAW files using Nikon software. The RAW files became incompatible with Adobe apps and other RAW file developers. Test and test some more before you trust any software with your files.

enzofsilva said:

I am one of those that used Aperture for years thrn were forced to migrate out of it.

I used a tool called Aperture Exporter to export my RAW files out of Aperture into something moreumivrrally readable.

Well, it exported RAW+XMP files for each file. Now I'd like to consolidate those files info and only have one file, the RAW file, no more XMP files.

I'm trying FastStone Image viewer and a few other viewers. Another thing is that I want to avoid data-base driven apps from now on. I've been burned. Another reason why I want my data to be in the RAW files themselves.

Is there an app that will importantly the XMP data to corresponding RAW files based on namkng, etc.?

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Have you checked if there's XMP metadata also embedded in the files? Some apps create XMP sidecars in addition to embedding the metadata for interoperability.

Xasan said:

digidog said:

Xasan said:

digidog said:

Xasan said:

A-Frame said:

Modifying the proprietary RAW files is rarely a good idea.

Click to expand...

You've probably heard of Photo Mechanic. What do you think they are doing with ratings and labels? They embed into XMP block of a raw file.

Click to expand...

Still not a great idea and few producer treat raws as anything but Read Only.

Click to expand...

See, we three do not agree on everything!

Canon DPP writes back.

Click to expand...

To their own file format; safer.

Click to expand...

For better safety, they append, to the end. Something goes wrong, data is intact. Nikon was writing into the middle, less safe.

Xasan said:

Now maybe it’s FUD but should 3rd party software write back to every raw file it ‘supports’ and can it do so correctly and safely?

Click to expand...

One needs to realize that raw files may contain format errors and EXIF structure violations right out of camera. That is not just because of firmware bugs, but also by design.

XMP block is a slightly different matter, writing XMP is very safe, also by design. That's why AP staffers feel safe using Photo Mechanic for a number of years.

Click to expand...

Good to know, thanks.

Xasan said:

Xasan said:

Xasan said:

To write to original raws or to make a backup first is user's choice. OP is thinking of modifying copies. Most of the damaged raw files come from the camera anyway.

Click to expand...

Or potential damage (and perhaps some legal issues) in writing back to the raw.

Was it (and there are many variations) created for this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidecar_file

Sidecar files, also known as buddy files or connected files, are computer files that store data (often metadata) which is not supported by the format of a source file.

The part about supported is a question to ponder.

Click to expand...

Raw and jpg definitely support XMP blocks.

Xasan said:

FWIW, I’m not a fan of sidecar files.

Click to expand...

Neither am I. My line is that encapsulating XMP blocks into raw file copies is safe and useful.

Click to expand...

I have no software in my workflow that does this (well LR will update write date/time changes if so set which itself is odd as the only option).




EXIF: write date or time changes into proprietary raws.

--
Andrew Rodney
Author: Color Management for Photographers
The Digital Dog
http://www.digitaldog.net

I don't currently have a DAM and am considering us g just the files themselves, folders on Windows Explorer, and an image viewer+RAW editor combo to manage files from now on. Apple Aperture burned me...

Also would simplify backups to cloud services like the unlimited Amazon Cloud Drive if I don't have to upload database files, only actual image files. I can simply program a backup application to sync contents of the Pictures folder automatically to a mounted Amazon Cloud Drive.

I hear Photo Mechanic being lauded here... Is that the only program out there that will write XMP data into RAS files? And can it consolidate, that is, import XMP data odierna corresponding sidecar files into their RWA file?

I basically warm no DAM, ratings etc. All in the images themselves.

Thanks.

enzofsilva said:

I hear Photo Mechanic being lauded here... Is that the only program out there that will write XMP data into RAS files? And can it consolidate, that is, import XMP data odierna corresponding sidecar files into their RWA file?

I basically warm no DAM, ratings etc. All in the images themselves.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

FotoStation writes the XMP metadata in the RAW files but also creates sidecars. I think this is to maintain full compatibility with all file types, other DAMs and imaging applications.

enzofsilva said:

I hear Photo Mechanic being lauded here... Is that the only program out there that will write XMP data into RAS files? And can it consolidate, that is, import XMP data odierna corresponding sidecar files into their RWA file?

I basically warm no DAM, ratings etc. All in the images themselves.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Why feel burned by Aperture? It still works doesn't it? It just isn't going to be updated. I use several old softwares that work fine without updates.

Problems are that some parts of Raw files are locked or proprietary & if you do write into them then you could be REALLY burned down the road with possibly corrupted raw files. At least Aperture didn't corrupt your files did it?

Using good DAM software NEVER changes the RAW data, so that the RAW file will never have a chance to be corrupted & one could change software & info.

Seems like you are trying to create a problem that doesn't really exist and then reinventing the wheel without the knowledge of the engineering. Good DAM software shouldn't break anything but you might. FWIW, backing up changed XMP files takes seconds, backing up changed RAW files could take minutes, hours, days.

Maybe check thedambook.com & it's user forum, as well as the PhotoSupreme User Forum where experts have discussed why your idea has not been really workable in the long run (or at all).

Cariboo said:

enzofsilva said:

I hear Photo Mechanic being lauded here... Is that the only program out there that will write XMP data into RAS files? And can it consolidate, that is, import XMP data odierna corresponding sidecar files into their RWA file?

I basically warm no DAM, ratings etc. All in the images themselves.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Why feel burned by Aperture? It still works doesn't it?

Click to expand...

It doesn’t for me; I can’t print books from it any longer. The one reason I used it; superb output from Apple.

Apple doesn't support it anymore. It's a letter of time till nothing works. Planned obsolescence.

My thought on simplification: no catalog files, pure file backups to a simple mounted cloud drive line Amazon Cloud Drive of image folder only. Not a mess of a DAM catalog and database...