RAW + JPG + XMP - RAW changed for adding keywords, rating, labels?

[bekesizl]

Hello,

This is my first post with a question I haven't found answerered with the forum search or freely available documents (without starting the trial).
I am considering a DAM with extended search and filter possibilities and support for stacks, versions to augment Mylio.
Photo Supreme is one candidate. Features, videos and what I have read until now in the forums seems promising.

The question is: when I change the star rating, the color labels of a RAW file (in my case Canon CR3) or add a keyword in Photo Supreme, are the changes stored only in the XMP sidecar or also in the RAW file?
If also in the RAW file, is there a possibility to configure it to change only the XMP sidecar and is this version officially supported?
If only XMP, is it planned to stay this way long term?

I don't mind changing JPG or TIFF files, but my RAW converter (DxO Photolab) can be really picky for changes in the original RAW files and I want to avoid conflicts in the future.

Regards,
Zoltán

[Hert]

First of all a warm welcome to the forum.

The question is: when I change the star rating, the color labels of a RAW file (in my case Canon CR3) or add a keyword in Photo Supreme, are the changes stored only in the XMP sidecar or also in the RAW file?

By default, Photo Supreme follows the metadata standards. For RAW files, the XMP is written as a sidecar (apart from DNG because DNG uses embedded XMP by definition).

[Sigi]

Hello Zoltan,
I also use DXO for more than 10 years now and I have always written metadata in the original raw files (Canon and NIkon) and never into xmp sidecars. In all the years I have never had a problem with DXO not recognising the file. I am aware that DXO says they want to have "virgin" raw files but it was never an issue.

Regards

Sigi

[fbungarz]

When I started with IDI some 10+ years ago, I originally had it configured to writhe to original RAW (Nef) and it ruined those. Granted that is a looooong time ago, but I would still caution against writing XMP to original raw files.
Probably unrelated:
When I started with DxO Optic Pro 10, some of my DNGs were not rendered correctly, a very bizarre color cast. They gave me a free upgrade to 11, admitting that version 10 wasn't reading the files correctly. So, yes, in my experience DxO can be picky...

[bekesizl]

Thank you for the replies.

It is good to hear, that it is the standard behaviour for RAW files. Fortunately I don't have many DNGs.

I hear everywhere that writing metadata to the RAW files from Canon and Nikon is not problematic. It is good for all to have such luck.
My first experience in this direction was a disaster, where the already edited CR3s got corrupted for DxO Photolab. I restored them from my backup, so no real harm was done.
This took me in the direction to explicitly look for software not wanting to alter the RAW files.

It might be also a bug on the DxO side, but DxO is not very quick to analyze the problem. (DPP, Lightroom and Faststone Image Viewer were able to read the file)
What would be the workaround for such cases when using the "change the raw" process?
Do not write metadata to those edited files until some software vendor repairs the bug? How long, weeks, months?
I would rather "be better safe, then sorry" (and choose a DAM using only XMP sidecar for RAW files).

[fbungarz]

It might be also a bug on the DxO side, but DxO is not very quick to analyze the problem. (DPP, Lightroom and Faststone Image Viewer were able to read the file)
What would be the workaround for such cases when using the "change the raw" process?
Do not write metadata to those edited files until some software vendor repairs the bug? How long, weeks, months?
I would rather "be better safe, then sorry" (and choose a DAM using only XMP sidecar for RAW files).

You can enable PSu to write to native RAW, but by default it does not. So there you are safe.
DxO is another matter. I find it a nuisance that PhotoLab now has a Catalog. Used to be one reason for me to prefer DxO instead of Lightroom. But it seems in order to compete everyone these days has to do everything, cataloging and image adjustment. I'd rather have a great cataloging software like PSu and combine it with a good raw editor. I still mostly find myself editing in Photoshop or Affinity, but like DxO for bulk adjustments.

If they embed into raw, I would suggest simply not using their catalog and do all cataloging exclusively in PSu. Sounds like safer approach than risking messing up your files and then wait for the DxO folks to fix their mess. In my case I had to wait more than six months before DxO 11 fixed the DNG color mess from DxO 10...

[Sigi]

Hello fbungarz,
Phtolab does not create a catalog and never had. It just reads whats in the folder.

[Mke]

DxO is another matter. I find it a nuisance that PhotoLab now has a Catalog.

I love DxO as an editor, but certainly don't use it for anything else. It's set to write to sidecars and I delete it's unnecessary database every few months.

PSU, on the other hand, is set to write direct to the image files wherever possible. From a historical perspective I'm very slowly digitizing the 'family archive' that dates back to the 19th century. Many of the photos having passed through several generations, some with and some without 'metadata' hand written on the back; you can guess which is most useful. If my own images survive that long, I'd be more confident that the metadata would still be in the images than that my PSU sidecards would still be with them.

[Mke]

Phtolab does not create a catalog and never had. It just reads whats in the folder.

DxO PhotoLab's database is, by default, at %UserProfile%\AppData\Roaming\DxO\DxO PhotoLab 2\Database
(presumably replace 2 by 3 for the latest version - I've not upgraded).

[Sigi]

Hello Mike,

there is a difference between a catalogue and a database. The DXO database does not catolog your files. DXO stores the corrections you make in the database and if you choose so in sidecar files.