# Caption / Description Metadata Fields



## Kevin Sholder (Feb 2, 2020)

I think that I've discovered what I consider a problem with these fields metadata fields within Lightroom / Photoshop.  Let me preface this is the way I have my Lightroom options configured as below:






I've thought in the past the the "Automatically write changes into XMP within Lightroom "really does" write all changes into XMP fields.

I've recently found that this isn't always the case and am looking for someone else to validate this.  The problem, when the "Caption" field has data in it all is fine.  When the same image is opened within Photoshop the same data is present in the "Description" field.  As shown below:

Lightroom Data





Photoshop Data





If I then delete the data from the "Caption" field within Lightroom, it is supposed to write that change to the file based on my understanding of the options above:





However when opening in Photoshop, the data is still there.





I can open this within Photoshop either inside of Lightroom or outside of Lightroom with the same results.  There has been no development done on this image as it is purely an image that was exported from the master.









No comes the interesting part.  If I CHANGE the data in the "Caption" field within Lightroom as such:





It shows the same data within Photoshop:





From what I've seen, if I totally remove the data from the "Caption" field within Lightroom, it DOES NOT remove the same data from the file, only from the display within Lightroom, because when the file is opened, the original data is still there.  But when the data is CHANGED, it DOES update the data correctly in the "Description" field that is seen by Photoshop and other external applications that read XMP data.

Please let me know your thoughts and if someone is also able to replicate this issue.

Thanks and sorry for the long post,
Kevin


----------



## Paul_DS256 (Feb 2, 2020)

Not to add to the craziness of metadata fields, but have you manually looked at what are in the image fields themselves? Forget about the XMP.


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Feb 2, 2020)

Paul_DS256 said:


> Not to add to the craziness of metadata fields, but have you manually looked at what are in the image fields themselves? Forget about the XMP.


That is what he is doing already. You cannot open an XMP file in Photoshop, and if you send a raw file to Photoshop you do not get the 'Edit Original' choice.


----------



## Paul_DS256 (Feb 2, 2020)

I had to continue this as an additional reply for some reason.

 I ask because when you move the image from LR to PS it may be taking the content of the XMP and writing it to the image file pasted and that's where it will stay and be shown in PS. When you come back from PS to LR it will not automatically move back to the XMP I suspect unless you sync. 

To see all the metadata in a file (not what MAC or Windows shows) using a utility like EXIFTOOL. Attached is an example of running "exiftool -a 20170210_085729.ORF > all_tags.txt" on Windows 10.

The titles of fields shown are not always that of the tag name of the various metadata schemas (EXIF, IPTC, Camera Manufacturer etc).


----------



## Kevin Sholder (Feb 2, 2020)

Paul_DS256 said:


> Not to add to the craziness of metadata fields, but have you manually looked at what are in the image fields themselves? Forget about the XMP.



Paul, as far as using an external tool such as you show in the example of EXIFTOOL, that answer would be no.  If you right-click on the file in Windows and go to Properties -> Details tab it also shows the "Description" / "Caption" field, only it's shown as "Subject."





So yes, the data only changes when it is either *deleted* in Photoshop or *changed* in Lightroom.  If it is deleted within Lightroom it shows being removed.

Lightroom removed:





File Properties removed:





Photoshop, shows it still present even after exiting Lightroom so all changes should have been completed to the file prior to exit as shown above by the actual file properties.





But Photoshop still has it there.  That is rather odd isn't it.

Kevin


----------



## Kevin Sholder (Feb 2, 2020)

Paul,

It looks like the EXIFTOOL also shows that the data is still present in the  field:





Even though the field was "cleared" within Lightroom, it did not totally clear it.

I wonder how many other fields that have been "cleared" actually still have data in them.  That's scary.

In any case, I would have expected that Lightroom and Photoshop to be in the same playing field together, but apparently not.  At least from what I am seeing.

Within Lightroom, you have to *change* the data in that field, not simply delete it.  If it is only deleted, it is still there, just not within Lightroom, but other application see it.

Thanks,
Kevin


----------



## Paul_DS256 (Feb 2, 2020)

Kevin. What is the file type you are passing back and forth between LR and PS?


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Feb 3, 2020)

A long shot, but what happens if you write the metadata to the file manually (Ctrl-S) as opposed to automatically write?


----------



## Kevin Sholder (Feb 3, 2020)

Paul_DS256 said:


> Kevin. What is the file type you are passing back and forth between LR and PS?


JPG


----------



## Kevin Sholder (Feb 3, 2020)

Victoria Bampton said:


> A long shot, but what happens if you write the metadata to the file manually (Ctrl-S) as opposed to automatically write?


Victoria, I'm sorry, I don't follow.  I'm trying to remove the data from the "Caption" field so that there is nothing there, blank or empty field.  It shows empty or blank in Lightroom, but if you open the file and look at the file info within Photoshop, the data is still there.

Thanks,
Kevin


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Feb 3, 2020)

Yep. What I'm wondering is whether the removal isn't triggering the automatically write to xmp (to remove it) but whether a forced save might.


----------



## Paul_DS256 (Feb 3, 2020)

Kevin Sholder said:


> JPG


That's what I thought Kevin. I couldn't replicate your steps with a RAW file. The choice for what do to with the image in PS from LR did not appear for me. When I checked, you don't get that choice with RAW. See this article.

If you check out this article you will see 

"To avoid file corruption, XMP metadata is stored in a separate file called a sidecar file. For all other file formats supported by Lightroom Classic (JPEG, TIFF, PSD, and DNG), XMP metadata is written into the files in the location specified for that data. "​​So, you are not writing to the XMP when you set/clear caption. The changes are written directly to the JPG.

So, first recommendation is to to start using RAW files for your processing.


----------



## Kevin Sholder (Feb 3, 2020)

Paul_DS256 said:


> So, first recommendation is to to start using RAW files for your processing.



Paul, in this case the files are of an over-sized document that was scanned as multiple TIF files and then combined with Photoshop into a single file.  Then imported into Lightroom and metadata added after import into Lightroom.  After the metadata is added, I would export them as JPGs and make some changes to the metadata.  Which is where I wanted to "blank" a field and in Lightroom, it looks likes it was done, but when looking at the file info with Photoshop, the data is still there.  Which is the rub.  Off to try the (Ctrl-S ) to see if that changes anything.

Thanks,
Kevin


----------



## Kevin Sholder (Feb 3, 2020)

Victoria Bampton said:


> A long shot, but what happens if you write the metadata to the file manually (Ctrl-S) as opposed to automatically write?



Victoria,

I removed the data from the "Caption" field within Lightroom and did the (Ctrl-S) and saw the dialog at the top of Lightroom saving the file.  This is what Lightroom shows:





And this is what Photoshop shows, data still present:





So next I thought, OK, why not "Read" the metadata from the file and see if it pops back into the Caption Field.





This did not change the data shown in Lightroom.  So I thought OK, I'll do the "Save" the metadata, again no change.  The metadata is still there in Photoshop, but not showing in Lightroom.

Thanks,
Kevin


----------



## Paul_DS256 (Feb 3, 2020)

Kevin Sholder said:


> Then imported into Lightroom


Kevin, what are you doing in LR after photoshop. Sounds like it may be simpler to just stay in PS.


----------



## Kevin Sholder (Feb 3, 2020)

Paul_DS256 said:


> Kevin, what are you doing in LR after photoshop. Sounds like it may be simpler to just stay in PS.


Once the images are exported as JPGs, they are copied out and used by a third party program to create my genealogy site.  This application reads data directly from the EXIF / IPTC data.  Then I remove / delete the JPG files from Lightroom as I only need the master TIF files since the JPGs reside in a non-Lightroom folder somewhere else on my hard drive.  Paul, if you're interested:  SCHOLDERER Surname Study; Home

That however is not the issue.  The issue is simply that the fields don't update within Photoshop as they should from Lightroom, the data remains in the file that Photoshop can read, but Lightroom says that the field is blank.  Each application should respect the change, when in fact only Lightoom is respecting the change and Photoshop still sees the data as being there.  I've exported the files in question multiple times as well with different export options to JPG and metadata trying to get each application to see the same thing and they are not.

Thanks,
Kevin


----------



## Gnits (Feb 3, 2020)

Efficient use of Title and Caption fields is a topic very close to my heart and critical for my efficient workflow.   I will relate the story below, just in case it has any relevance to this scenario.

In earlier versions of Lightroom I reported bugs associated with the handling of metadata on images exported.  I found I could not completely trust the metadata such as Title and Caption after I had exported from say a raw to a jpg.  Everything works to my satisfaction if I complete a normal cycle (ie import raw, edit, apply metadata and then export as jpg. At this point in time, all metadata is in sync in all places (ie catalog, xml if exists and within the exported jpg).

Later, I may discover  I need to edit some of the metadata (typo, new info, etc). No problem. Edit the metadata in the raw file  and export the jpg image, overwriting the existing jpg.  In most cases I add exported images to my catalog.  If I check the metadata in the jpg file (say using a third party tool) or if I check the metadata fields in the exported jpg file using Lightroom library view of metadata, I often found that my metadata did not reflect the edits I had just completed. Very, very, very frustrating.

I reported this as a bug and put considerable effort (at the time) into trying to get this bug fixed.

Several people told me at the time that  this was not a bug,  but normal behaviour.  After a while, I gave up trying to convince people (incl Adobe) this was a bug.

My workaround is relatively simple (for my use scenario).  Step 1. Re-Edit metadata in my raw file as required. Step 2. Delete the previously exported jpg daughter from the catalog and the disk. Step 3. Re-export from raw to jpg.  Again, at this stage all my metadata is in synch. (ie Catalog of raw, catalog of exported jpg and metadata inside the jpg.

I suspect that if a return trip to Photoshop is included in the workflow (eg import raw, apply metadata, edit in photoshop, export as jpg) then my problem above becomes even more amplified as the Photoshop file also has to be kept in synch.
Apologies if this story is not relevant, but I hope it might provide a useful insight into this problem. Finally, I have not checked if my bug scenario was ever fixed, as I have stuck with my tried and trusted workflow.  (Admin ... please delete my message directly above..... posted in error).


----------



## Kevin Sholder (Feb 3, 2020)

Gnits, thank you for the additional insight, seems as though metadata has been a struggle in some fashion or other for a long time.  My problem just cropped up because I've finally taken the plunge to manage all of my genealogy exhibits within Lightroom.  Down side is most are scans of documents or pictures.  Not many RAW images of any kind as some of the scan are as old as 1995 scanned at Kinko's with Photoshop v3, so pretty old stuff but still works as they were all scanned as TIF files even back then.  Just not the color space or bit depth, mostly gray-scale.

Thanks again,
Kevin


----------



## Gnits (Feb 4, 2020)

I just did a test using a raw file as main image.
Applied metadata.




Exported as jpg.  Everything ok with exported metadata jpg in file and catalog.

Next I edit the metadata in the original raw image.





After exporting to jpg and overwriting previous.
The metadata inside the jpg is correct ....





But the corresponding metadata for the jpg in the catalog does not reflect the metadata edits.






I was informed this is not a bug.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Feb 4, 2020)

That looks like a bug to me. Where’s the bug thread? Someone may have misunderstood.


----------



## PhilBurton (Feb 4, 2020)

Victoria Bampton said:


> That looks like a bug to me. Where’s the bug thread? Someone may have misunderstood.


Agree.  It's reasonable to expect that metadata, either embedded or in an XMP sidecar, will be the same for all file formats.  That's just common sense.  it's a bug.  If it is not considered to be  a bug, then it's extremely poor design.


----------



## johnrellis (Feb 5, 2020)

Kevin's symptoms are indeed a bug.  See here for the bug report I just filed:
https://feedback.photoshop.com/phot...ghtroom-save-to-file-doesnt-clear-iptc-fields
Industry standards require that Title, Caption, and Copyright be stored in three locations each: EXIF, XMP, and IPTC. When you clear those fields and do Metadata > Save Metadata To File (or Edit In Photoshop), LR is saving the cleared fields to EXIF and XMP but not to IPTC.

Please add your constructive opinion to the bug report, and be sure to click Me Too and Follow in the upper-right corner. That will make it a little more likely Adobe will prioritize a fix, and you'll be notified when the bug's status changes.


----------



## johnrellis (Feb 5, 2020)

Gnits, to test my understanding, here are the steps you're taking:

1. Change the caption of raw photo A.ARW to X.

2. Export A.ARW to A.JPG.

3. Import A.JPG into the catalog.

4. Change the caption of A.ARW to Y.

5. Export A.ARW to A.JPG, overwriting the previous version.

6. Observe in LR that A.JPG still has caption X, not Y.

Is my understanding of the steps correct? If so, this is expected behavior. If you change the metadata in a file that's already imported into LR (e.g. using an external app or by overwriting the file on export), LR won't automatically re-read that metadata into the catalog. You have to explicitly do Metadata > Read Metadata From File to force LR to read it in.


----------



## Kevin Sholder (Feb 5, 2020)

johnrellis said:


> Kevin's symptoms are indeed a bug.  See here for the bug report I just filed:
> https://feedback.photoshop.com/phot...ghtroom-save-to-file-doesnt-clear-iptc-fields



Done, and yes the steps that have been outlined in the case are accurate.  thank you for doing that John!!  I'm glad that someone else was able to verify and submit.

Guess we need to get some more people to do the ME TOO to have it looked at.

Thanks,
Kevin


----------



## Gnits (Feb 5, 2020)

johnrellis said:


> Gnits, to test my understanding, here are the steps you're taking:
> 
> 1. Change the caption of raw photo A.ARW to X.
> 
> ...



Yes ... the steps are correct.
And while Adobe consider this to be the correct handling of that scenario, I believe the thinking is flawed.  So be it.

I have discussed this years ago at great length. I will try to find the threads of that discussion. But I do not want to bore people senseless by repeating the points I made earlier.

I have my own workaround. When I know I need to edit metadata back in the original raw image, so it travels correctly in future for any future kids of this raw image,  I simply delete the original exported jpg(ie remove from catalog and remove from disk). The jpg gets exported with the correct metadata and the catalog entry for the jpg has the correct metadata. This process is now embedded in my dna and I complete this process without thinking. Unfortunately, this does not stop lots of other people from falling into this trap and assuming their metadata has been correctly processed.


----------



## Kevin Sholder (Feb 2, 2020)

I think that I've discovered what I consider a problem with these fields metadata fields within Lightroom / Photoshop.  Let me preface this is the way I have my Lightroom options configured as below:






I've thought in the past the the "Automatically write changes into XMP within Lightroom "really does" write all changes into XMP fields.

I've recently found that this isn't always the case and am looking for someone else to validate this.  The problem, when the "Caption" field has data in it all is fine.  When the same image is opened within Photoshop the same data is present in the "Description" field.  As shown below:

Lightroom Data





Photoshop Data





If I then delete the data from the "Caption" field within Lightroom, it is supposed to write that change to the file based on my understanding of the options above:





However when opening in Photoshop, the data is still there.





I can open this within Photoshop either inside of Lightroom or outside of Lightroom with the same results.  There has been no development done on this image as it is purely an image that was exported from the master.









No comes the interesting part.  If I CHANGE the data in the "Caption" field within Lightroom as such:





It shows the same data within Photoshop:





From what I've seen, if I totally remove the data from the "Caption" field within Lightroom, it DOES NOT remove the same data from the file, only from the display within Lightroom, because when the file is opened, the original data is still there.  But when the data is CHANGED, it DOES update the data correctly in the "Description" field that is seen by Photoshop and other external applications that read XMP data.

Please let me know your thoughts and if someone is also able to replicate this issue.

Thanks and sorry for the long post,
Kevin


----------



## Paul_DS256 (Feb 5, 2020)

johnrellis said:


> Industry standards require that Title, Caption, and Copyright be stored in three locations


JohnRellis, where have you found these standards. The multiple metadata schemas used in images are a mess. See Problems with current Metadata Standards. There is/was a Metadata Working Group trying to sort this out. See MWG Tags.

The bug is likely the non preservation of metadata when sharing images between Adobe products. Given where Adobe is with cloud products, it is likely this issue exists with other Adobe products besides PS and LR Classic


----------



## LouieSherwin (Feb 5, 2020)

@Paul_DS256 ,

To access more than you may want to know about photo metadata check out the PhotoMetadata.org site.

On the resources in META Resources -> Links & Resources Guide you can find links to all the relevant specifications including the most recent guidelines IPTC-PhotoMetadata.  This document spells out all possible photo metadata where it is defined and how it in intended to be used. 

Most popular software including Adobe follow these guidelines, mostly. 

-louie


----------



## Paul_DS256 (Feb 5, 2020)

LouieSherwin said:


> Most popular software including Adobe follow these guidelines, mostly.


Thanks for the link LouieSherwin. Very useful. Similar information to the sites I provided.

I have a EXIFTOOL batch job I use to load basic metadata into my images before I IMPORT them to LR.  A practice I started before using LR.  In there, I found I had to assign the same attribute to different tag fields in different schemas similar to the alignment in MWG Tags. 

I'm still trying to sort out what Microsoft uses when it displays metadata in Explorer.

My point was to JohnRellis's point of "_Industry standards require that Title, Caption, and Copyright be stored in three locations_". As far as I know, there is no standard that requires that and as you indicated, it's left to the different software vendors to decide.


----------



## RikkFlohr (Feb 5, 2020)

"And while Adobe consider this to be the correct handling of that scenario" .  I would really love some context on that statement.


----------



## johnrellis (Feb 5, 2020)

Paul_DS256 said:


> JohnRellis, where have you found these standards. ...  There is/was a Metadata Working Group trying to sort this out.



The Metadata Working Group was founded by Apple, Adobe, Canon, Microsoft, Nokia, and Sony. In 2010 they published _Guidelines for Handling Image Metadata, Version 2.0. _Though called "guidelines", the document is written as a specification, with very precise language and rules, and the MWG published an accompanying verification test set of files. Adobe committed to the spec starting with LR 3.4 and Camera Raw 6.4. The MWG web site has been down for a while, but here's a copy of Guidelines 2.0.

One of the primary goals was to tell applications how to handle the overlapping metadata specifications in EXIF, IPTC, and XMP.  Section 4.2 provides detailed rules:




One of the general principles is that if a field (e.g. caption) exists in multiple metadata sections (EXIF, XMP, IPTC), when an app changes the field, it should update all the occurrences. So if an app updates EXIF:ImageDescription, it should also update XMP: Description and IPTC:Caption.

Exiftool implements the MWG spec with its MWG Tags.


----------



## johnrellis (Feb 5, 2020)

Paul_DS256 said:


> The bug is likely the non preservation of metadata when sharing images between Adobe products.



In detail, the LR bug is that Metadata > Save To File doesn't properly update IPTC:Caption-Abstract when it clears EXIF:ImageDescription and XMP: Description. When you do Edit In > Edit In Adobe Photoshop > Edit Original, LR does an implicit Save To File (so that Photoshop will see the current metadata from the LR catalog).


----------



## Paul_DS256 (Feb 5, 2020)

johnrellis said:


> Adobe committed to the spec starting with LR 3.4 and Camera Raw 6.4.


I for one would love to see these more broadly adapted but given the silence of the working group, I wonder if it's dead.

I did some Googling and found this Photo Metadata Archives - IPTC. From reading it, I can't tell if the IPTC org has taken over what the working group was working on.

I would say Adobe was compliant in LR 3.4 but writing the metadata to the image file or XMP sidecar depending on the type of file. The issue comes in exchanging files and the metadata correctly with other Adobe products and 3rd party tools.


----------



## Paul_DS256 (Feb 5, 2020)

johnrellis said:


> Save To File doesn't properly update IPTC:Caption-Abstract


Understood. I haven't tested this to a RAW file or other file. This will dictate whether the information is stored in the XMP or image itself.

Unfortunately, I had a major Windows 10 failure and am in the processing of reinstalling the OS so I can't try and illustrate.


----------



## johnrellis (Feb 5, 2020)

Paul_DS256 said:


> From reading it, I can't tell if the IPTC org has taken over what the working group was working on.


I hadn't visited iptc.org for a while, so I spent some time there and searching within the site via Google and it appears that the IPTC's Photo Metadata Working Group has nothing to do with the Metadata Working Group organization consisting of Adobe, Microsoft, et al.  The IPTC standards describe how to reconcile IPTC fields stored in XMP with those stored in the legacy IIM. (That reconciliation predates the MWG Guidelines.) But I couldn't find anything at IPTC.org that describes how to reconcile EXIF with XMP and IIM, which is a primary focus of the MWG Guidelines.

IPTC 2019.1 adds Image Regions, polygonal boundaries overlaid on the image that contain associated metadata, such as Person Shown. This appears to be  similar in functionality to the Regions specified in MWG Guidelines 2.0, but unfortunately all the details are different. LR and a few other programs (e.g. Picasa) have long implemented the regions in MWG Guidelines for face tagging. I don't know why IPTC chose not to build upon that, rather than doing something much different syntactically.


----------



## PhilBurton (Feb 5, 2020)

Kevin Sholder said:


> Done, and yes the steps that have been outlined in the case are accurate.  thank you for doing that John!!  I'm glad that someone else was able to verify and submit.
> 
> Guess we need to get some more people to do the ME TOO to have it looked at.
> 
> ...





RikkFlohr said:


> "And while Adobe consider this to be the correct handling of that scenario" .  I would really love some context on that statement.


Rikk,

Maybe not context, but perspective.  The current Adobe approach defies common sense.  

If we agree with Occam's Razer, we would have only one metadata standard, but that's not the world we have right now.   Since we do have multiple standards, the very least we can expect is that equivalent data fields have the same value or contents.


----------



## johnrellis (Feb 6, 2020)

There are two separate issues interleaved here.  Rikk isn't contesting Kevin Sholder's bug with Save Metadata To File not clearing IPTC fields. Rather, he's asking Gnits to elaborate on his opinion (see here) that LR should automatically read the metadata of a file into the catalog when the file's metadata gets changed.


----------



## PhilBurton (Feb 6, 2020)

Good point.  I still maintain that in the "spirit" of the Publish service, which automatically recreates images with newly applied edits, that approach should carry over to the metadata.  Frankly I'm gobsmacked that Adobe believes otherwise, since this situation is not consistent with the overall Publish approach.

Metadata technical standards are very complex, particularly so because there are multiple standards that are only partially "harmonized," to use a favorite word of standards bodies.  I'm sure that only a minority of Forum members are capable of understanding these issues, _nor should the be.  _Adobe needs to acknowledge that they will fix this issue.

Part of the reason that I may Adobe every single month for Lightroom is that I expect Adobe to manage all this technical complexity for me, just as they manage all the issues around Nikon's ever changing NEF format, or color management.


----------



## Gnits (Feb 6, 2020)

RikkFlohr said:


> "And while Adobe consider this to be the correct handling of that scenario" .  I would really love some context on that statement.


Rikk, delighted to see you on this discussion.  

It was a long time ago. I will try to dig up any posts or communications related to this. Busy for the rest of the day, but will try tonight. I am not trying to bring up old issues, but I do consider this to be a major flaw in metadata handling.  By right, if overwriting an image exported from Lightroom and selecting to include the exported image in the catalog, then Lightroom should initialise the metadata fields as it would for a new exported image and then populate with the metadata from the parent raw file. I am recreating this process manually by deleting the original exported jpg from the catalog, forcing Lightroom to execute a new record subroutine.


----------



## Gnits (Feb 6, 2020)

Here is my bug report from 6 years ago.

https://feedback.photoshop.com/phot...ort_to_jpg_does_not_export_metadata_correctly
I will try to find any further correspondence, now that I have a reference date.


----------



## RikkFlohr (Feb 6, 2020)

Gnits said:


> Here is my bug report from 6 years ago.
> 
> https://feedback.photoshop.com/phot...ort_to_jpg_does_not_export_metadata_correctly
> I will try to find any further correspondence, now that I have a reference date.


Thanks. I am glad to see I wasn't on the thread and identified as the culprit  That post is pretty ancient and didn't have a lot of Me-Toos so I am not surprised it is lost in the shuffle. Interesting aside- that was my 3rd day at Adobe although I was working on the Spark Team at the time and didn't get into Lightroom support (officially) for several months after.

If you wouldn't mind - go to that thread and post a new update saying 'Darn it, it is 6 years hence and still not working' .  Include a brief step by step for reproducing. Feel free to link back to this thread.  Once you do that, I will write a bug and get it cross referenced.


----------



## Gnits (Feb 7, 2020)

Rikk, Will do later to-day.

BTW..... I have (and always had)  the highest regard for you and the work that you do.   

I never tried to blame anyone and not doing that now.    I have run very large IT departments and projects and know how complex delivering real world solutions can be.  I also notice in recent times  a lot of under the counter improvements have been made by Adobe in both Lightroom and Photoshop. I applaud these developments. Many of the Photoshop subtle improvements were real 'gottchas' for people trying to learn Photoshop as they were user interface howlers.  

I joined this conversation because I recognised that the original posters issues shared many of the characteristics of my experience dealing with an integrated workflow making using of metadata such as Title and Caption.


----------



## Gnits (Feb 7, 2020)

Bug report updated as suggested.

https://feedback.photoshop.com/phot...c-reply-list[settings][page]=1#reply_20419952


----------



## RikkFlohr (Feb 7, 2020)

I've logged a bug for this Matthew


----------

