# Your keywording tips



## Ian.B (Jun 30, 2015)

Keywords; I hate them but I have gotta hav'em. However I often wonder which is best/do I have too many or not enough and I'm sure others ask themselves the same question so a "Your keywording tips" thread might be handy place to put together some ideas/ways to use/finding photos and so on



One question I have: Should I have a 'yellow flower' keyword or would 'yellow' and 'flower' be better keywords. Should a _ be used?

or "old building", "old stone building" or is "old" and "building" and "stone" a better way to go

I now; very much horse for courses; what work for me but.....


How do you find _the photo_?
I have been typing into the Filter at the top of the key word list; works OK if I have done my part with k/wording. But would it be better to use grid module/text/keywords


These days photography/editing/posting/sharing/helping online where I can is just my thing to do. I don't consider my images to be overly important although the kids might think differently in many years times
I have often said to newbies not to make digital photography harder/more confusing and complicated than it has to be. Sometimes I feel my keywording is like that. 

BTW I do have pretty good hierarchy list. 

Got any tips to share.


----------



## davidfarquhar (Jun 30, 2015)

I found that if you are going to be using similar keywords in smart collection such as those designed to help with a workflow, it works better to have _ in them e.g. Export_to_Flickr and Export_to_Facebook are easier to set up a smart collection for


----------



## Roelof Moorlag (Jun 30, 2015)

It's not 'the' answer to your question but what me helped is to put more effort in keywording my best images. So, i do rating first. I only visit 3 star and better with extensive keywording. 
Location info i do in batch on import or with GPS and names of people i do with face recognition.


----------



## Anthony.Ralph (Jun 30, 2015)

I like to do some keywording as I import a batch of photos. I tend to include things like location, season of the year and event - anything that would apply to the whole group being imported. This does take the sting out of things a little. I have also recently used the spray can more frequently to add keywords to groups of photos that are not contiguous in terms of keywording; another easing of the chore.

Anthony.


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 1, 2015)

davidfarquhar said:


> I found that if you are going to be using similar keywords in smart collection such as those designed to help with a workflow, it works better to have _ in them e.g. Export_to_Flickr and Export_to_Facebook are easier to set up a smart collection for



Thanks David; atm I'm not planning to use collection too much; but .........



Roelof Moorlag said:


> It's not 'the' answer to your question but what me helped is to put more effort in keywording my best images. So, i do rating first. I only visit 3 star and better with extensive keywording.
> Location info i do in batch on import or with GPS and names of people i do with face recognition.


Thanks for the input, I took on board the thoughts of Scot Kelby about rating photos and not using stars. The image is in or out; although I do leave maybes/not sure/insurance/backup for the best images.  Scott K said in his LR book that he has seen people agonizing over whether a photo is 3 or 4 stars. It's not a one star so why panic over an inferior image. That's why I flag; X or just leave the image sit although I can see more use for starring if I was to take up more use of collections. At the moment I getting plenty of fresh files to play with without going back through old files. 



Anthony.Ralph said:


> I like to do some keywording as I import a batch of photos. I tend to include things like location, season of the year and event - anything that would apply to the whole group being imported. This does take the sting out of things a little. I have also recently used the spray can more frequently to add keywords to groups of photos that are not contiguous in terms of keywording; another easing of the chore.
> 
> Anthony.


Cheers; never considered 'season' k/words not that we get the real cold/snow weather down here. I should use the spray can more myself instead of selecting files..... Note taken


Come on folk; spill beans on your keywording secrets. I'm sure there are many following this thread looking for some  guidance. 
>>And this is _an open thread_ so don't be afraid to ask your questions. 

I would still like to hear some feedback on having lots of single k/words or is it better (for you) to have multiple (searchable) words in the key word

What was the _BIGGEST  _keywording/tagging mistake/mess _you_ made. .......promise we will not laugh .......... too much ​:bluegrin:


----------



## sbtm (Jul 1, 2015)

I would love to start keywording but hate the fact that i have to go through 15,000+ photos to do. Unless, I just start with new pics and go forward


----------



## Jimmsp (Jul 1, 2015)

sbtm said:


> I would love to start keywording but hate the fact that i have to go through 15,000+ photos to do. Unless, I just start with new pics and go forward



When I first jumped into serious keywording I had over 50k of photos to work on. I set a priority workflow:
1. All new photos
2. All 4 & 5 star photos ( I use stars to rate how good they are)
3. Last year's photos, starting with 2&3 stars
4. Year before last; etc.

I still have photos with no key words. Most of these were taken many years ago, and many probably should be deleted; maybe someday.


----------



## sbtm (Jul 1, 2015)

Jimmsp said:


> When I first jumped into serious keywording I had over 50k of photos to work on. I set a priority workflow:
> 1. All new photos
> 2. All 4 & 5 star photos ( I use stars to rate how good they are)
> 3. Last year's photos, starting with 2&3 stars
> ...



That's exactly what I am going to start doing. Prioritize.
1. All newly imported pics
2. Any free time I have I start doing older ones
3. Any pics I access or require to go back to


----------



## rob211 (Jul 1, 2015)

We've discussed the underscore issue elsewhere here; worth looking at that thread. It got particularly messy with names of people. But now those are special keywords in Lr 6 (although not in the outside world), so perhaps we need to rethink how we do that.

A BIG issue with keywords in Lr isn't the keyword itself, but how Lr searches for it. It is very lame when it comes to spaces, essentially treating a space as "or." It's nice that we can do a keyword like "Berlin Ichthyosaur State Park" but that's a lotta ORs (you'd have to search for "state AND park AND berlin AND ichthyosaur"). And if I have lots of icthyosaur pictures not related to the park, it's a problem. Some just use the underscore or other character to make that all one word, and then remove it for export. And you have to account for how say a web service or other software will deal with those keywords. And the same issue exists for hierarchies, since not all services/software is gonna be able to deal with them in a uniform way. So if I do "State>Park>Berlin Ichthyosaur" I end up with "state, park, Berlin Ichthyosaur" and I may have the same problem with searches.

At least with Lr, then, I find it much easier to use the checkboxes and keyword list to find stuff by keyword. It can be a pain to find the same photos using a smart collection (it would be nice if, having done that, we could save what essentially is a keyword search as a smart collection, but I don't think you can). John Beardsworth's Any Filter can help with this. And BTW, J Friedl's plugin for names can help as well.

It can help to look at some of the more sophisticated keywording info, like the stuff Photo Mechanic users have. They make use of variables, and pre structured lists (you can even buy them). It can help to sort out how to set up hierarchies, especially if you start doing this a lot.

I'd like to see if there was a way to reverse keyword from published photos. I dunno if anyone is using Flickr or Google, but their searching/filtering algorithms are scary useful. They find stuff I miss, and if I could apply a keyword within their filters/searches and then bring it back into Lr it would be very nice. But I don't think there's a way, since it's even hard to keyword from within those services. But it can help with how you view your own photos (and it's fun to see Flickr sort your less-liked relatives into the "dog" category...).


----------



## Roelof Moorlag (Jul 1, 2015)

> I would love to start keywording but hate the fact that i have to go through 15,000+ photos to do. Unless, I just start with new pics and go forward


Thats why i do only serious keywording my best images (3 star +).

I'm using 'helper keywords' in my workflow. In the import template i add some standard keywords: @doesneedrating, @doesneednaming, @doesneedkeywords
I have some smart collections (Does Need Rating, Add people's names, Keyword this) which i let collect all images with 3 stars and better + the 'helper keywords' 

Now, when i have some time i'm selecting some images (20 or so, a number i'm sure i will accomplish), mark them (with a color label or so) and then rate them, add people names to them and/or put keywords in it. When i'm finished i'm removing the respective helper keyword. These images will disappear from the smart collection. (This is how you can track your work on a big pile like 15.000 photo's also. Add the helper keywords to all of them and then work through them the next years).


----------



## gpsmikey (Jul 1, 2015)

Lots of good comments here - I think I am going to use underscore in mine (yes, I have read and understand both sides, but for me, underscore works).  One point that I have not seen mentioned here yet is the singular vs plural - dog is not the same as dogs, goose is not the same as geese - pick which works best for you and stick with that form.


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 2, 2015)

sbtm said:


> That's exactly what I am going to start doing. Prioritize.
> 1. All newly imported pics
> 2. Any free time I have I start doing older ones
> 3. Any pics I access or require to go back to



Yep; you have the right idea imo. With old file move from newest to oldest.  Good time to delete the old :blush: keepers too. You would already have an idea of some   keywords some add those now and then use the paint can to add those keywords to photos. You can also select and drag the image/s onto the keyword. And you will not get it perfect; never will be if it's like mine but k/words are easy to edit/move around/change and LR it brilliant at matching the keywords to pictures when looking that photo


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 2, 2015)

rob211 said:


> We've discussed the underscore issue elsewhere here; worth looking at that thread. It got particularly messy with names of people. But now those are special keywords in Lr 6 (although not in the outside world), so perhaps we need to rethink how we do that.
> 
> A BIG issue with keywords in Lr isn't the keyword itself, but how Lr searches for it. It is very lame when it comes to spaces, essentially treating a space as "or." It's nice that we can do a keyword like "Berlin Ichthyosaur State Park" but that's a lotta ORs (you'd have to search for "state AND park AND berlin AND ichthyosaur"). And if I have lots of icthyosaur pictures not related to the park, it's a problem. Some just use the underscore or other character to make that all one word, and then remove it for export. And you have to account for how say a web service or other software will deal with those keywords. And the same issue exists for hierarchies, since not all services/software is gonna be able to deal with them in a uniform way. So if I do "State>Park>Berlin Ichthyosaur" I end up with "state, park, Berlin Ichthyosaur" and I may have the same problem with searches.
> 
> ...


good info Rob; thanks for the time to explain it all


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 2, 2015)

Roelof Moorlag said:


> Thats why i do only serious keywording my best images (3 star +).
> 
> I'm using 'helper keywords' in my workflow. In the import template i add some standard keywords: @doesneedrating, @doesneednaming, @doesneedkeywords
> I have some smart collections (Does Need Rating, Add people's names, Keyword this) which i let collect all images with 3 stars and better + the 'helper keywords'
> ...



Thank you; more to take in when I have a clearer brain :blush:


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 2, 2015)

gpsmikey said:


> Lots of good comments here - I think I am going to use underscore in mine *(yes, I have read and understand both sides, but for me, underscore works)*.  One point that I have not seen mentioned here yet is the singular vs plural - dog is not the same as dogs, goose is not the same as geese - pick which works best for you and stick with that form.



do you have any really helpful links re: underscore. we can all google it but then we need sort  the  rubbish from understandable stuff

Thanks for the input folks; good stuff just like this forum


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 2, 2015)

I must say searches work better here than many other forums I use  far too often that's :blush: Something like 50,000 odd posts; 23,000 on _one forum_ :blush:

Bit more light reading  for those who are interested

http://www.lightroomqueen.com/community/showthread.php?18972-Two-word-keywords&highlight=underscore

http://www.lightroomqueen.com/commu...racter-in-keyword-filter&highlight=underscore

http://www.lightroomqueen.com/commu...o-Word-Keywords-Together&highlight=underscore


----------



## gpsmikey (Jul 2, 2015)

Most of the discussions I had read on the underscore were here, but there were others as well.  John Beardsworth comment about corrupting the data is valid ( that was discussed in this thread also referenced above - "two word keywords"  , however, in my case, things like "mt. Rainier", "snow goose", "canada goose" etc. are all single words to me.  If I want to search for "snow", then I will have a keyword of "snow" for the picture with snow in it.  Actually, a good search term for more information is "keyword underscore" - that will narrow down the search a bit.  Since (unless you are working with stock images for sale etc.) the primary purpose of keywords is to allow you to find what you are looking for, then you need to use what works best for you.  My thoughts on it anyway


----------



## Tony Jay (Jul 2, 2015)

Hi Ian.

Your query does raise some important issues that are worth comment.

Starting generally it is clear that keywording images cannot be done to a single universal set of rules.
One's genre of photography is a clear factor that markedly influences how one keywords. Each genre of photography has its own 'vocabulary', and, hence, keywords that make sense.
If one shoots only family members and family events then names and events are important keywords to capture.
If one shoots birds as a dedicated pursuit then keywords need to include species and subspecies as well as location. In the case of the birds a detailed deep hierarchy is the only way to adequately capture this information.

The depth of the keyword hierarchies used and the number of keywords applied to individual images are a direct reflection of the need to find a particular image.
Clearly an image keyworded with just the keyword 'bird' is not helpful to the dedicated bird photographer who needs to find three images of a subspecies of kestrel in an image catalog of 100 000 images.
However the photographer who just shoots family members and special events like birthdays and anniversaries can do with a much simpler set of keywords generally.

So, if one can always find images via keywords, and other metadata of course, using the filter bar or via Smart collections, then keywording to a greater depth arguably is redundant.
If one struggles to find images at the current level of keywording then there is an issue that needs to be addressed. (Perhaps I am over-reading your post Ian but I get the impression that you may reside in the latter camp.)

On a different track it is clear from many of the replies to the OP, and the OP itself, that most individuals regard keywording as a necessary evil. Unfortunately, any evil, whether necessary or not, will be approached with a reluctant distaste and more likely total aversion.
I regard keywording (and other metadata capture for that matter) as an indispensable part of my workflow. Not keywording an image appropriately to me is the same as driving to work but then leaving one's car out in the traffic blocking the intersection while at work. Just park the car!
I don't have negative feelings toward keywording rather I regard a well keyworded image with as much pleasure as a beautifully crafted landscape image in post-processing. To me these are two sides of the same coin. A properly processed image is a properly processed image!

I appreciate that there is a broad range of possible workflows that can be applied in post-procesing. However, my strong suggestion is to start culling and keywording while importing. Rate and keyword images right there and then. Learn to do it quickly - it is possible. I can finish a minute or two after Lightroom finishes its import.

What are the keys to achieving this kind of workflow?
I use metadata presets to quickly apply things like copyright and locational metadata on import.
My keyword hierarchies are set up in such a way that adding specific keywords such as a location will give me all the locational keywords from perhaps a street address to the continent in which that location resides. One mouse click can add up to a dozen keywords via the hierarchy.
Of course not all keywords reside in a deep hierarchy but arranging keywords by subject with the apex keyword in a hierarchy being a non-exportable keyword allows one to quickly traverse a keyword collection potentially numbering on the ones of thousands.
Make use of the multiple options for keywording several images simultaneously. I tend to select a single representative image and keyword it and then copy the metadata to other images via 'Synch metadata'.
Practice makes perfect. Five minutes of effort will not raise your workflow efficiency by much. Disclosure: It took about a year of persistent effort and research to build my workflow to suit my needs.

Whether anyone takes on my suggestions will be dependent on one's take on keyboarding and metadata acquisition. I regarded it as a crucial part of workflow and got on top of the issues involved.

Tony Jay


----------



## sbtm (Jul 2, 2015)

Ian.B said:


> Yep; you have the right idea imo. With old file move from newest to oldest.  Good time to delete the old :blush: keepers too. You would already have an idea of some   keywords some add those now and then use the paint can to add those keywords to photos.



I actually have an idea on what "themes" I would be naming my pics. For example, location, event, people in pic (immediate family at least), land marks, vacations, etc. That's how I access pics on computer and my brain at least. And of course, date which is already there as pics get imported into folders (Windows) when the pics were taken.

Thanks Ian.


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 2, 2015)

wow; thank  you Tony; great long list of info. Actually my keywording is not too bad now and I can find most; but not all images most of the time. But I do often wonder if there is a "better way" knowing there is no best way. I also know there are many silent members/lurkers who will get even more from this thread than I will and that gives me that fuzzy warm feeling  

my biggest dramas is ready/writing/typing and I'm certainly not the most organized sort of bloke so all this file stuff doesn't come naturally to me. Although it always surprised my family, and myself how quickly I used to be able the find clients files/negs. But my personal stuff was a different story until I started to understand lr and keywording

New York as a keyword was mentioned above and the way I approach those is usually NewYork

I have also amended my keywords to work better on flickr: Where live atm, Mildura is under Victoria which is under Australia and under Mildura are the more local places that mean more to me. Take this recent image





Keywords added
BackStreet, Black and white, Coloured, FrontYard, Mildura, Pickets, Seat

Keywords exported
BackStreet, Australia, Black and White, Coloured, FrontYard, Mildura, North West Victoria, Fence, Pickets, Seat, Street, Victoria

Is there something I could/should do different? Is it worth worrying about tags on Flickr? (I'm not there to count followers) How would you file the photo?

I appreciated all the tips and advice given and I will certainly spend more time taking it in.


----------



## rob211 (Jul 2, 2015)

(warning: crabby rant)

Since keywording is about finding images (and that's not only in Lr, but other applications, the computer's system, and online) you'd think after all these year Lr would have noticed some of the improvements that have been made in other areas.

For example, tag clouds. Or fixing Lr's lame search capability when it comes to spaces. Or keyword suggestions. Or grouping by date and time: just about every other application does this well, and it's a great time saver when tagging, since it helps group similar stuff together. Sure, you can use a filter, but you shouldn't have to.

And although Lr and Adobe probably don't have the chops to do it, image searching has evolved considerably. I can find stuff in my photos in Flickr and Google photos even when the photos are not tagged or described. It's not reliable or an alternative by any means, but it is an interesting way to sort through photos. I can even sort and filter by predominate colors using other software. And software like Snapselect can find suspected duplicates, which helps with culling. Or even finding photos shot in the same location at very different times.

At its core Lr is about organization; there are tons of editing tools, not so many organizers. Yet editing evolves; organization has hardly changed in years and years. About the only significant change is the addition of geolocation, and that was late. This matters to keywording because it is, and should be, an adjunct to organization and finding stuff, and not the only tool we use. I may need a certain photo, but sorting those down to "bird" or even "kestrel" or to any keyword grouping often isn't enough; these days a computer should be able to assist more with content. Lr is long on categorizing by metadata like geeky camera parameters, but unless someone pays me to review lenses how often am I gonna care about searching for 20mm shots? Meanwhile, you can't even put keywords in cells in grid view. Keywording could be much more effective and easier to use if Adobe put some energy into those goals instead of yet another Ps tool ported into Lr.


----------



## rob211 (Jul 2, 2015)

Ian.B said:


> Keywords added
> BackStreet, Black and white, Coloured, FrontYard, Mildura, Pickets, Seat
> 
> Keywords exported
> ...



I am not sure what the hierarchy is; that adds tons of info. "Fence>picket" for example is different than "labor union>strike>picket." Or "street": is that a style of photography, or part of the name of a street, or the object shown in the photo? Hierarchies can make those distinctions, at least as long as they remain heirarchies. So "Australia>state>Victoria" and "street>Victoria" and "queen>Victoria." Of course Queen Victoria on Victoria Street in Victoria is a problem once the hierarchy gets flattened out to a list. But at least then all the terms are included, so "Victoria AND street AND state AND queen" would find it; it would be excluding all the other stuff (and in commonwealth countries every other thing is named "Victoria") would be the tough part. And that's sorta true in searching in Lr. But using the list it would be pretty easy to find such a photo to the exclusion of others, since the hierarchy in the list drills right down to it.


----------



## Jim Wilde (Jul 2, 2015)

rob211 said:


> (warning: crabby rant)
> 
> Since keywording is about finding images (and that's not only in Lr, but other applications, the computer's system, and online) you'd think after all these year Lr would have noticed some of the improvements that have been made in other areas.
> 
> ...



Rob, I'm not disagreeing with most of the rant, but I feel you're doing it in the wrong forum.....I doubt very much that Adobe staff would read it in this forum, so you'd be better advised doing it at the official Adobe feedback site. Though I'd imagine most if the features you'd like to see have already been requested....


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 3, 2015)

rob211 said:


> (warning: crabby rant)
> 
> Since keywording is about finding images (and that's not only in Lr, but other applications, the computer's system, and online) you'd think after all these year Lr would have noticed some of the improvements that have been made in other areas.
> 
> ...



I hope you put your fingers in a bucket of cold water after typing that


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 3, 2015)

rob211 said:


> I am not sure what the hierarchy is; that adds tons of info. "Fence>picket" for example is different than "labor union>strike>picket." Or "street": is that a style of photography, or part of the name of a street, or the object shown in the photo? Hierarchies can make those distinctions, at least as long as they remain heirarchies. So "Australia>state>Victoria" and "street>Victoria" and "queen>Victoria." Of course Queen Victoria on Victoria Street in Victoria is a problem once the hierarchy gets flattened out to a list. But at least then all the terms are included, so "Victoria AND street AND state AND queen" would find it; it would be excluding all the other stuff (and in commonwealth countries every other thing is named "Victoria") would be the tough part. And that's sorta true in searching in Lr. But using the list it would be pretty easy to find such a photo to the exclusion of others, since the hierarchy in the list drills right down to it.



Thanks rob;  just realize I should use 'StreetPhotos' or 'StreetPhotography' and not just "Street" ._Good point_

Australia, Black and White, Fence, Street (now "StreetPhotos" ), are the hierarchies and _Seat is under a non-explored 'General photos'

_Been a good thread; maybe we need a "to pass onto Adobe" thread or section (??)


----------



## Ian.B (Jun 30, 2015)

Keywords; I hate them but I have gotta hav'em. However I often wonder which is best/do I have too many or not enough and I'm sure others ask themselves the same question so a "Your keywording tips" thread might be handy place to put together some ideas/ways to use/finding photos and so on



One question I have: Should I have a 'yellow flower' keyword or would 'yellow' and 'flower' be better keywords. Should a _ be used?

or "old building", "old stone building" or is "old" and "building" and "stone" a better way to go

I now; very much horse for courses; what work for me but.....


How do you find _the photo_?
I have been typing into the Filter at the top of the key word list; works OK if I have done my part with k/wording. But would it be better to use grid module/text/keywords


These days photography/editing/posting/sharing/helping online where I can is just my thing to do. I don't consider my images to be overly important although the kids might think differently in many years times
I have often said to newbies not to make digital photography harder/more confusing and complicated than it has to be. Sometimes I feel my keywording is like that. 

BTW I do have pretty good hierarchy list. 

Got any tips to share.


----------



## Tony Jay (Jul 3, 2015)

Hi Ian.

If I may suggest having looked at the posted image (very intriguing post-processing BTW) all the keywords do is list the elements of that image.
There are no keywords describing what that image is all about! Nada. None.

I suggest that there is much more going on with respect to that image than that currently listed as keywords.
Why such stunning post-processing if all it was supposed to represent is a half-dozen concrete nouns.
Clearly this image is mean't to communicate much more abstract concepts.
So keyword them!
Anyone can see the fence, the tree, the bench, the house, and the garden but the key issue is what does it mean?
What are you trying to communicate with this image?

Think about it a bit.
Keywording really is boring if it ends up just being a list of the elements of the image.
Keyword the stuff that cannot be automatically understood just by listing what is obvious in the scene.
Sometimes even this is not sufficient - in other words the story the image is trying to tell cannot even be contained in any list of keywords - use captioning to tell the bigger story!

Clearly not every image ever shot requires treatment like this but noteworthy images do. In fact, for me anyway, an image that cannot excite any abstract keywords is a hint that perhaps the reject button and eventually the delete button may ultimately be the most appropriate post-processing!

Tony Jay


----------



## rob211 (Jul 3, 2015)

Tony Jay said:


> Hi Ian.
> 
> If I may suggest having looked at the posted image (very intriguing post-processing BTW) all the keywords do is list the elements of that image.
> There are no keywords describing what that image is all about! Nada. None.
> ...



This raises a great point (and one I should have raised if I wasn't ranting...sorry). Someone here clued me into the fact that keywording should ADD info, not replicate it in a different form. Captioning and titling can also help with that. By ragging on Lr I was attempting to point out that other software has been successful because it can organize our stuff in ways that adds meaning without much effort; Apple's "Event" view in iPhoto was like that. It's really just a date filter but by combining a couple of dates and geolocation you add a ton of info and can describe a vacation with just that. Flickr has auto filtering for like "patterns" or "serene" or "depth of field." Maybe some of us don't like to look at our own photos, but for those that see them as more than just a library card catalog it can be nice to have some organization around concepts like that. I just had occasion to search for photos of a long-passed friend. It became obvious pretty quickly that simply searching on his name wasn't enough; I needed to get photos of events we did together, photos of things he liked, photos of others who were close to him, and even photos that evoked that time and that place. Time and place filtering helped (and unfortunately most were old scans without geolocation), but I immediately wished I'd been more expansive in my descriptions and keywording.

Another tip I picked up here might help as well. I was trying to figure out a way to keep notes about photos I shot, something we got taught to do in my photo class way back in the film days. There's a plugin, but it didn't work out well for me. Someone here gave me a tip, to add a ton of info in one of the IPTC fields of a representative photo, and then to keyword it with "note" or something. That way you can reference other stuff (you can even put in URLs, BTW) that doesn't fit neatly in IPTC fields or Lr's categories, and once you find that note photo it can more easily lead to other stuff you wanna find.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Jul 3, 2015)

Ian.B said:


> maybe we need a "to pass onto Adobe" thread or section (??)



There already is.... Adobe hosts it at Official Feature Request/Bug Report Forum.  It holds far more weight coming from you directly on that forum that it would us just passing it on - plus people can vote on their favorite requests on that site, which adds additional weight to the requests.


----------



## Roelof Moorlag (Jul 3, 2015)

> I was trying to figure out a way to keep notes about photos I shot,


I'm using the 'big note' plugin from John Beardsworth for this purpose:
http://www.beardsworth.co.uk/lightroom/big-note/


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 4, 2015)

Thanks Tony and Rob; while I think more about your posts how would you explain such an image with a keyword/s

This is just personal photography and the keywords I have entered are to _me _help find the image. I knew I had this file and so I just typed in things like seat/street/frontyard and I had the file in front of me. But your comments have me, and guess others thinking about "the better way" to add/use keywords

more sitting and thinking


"What are you trying to communicate with this image?"
Interesting question and I feel the answer is I'm not trying to communicate anything or maybe I don't understand the "communicate" in photos part. To me it's a someones frontyard  I walked past, I thought the light/layout/colours would make an attractive photograph (never a _shot_:(). I would have spent a minute or so photographing the scene from the footpath and there is only one other file of the seat which is the most important feature. So to me its more a pretty picture thing; something I saw, liked and knew I could fiddle around with editing. Much of the PP would have popped into my head at the time. Apart from seeing, photographing with a fixed focal length lens (only lens I have for the OLY) and editing the image I'm not sure it's really much past the challenges mentioned; particularly going back to one camera and fixed focal length lens = to 40mm 


more sitting, reading and thinking about info in the thread; plus the problem of my son busting his landcruiser ute gearbox an hour west of Kununurra; far Nth east WA. He's got a_ long _walk back to Perth lol

I always get confused with this _communicate a message_ with a photo when they are so often _a recording photo_; ie recording the scene/subject.


----------



## Tony Jay (Jul 4, 2015)

Hi Ian.

How to describe that image beyond the obvious is difficult because I did not shoot it.
This is not a cop-out because I don't know what you were thinking when you decided to take the shoot nor your thought process in post-processing.
I did get to see another version of this image that you posted in another thread - that was a very "vanilla" rendition. The version you posted in this thread has very striking post-processing and almost changes the image beyond recognition apart from the fact that that the tree, the bench, the house, and the fence are still where they were. 

Nonetheless, this is a very different image and it didn't get to look like that in a mental vacuum. Clearly you some thoughts that drove the post-processing in that direction. Also, you chose that image and not another one for that treatment - again something must have been knocking around in you head to make the decisions that you did. The result is an abstraction of the original, but what it means, especially for you, is probably not my business to dictate.

While some shots we all take can be described as mere 'record shots', this one is not. It has a beauty and an enigmatic mystery to it that intrigues me but for the life of me I cannot suppose what its story is - however there is a story behind this image otherwise it would not have been shot originally and would certainly not have been subject to the post-processing it has been through.

Incidentally, I know the area where your son damaged his Landcruiser very well. The Kimberley's is a favourite photographic haunt of mine although I have not been there for three years now. I might be wrong but Kununurra has quite a lot of infrastructure and if your son could get his vehicle towed there it is likely it could be repaired.

Tony Jay


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 4, 2015)

Tony Jay said:


> Incidentally, I know the area where your son damaged his Landcruiser very well. The Kimberley's is a favourite photographic haunt of mine although I have not been there for three years now. I might be wrong but Kununurra has quite a lot of infrastructure and if your son could get his vehicle towed there it is likely it could be repaired.
> Tony Jay


Time is his drama Tony; wedding at Elquestro today and then meant to be spending a week heading back the 3200++ kms to perth for work. Now the British/Europeans will be scratching their heads about a 6-8,000 road trip for a wedding. I thought it was bit much also but then we are only young once. I believe there were  a couple of vehicles from northern Victoria going up also. One broke the axle on the camper trailer somewhere on the Tanami Track (alice spring>Hall creek) and they had to drive to Kununurra to get another axle; return to the trailer, make the repairs, and then head back up to Kununurra.  That  would be something like 2000++++km return trip lol. Yep; it's a _hellofa _big country! 
Being a truck driver, there is a good chance he will truck it to Perth and  hopefully double up with the driving the truck to perth. All a bit of a bugga for him but still a good adventure. We will know more tomorrow or monday.And yep, Dad has the credit card ready!  

Thanks for all your help and advice with the keywords Tony


----------



## rob211 (Jul 4, 2015)

Ian, I dunno exactly what I'd put down for that photo. But maybe even "stroll" and "the neighborhood" or "homes" or a caption describing why you were walking by.

I realized after my neighborhood burned up (I'm in CA, I'm sure you Aussies can relate) that I had more pictures of national parks hundreds of miles away than I did of my own backyard. New residents were asking about the places that stood on the lots where their new homes are, and I couldn't help 'em. Pitiful. If I had been entering "neighborhood" as a keyword perhaps it would caused me to think more about that, as I do now, and do more to document it. Same thing with family events. Or even macro shots as opposed to big vistas; my keyword makes me think about what I'm doing with the photos and gives me ideas about taking new photos.


----------



## gpsmikey (Jul 4, 2015)

That is an excellent idea to not only take pictures of the local neighborhood, but have them keyworded that way.  Everybody goes on vacation (or on holiday for you folks) somewhere else (meanwhile, all the people that live "somewhere else" go on vacation to your area (explains why the roads and airports are so busy).  The bottom line though is that some years later, your favorite things, people and places in your neighborhood are all gone and the only pictures of them were taken by visitors that have wandered back home again.  Worth getting images of everyday things in your neighborhood and tagging them so you can find them later.  I sure wish I had more pictures from where I grew up - all those old negatives went away long ago because they were "too common".


----------



## rob211 (Jul 4, 2015)

And we here often focus (heh) on OUR stuff. I have a ton of photos that others have given, emailed, linked, sent on DVD, etc to me. I often forget to keyword those. And sometimes they're scans, and dates are screwed up, and the exif is stripped out, etc. So I too often ignored them. But that too was a big mistake, and since I didn't take the photos it's even harder for me to find them. So it helps to have a plan for dealing with those. And you can see from the discussion about Ian's photo that it's harder sometimes to keyword someone else's work than your own.


----------



## Jimmsp (Jul 4, 2015)

rob211 said:


> ....And you can see from the discussion about Ian's photo that it's harder sometimes to keyword someone else's work than your own.


So true. I have stuck with the basic : who, what, and where; eg, Jennifer<Family, reception<wedding, Minneapolis<MN<Place.
At least then I can get to them fairly quickly and only have a few (50-100?) to quickly look through.


----------



## Jimmsp (Jul 4, 2015)

rob211 said:


> .....
> 
> I realized after my neighborhood burned up (I'm in CA, I'm sure you Aussies can relate) that I had more pictures of national parks hundreds of miles away than I did of my own backyard. New residents were asking about the places that stood on the lots where their new homes are, and I couldn't help 'em. Pitiful. If I had been entering "neighborhood" as a keyword perhaps it would caused me to think more about that, as I do now, and do more to document it. Same thing with family events. Or even macro shots as opposed to big vistas; my keyword makes me think about what I'm doing with the photos and gives me ideas about taking new photos.



Yes, I'll second or third this great idea; and  "neighborhood" is a great starting point for a keyword.
To followup on Tony's discussion, I can see this part of a documentary, not just because I like how something looks.
I have an upper level keyword category called "Conceptual Description", and I can start to see how this will fit in.
Now to get out and shoot some pics.

BTW, this has been, and will probably continue to be, a great thread.


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 5, 2015)

Jimmsp said:


> Yes, I'll second or third this great idea; and  "neighborhood" is a great starting point for a keyword.



But; there always a but; we don't really use the word "neighborhood" (and we add a "u" ) that much; hence the key word "backstreet" to different from the usual street photos. Now we are going to get in the global word wars lol. 

I'll get back to the other comments later; I need to find a photo lol. Keyword is there but no photo


----------



## Jim Wilde (Jul 5, 2015)

Ian.B said:


> Keyword is there but no photo



Stacked? Try Photo menu>Stacking>Expand All Stacks to see if that shows the image.


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 6, 2015)

thanks Jim; the dramas there is a 0 beside the keyword 

I know it's there and just play hide and seek with me :mrgreen:


----------



## Rose Weir (Jul 6, 2015)

Adding to the 'backstreet' versus main street or street 
In rural areas there are concession(roads)side(roads)county(roads) and any of these can have the same number when the township boundary changes.
I did a project on the bridges that cross a major meandering river (Saugeen and its tributaries to Lake Huron, Ontario) 
The original iron framework bridges are being demolished and only a few  remain so there are other folks who also go round shooting at these  structures.
The locals can have a label for a road and the map has a totally different label which makes getting directions an interesting conversation.
I ended up having a Parent word 'Roads' and subsections by township with sideroad and concession per twp.
I have discovered when collecting images of the same topic that having the date in the filename and distinct key words make the project much more efficient.
This meant reviewing images through 2006 to 2009 to assign specific descriptions and keywords. At that time the single Road keyword seemed sufficient <LOL>
Now I am revisiting some of those past locations and discovered I didn't have an exact road number where that derelict building was located.


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 6, 2015)

Rose Weir said:


> Adding to the 'backstreet' versus main street or street
> In rural areas there are concession(roads)side(roads)county(roads) and any of these can have the same number when the township boundary changes.
> I did a project on the bridges that cross a major meandering river (Saugeen and its tributaries to Lake Huron, Ontario)
> The original iron framework bridges are being demolished and only a few  remain so there are other folks who also go round shooting at these  structures.
> ...



at the time it would have most likely be fine Rose as many of the files are still in your mind but as we gather more and more files (and age) things become a bit blurry. Keywording is a never ending part of digital photography IMO. At least keywording digital files is a hell of a lot easier than filing trannies or negatives. I have no idea how organizations like National Geographic manage to do it. 

I still think the delete key is a great filing tool; just crazy the photos we keep.  I'm might start using ratings more, anything under 5 is not needed. I add blue to any file I post on a forum and post to much "rubbish". Maybe a separate small h/drive for those ..... sorry thinking out aloud 

As for my lost photo; it's no where except on Flickr. If I deleted it (them actually) then it was by a _BIG_ mistake. It was an old photo/negative I scanned and _ALL_ those were given a "Scan" k/w at the time......ummmm .... maybe _most_ were given the k/word . Bit . I did add at least 'Toyota' recently and that was the seach k/w I was using. So no idea. :(


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 6, 2015)

Rose Weir said:


> The original iron framework bridges are being demolished and only a few  remain so there are other folks who also go round *shooting at these  structures.*


No wonder they are demolishing them; all the bullets holes would be weakening them :bluegrin:_ Sorry; _I so dislike_ 'shooting' _to describe photography but it's well and truly entrenched


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Jul 6, 2015)

One way to deal with spaces in keywords and the way Lightroom searches for these kinds of keywords in smart collections is to use (non-exporting) synonyms. So your keywords are 'Grand Canyon', 'Bryce Canyon', Grand Teton' etc. and their non-exporting synonyms are 'GrandCanyon', 'BryceCanyon' and 'GrandTeton'. If you set-up a smart collection based on keywords, you use 'Keyword = <Synonym>'.


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 6, 2015)

^^ wish I had keywords like those 

_synonyms_>>now thats something I seldom use; I have enough dramas working out the keywords without thinking about synonyms

Thanks for the thoughts Johan


----------



## Johan Elzenga (Jul 6, 2015)

Ian.B said:


> ^^ wish I had keywords like those
> 
> _synonyms_>>now thats something I seldom use; I have enough dramas working out the keywords without thinking about synonyms



LOL. Fortunately, you only have to use synonyms for those keywords that can cause problems. For most keywords you'll be fine without them. In my example you can normally deal with this by using '_Keywords: Contains All_', because it's fairly unlikely that you have a picture that contains both 'Grand Teton' as well as 'Bryce Canyon' (and so it will show in a smart collection on keyword 'Grand Canyon'). 

But for names of people it's a great solution. You may have names like 'John Doe', 'Jane Doe' and 'John Smith' and that causes problems if you also have pictures with both Jane Doe and John Smith in the same shot. Those pictures will show up in a _Keyword: Contains All 'John Doe'_ smart collection. If you use 'JohnDoe' or 'John_Doe' as synonym, you won't have these problems and you still get nice keywords without underscores or missing spaces when you export images with embedded metadata.


----------



## LouieSherwin (Jul 6, 2015)

Hi,

For all who have contributed to this thread I suggest that you head over to the official feedback forum and add you support to any of the keyword discussions over there. The main one is titled Lightroom: Better keyword management. It has been active almost from the first day (over four years ago) the feedback forum was created. Perhaps some day Adobe may actually address some of these issues. 

-louie


----------



## Rose Weir (Jul 6, 2015)

Ian-re 'I still think the delete key is a great filing tool;'
I browse the card using Faststone Image Viewer so only selections from that end up being transferred to a hard drive for import.
When things were slower and smaller ....4 cameras ago, small memory cards and slow computers my mantra was '24 images ...or when the card is full' I carried my 'film habits' over to digital <lol> Now I'm apt to try several settings and keep one of the same scene (bigger card, faster setting overall)
It was way too slow for me in Lightroom to do the browse, eliminate etc so the habit of viewing the card with this 3rd party browser has been embedded. 

One day when  you are doing something else that lost image will suddenly turn up; likely in an unexpected location <grin>

Louie: Included in the 'keyword polishing request' could also be a redo or insert specific for 'file-renaming'. Even an example of a special script that could be applied to a selected group would assist the tedious routine of catching up old images that did not use the original file number + date. 
I started with original image number + folder name + title and did not consider that several years later the date would be of value.
So much backspacing, inserting date <grin>


----------



## Sandyjas (Jul 7, 2015)

Hi Ian,

I entered keywording before I knew I would grow in photography.  I had a very small list.  It has grown and grown and I have had to go back over my past photos and re-keyword them.  I would think seriously first about whether you might be wanting to grow in photography in the future.  Start with a lot of keywords, you don't have to use them.  But you have them if you need them.  That's how I feel.  Get another's list and use that or study it.  I am older and I look at it now as how much time for taking more photos, in my keywording plan.  If I was just starting out and might be serious about working  in photography for a long time, I would tend to set up a huge hierarchy and really lay out more keywords. As is I have unconsciously just picked out keywords as I went along.  You can get into trouble with this, unless you have Lightroom.  Long ago I had a keyword "snow pictures," for every picture with snow in it I took.  But what happens, as you go along photoing and start adding up the snowman pictures or pretty snow scenes?  You need "snowmen" and "snow scene" keywords...you must go back and find all your snow pictures to find the snowmen and snow scenes! (Unless you have these photos in Lightroom - you can search for "snow pictures" and deal with that result instead of going back through all your photos.)     But on the other hand, I have 800 keywords now and you must remember them all to use them!  I try and review my list every now and then.  I love my keywords and I have also had to record how I sometimes combine certain keywords to do a search.   This would also be good to do if you tend to forget or for someone else who wants to look through your photos.   To get back to the yellow flower topic.  I take some flower pictures.  I have a keyword "flowers" and keywords for the names of individual flower types.  I really don't need to find all my yellow flowers because I would probably only be concerned with finding all my flower pictures or a certain flower in the future. I guess.  Combining "yellow" with a flower or other subject is a great keyword strategy though.  I think that is a great idea.  I haven't used it yet.  The closest I get is keywords like "yellow scene," "blue scene," etc...   I think it depends on how you think you, or others, may need to search your photos as to how you set up your keywording scheme, or how elaborate you want to make it.  I guess there are no laid out rules for everyone's keywording strategies, maybe record them.

Sorry for any misspelled words.  I have a hierarchy apart from Lightroom.  Every keyword is under a Category Heading and the headings that have a large amount of keywords under them have sub-headings.  This is not in Lightroom.  But it comes in handy looking up keywords, as my alphabetical list and my explanation list.  (The explanation list is where I put my few rules of the road for combining certain keywords or not).  Thanks for the "underscore" info, I have not had time to read.  I do not have my keyword phrases underscored, hence I can not use (I think this would be an option in the Text Filter if I did) the Text Filter for a "NOT" operator very well.  "Doesn't Contain" (the NOT operator) does not see keyword phrases as one keyword.  It brings in results for every word in the phrase and also could cut out many other keywords with the same word, that you might want_ in _the result.  Unseen disaster!  Why could I not think in the past to combine my keyword phrases!  The keyword phrase "very big birds" could be written "verybigbirds!"  That is one unique word.  The Metadata Filter in Lightroom (as I understand) will treat keyword phrases like one word.  It searches for the whole phrase only, not for individual words contained in the phrase.  The Metadata Filter will search with the "AND" and "OR" operators, it just doesn't have any "NOT" operator, that I know of. 

To me keywording photos...photos themselves are very non-objective matter.  To me, you can never hope to round up photos 100% without inconsistencies here and there.  I'm just happy if I can  feed in keywords like "snowmen" "snowstorm" "edited" "tint" and get a result.  I think to study digital asset management, keywording, and Lightroom well before you start can lower your mistake ratio. 


Sandy


----------



## gpsmikey (Jul 7, 2015)

One thing I would suggest for someone seriously considering starting keywording is to consider getting a copy of (or borrow) "The DAM Book" - Digital Asset Management for Photographers.  The author does a pretty good job of covering lots of ideas and why you should do things certain ways.  Certainly tailor to your needs, but it at least gives you a good starting point for developing your plans.  Amazon carries the book as does a number of other places (although Amazon is showing strange prices on it right now - there are newer books also on Digital Asset Management).  Something to consider.


----------



## Ian.B (Jun 30, 2015)

Keywords; I hate them but I have gotta hav'em. However I often wonder which is best/do I have too many or not enough and I'm sure others ask themselves the same question so a "Your keywording tips" thread might be handy place to put together some ideas/ways to use/finding photos and so on



One question I have: Should I have a 'yellow flower' keyword or would 'yellow' and 'flower' be better keywords. Should a _ be used?

or "old building", "old stone building" or is "old" and "building" and "stone" a better way to go

I now; very much horse for courses; what work for me but.....


How do you find _the photo_?
I have been typing into the Filter at the top of the key word list; works OK if I have done my part with k/wording. But would it be better to use grid module/text/keywords


These days photography/editing/posting/sharing/helping online where I can is just my thing to do. I don't consider my images to be overly important although the kids might think differently in many years times
I have often said to newbies not to make digital photography harder/more confusing and complicated than it has to be. Sometimes I feel my keywording is like that. 

BTW I do have pretty good hierarchy list. 

Got any tips to share.


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 8, 2015)

Sandyjas said:


> I would think seriously first about whether you might be wanting to grow in photography in the future.
> Sandy


 lol Sandy; my past is _far longer_ than the future  or should that be lol.

Thanks again to _everyone _who offered anything at all to the thread. No one system is going to work for everyone but most systems can be improved so I need to re-read  the thread and take some notes of the ideas that I could use. Of course I know I have been asking the questions for so many others who are too shy to ask; I don't mind being the dummy for others 

I have often asked in a general way what will happen to your photos when you fall off the perch? Ever thought about it? IMO; if we don't have a _reasonable filing system_ no one is going to worry too much about all those photo files we have collected. But 20-30- 50 years how will photo files be stored and read? What we do now may not mean a thing then. 

Was this mentioned above (??) If we put "_" in front of a keyword (_Landscapes) then that keyword will be at the very top of the keyword list.


----------



## Roelof Moorlag (Jul 8, 2015)

> One way to deal with spaces in keywords and the way Lightroom searches for these kinds of keywords in smart collections is to use (non-exporting) synonyms. So your keywords are 'Grand Canyon', 'Bryce Canyon', Grand Teton' etc. and their non-exporting synonyms are 'GrandCanyon', 'BryceCanyon' and 'GrandTeton'. If you set-up a smart collection based on keywords, you use 'Keyword = <Synonym>'.



Nice tips Johan for addressing the 'spaces in keywords'  issue!
I did not know the smart collection <Synonym> either

Roelof


----------



## Roelof Moorlag (Jul 8, 2015)

> One thing I would suggest for someone seriously considering starting keywording is to consider getting a copy of (or borrow) "The DAM Book" - Digital Asset Management for Photographers.


Yes, Peter Kroghs book is covering all things that has to do with managing your digital collection. Very good indeed. 
You can get an impression of how he is writing on dpbestflow, a very rich source.


----------



## Roelof Moorlag (Jul 8, 2015)

> I have often asked in a general way what will happen to your photos when you fall off the perch? Ever thought about it? IMO; if we don't have a_reasonable filing system_ no one is going to worry too much about all those photo files we have collected. But 20-30- 50 years how will photo files be stored and read? What we do now may not mean a thing then.



I did give my father in law a copy of lightroom and learned him the basics. He managed all his photowork with it and now he passed i'm able to get in control over his collection. Without this i would always have doubts if the collection is complete or not.

Another thought: I think it important to make hard copy output of your (best) work regularly. Photo's, books, posters, etc...
I have the intention to do so


----------



## tspear (Jul 8, 2015)

Ian.B said:


> I have often asked in a general way what will happen to your photos when you fall off the perch? Ever thought about it? IMO; if we don't have a _reasonable filing system_ no one is going to worry too much about all those photo files we have collected. But 20-30- 50 years how will photo files be stored and read? What we do now may not mean a thing then.



I actually have discussed with my two older kids (they are in college).
They are aware of the Lr software, and where all the pictures are stored, and it is also why I enabled auto-write of the metadata back to the image. Another reason for the DNG, no loss of the sidecar files and trying to explain them and manage them.

Next year I plan to work on my parents, and then tackle my brothers.

Tim


----------



## Sandyjas (Jul 9, 2015)

I went back to my NOT Operator notes and I don't think that the keyword phrase "verybigbirds" will help that much when using Doesn't Contain in the Text Filter.  I really wish the Text Filter had an option to see keyword phrases as one keyword without underscores.  Seems like typing in it would be faster than scrolling the Metadata Filter.


Sandy


----------



## Ian.B (Jul 10, 2015)

I have two kids with a interest in photography so they will work it out. I hate to think what I will find on my 80++ mother's computer lol. She the most tidiest of house ladies but the computer is a different story 

I have done some tidying up/added length to hierarchies and now I'm more confused than ever  

Gone back to "BackStreets" as thats a term used here. Saw a photo thread today about the "_backroads_ of mid north...">>[country roads of ....]. 
My keywords are more about _ME_ finding _MY_ files. 

cheers all....anyone got any more ??....


----------

