XMP and workflow of different applications

Because DxOPL does for now only read XMP/IPTC/EXIF and also export info in this matter on Tiff and Jpegs i try to be sure to understand it’s restrictions.(in order not to mesh up DxOPL’s readout and preset actions)
i understand that XMP is a sort off Standard, but in general it’s a textfile where command lines and information is stored to read by applications as DxOPL.
And as far as i know it’s a adding process when you run it through different applications who can write ina XMP.
What i not yet know is the route of a XMP file to DxOPL a thing to be considered?
Say if i use Fast Raw Viewer to create a XMPfile, which is basicly tailored for Adobe’s LR system as colortags and exposure corrections/ WB corrections and such.
As in the corrections done (you can do some initial corrections in FRV wile examining the RAW-file and culling) in FRV and i use XMP creation it stores those Adobe tailored commandlines in a XMP file.(i hope i describe it correct if not please correct me.)

Then i would run it through XNviewMP for adding keywords and such so DxOPL’s indexing and search function can use those information writen in the XMP.

What i like to understand is what does DxOPL with settings made by FRV about exposure compensation WB settings, , stars, colorlabels (Or overwrite the XNviewMP application in the second step all not recognised data made by FRV. and write only the info it can deal with in the XMP?)

some screen shots of xmp testing:
the settings in FRV:

xmp view of the made xmpfile:

looking in XNviewMP it reads those writings in XMP.

and also the adjustment corrections:

ok i add a keyword and nothing more.

XMP-file is updated by XNviewMP.
now i open DXO my editor:
would i see the WB correction and de rating and the keywords and the EV of +1? no colorlabel i think because it doesn’t have this.
when i open the folder it shows the DB info so i made a new image in folder “nieuw”
copied the rawfile and the xmp inthere no show:
renamed both:
re start dxopl:
(nothing) i am thinking there is a error inhere of v3.2.
tested it in a other version and WB: no change, Keywords, shown, EV not shown and to my surprise no 5 star rating.

new test:
only 3 star to create fresh xmp by FRV:

open xnviewmp:
and rating visible:

open DXOPL:

so passed through.
now i close dxo and reopen xnvmp
add keyword and add 2 stars to 5.

view xmp:

reopen DXOpl:
it reads the change of 5 stars but where is my “keyword”?

back to xnvmp refesh thumbnail library.
(reading xmpfiles again.) waiting, waiting waiting.
viewing my info xnvmp doesn’t create a “dc” header/chapter when i add keywords.

i start to feel stupid or i am in a rabit hole …
XMP a standard carrier? yes as in the way a txt file is but in a standard information transport container? geesh i get confused.


I don’t know the exact use of xmp, but editing data used in one program can’t be used in another program. RAW converters are parametric editors. The editings are saved as parameters used by the different tools of that specific program. Every converter has its own tools, that’s why they’re different programs.
I would be more pleased if DxO would write the iptc section. Would save a lot of us a lot of


1 Like

Well, i was setting up a workflow.
First culling and checking.
Fast Raw Viewer. If i could rate with stars only great. If i could do more marveles.(didn’t count on it but hence if it worked it was fun. You could so some pre processing in FRV.)

Then do the keyword managment in xnviewmp.(sins dxo doesn’t write in xmp)
Before dxo is covering my raw archive DB.
I was hoping it was working.
Well not really so back to only viewing and checking until i understand why xnviewmp doesn’t update the xmp in the DS chapter/header.
Iptc in a raw file is a bit difficult.

It’s a pain in the xxs those nearly the same systems. :grin:

Hello Peter,

XMP is a complicated topic.
Altough technically it is only a textfile, the tags inside can be really complicated.

What FastRawViewer adds to the XMP file is correct.
You should see the star ratings inside Photolab. The other properties are not supported (yet).
The raw editing parameters can only be read by Lightroom or some other programs trying to mimick understanding some Lightroom edits. Photolab is not one. But you can have parallel Lightroom edits in the XMP file without interfering with other software.

I have not much experience with keywording in XnViewMP, but it is surely impotant, which dialogbox you use for it. I guess this program is not the best tool for this job.

The term IPTC can be confusing. It may refer to the old IPTC-IIM (supported by XnViewMP) and deprecated sincs 15 years or so.
The XMP also has a section called IPTC, which is the modern successor of the old one.
If you want to have a feeling what can be contained in XMP, the Exiftool homepage can give you an insight.

A jpg or tiff file can itself contain XMP data without any sidecars. Most raw files also, but it is a more dangerous method if there is a bug in the software.

I can’t really suggest you a free software for keywording your files.
There is IMatch (only Windows), Photo Supreme and Photo Mechanic (Windows and Mac) for ca. 140 EUR.
IMatch wants to write to the raw itself, but can be configured not to. It is harder to learn due to the broad function scope, but has a good help and a good forum. I chose this.
Photo Supreme might be a bit easier to learn, but has sparse documentation and a good forum.
These two are DAMs, which means you can edit and search keywords and other metadata.
Photo Mechanic is a renowned metadata editor, but you cannot search your files inside. A DAM is in public beta named Photo Mechanic Plus.

Then there is Mylio (my other software) which is not the best for keywording, but can at least edit Title, Caption and the non-hierarchical keywords. By default it only writes to XMP sidecars which is not the best for jpgs and tiffs, but it can write the data to this files on executing a special command. It is a DAM “light” with organization capabilities. Its main strength is the synchronization between devices (phones, PCs, Macs). It also lets you to rate your photos on the phone and have the ratings on your PC. It is free up to 25000 images.

There is also Lightroom with an expired trial and Adobe Bridge free with and Adobe account.

I was looking myself for an easy (and cheap) way to catalog and keyword my photos. I was thinking about using Exiftool with batch files and Mylio. After searching and thinking for a while I decided to buy IMatch, configure it to not touch raw files and use it together with Mylio. These two I liked from the above mentioned the best and everything else was much more complicated.

1 Like

In my thougths edit list belong to the program that created them. But keywords belong to the image in whatever form, raw, tiff, jpg etc.It’s a description of the content and that doesn’t change.
The old Nikon converters did add the keywords to the raw file, also the edit lists and a high quality jpg. I could use any image browser to view them. With the now a days converters I can’t. I’ve to use their software.



Not more difficult as in jpg or whatever. It’s just a block of text added to an existing file. Somewhere in the index there’s a reference to the place it starts.


Hello Zoltán,
Thanks for the elaborate answer.

As i wrote before i was used to tag at the end of my process and fysicly mirrored my folder structure on both sides. Which works fine but it makes sense to tag/organise at the beginning.
Pending of DxO to write in external files (i am not keen on depending on internal DB) i use XNviewMP which worked fine until i added FRV in my workflow.
After a nighty sleepover the “flaw/break” is in the fact that XNViewMP isn’t creating a XMP anymore and doesn’t write the “DS” section in the existing one. (aka no keywords added in the XMP sidecar.
i need to see if i can fix this until DxO is delivering a simple effective XMP editing section to manage IPTC/METAdata/EXIF ánd Keywording hopefully compatible with Adobes versions. (not for me i don’t use LR but in general lots of people do so it would be a sellingpoint.)

Good to know. So the FRV can be a solid start for my workflow.
(Maybe they can implement a simple hierarchic keywording feature which cuts out the second application => problem solved :wink: )
The fact that DxOPL can’t cope/read those extra parameters isn’t really a problem aldoh it would be nice to do some quick pre process setups wile culling. (i am new to FRV so i need to master the settings and readjust them so that it suites DxOPL the most)

Rawfile metadata is indeed editable but i don’t like to mesh around too much in my originals. A sidecar is much safer. (screwup is just delete sidecar and your fine)

Easiest way to solve this hickup is lett XNviewMP create the XMP for this moment and don’t use FVR’s XMPcreator. DxOPL can pick up the keywords and stars out the XMP.

Glad i am not the only one who is ploughing through the mud of DAM horror. :smiley:

True. It is dangerous to transfer settings of different manufactorers of processing applications between each other. Simple corrections as WB numbers in temperature and tint or a EV setting would be doable. (just copy and set in there own tool is enough. interpretation is 1:1 no additional difficulty or calculation the problem lies in the unwanted changes and hierarchic layout of presets .)

As i wrote above, i know you can but it’s less failsafe to do so.
(ideal all camera manufacturers should use a universal IPTC/EXIFdata section which can be read and edited by all applications working with RAW’s)

Untill then i hope DxO is working on a solution to discard my free solutions as uMark6 (watermark) and XNviewMP (keywording) too slimline my row of applications down.

FRV is as a culling/selecting tool a great addition to DxOPL.
It has exactly what DxOPL not have (yet), RAW/RGB histogram toggle, Edge and fine detail viewer (to find focusplane and DoF information), RGB-channel preview, quick highlight/shadow boost to check floor and sealing of the image (preference setup to the DR of your camerasensor). Small tools which can help to select the right one of a bunch/burst of images.

Oh new information: adding title in FRV is passed through export of DxO:
oh (again) : i found the trigger to add header DC on which XNviewMP can build:
adding a tittle:

en DxO is reading it then and export it also:

don’t know how much “noise” and “rubble” i cause in the XMP-file doing this but we have “lift off” LOL

Next test would be
1 culling on windows thumbnails (Fast image viewer) delete all officious mishits.
2 adding keywords on remaining (raw) images by XNviewMp => creating XMP.
3 opening FRV for second run of culling, adding title and stars if needed to help editing structure(updating XMP.)
4 opening DxOPL and finalize process.
5 backup dopfiles in subfolder and move folder of rawfiles and xmp’s to RAW archive
6 archive jpegs done.

I have a old pse and a adobe acount, lying around doing nothing, watch some bridge video’s.
So, could be an interesting centrepoint of a amateur DAM system.
User interface looks at first much more intuative then xnvmp.
And recalling your

It would be better to keep modern system up to date. (if dxopl can deal with that.)
Plus is FRV is also using adobe style xmp.
On other plus is i can edit on the back door the jpegs iptc exported by dxopl without keeping pse13 alive.
Last plus it’s not only stills i can digest in the library.
So cut out xnvmp and add in bridge could be a possibilty.

If dxo follows the compatibility of adobes xmp’s it connects rather well with there development of a DAM enviroment and can tangle in in the future.

Thanks for pointing me to that possibility.

As far as I came with a short check on XnViewMP, it changes the RAW files even if they are set as read-only, probably using Exiftool if doing anything else then Star rating or color taging.

What Bridge does to the files should be understandable by DxO without problems. It creates XMP sidecar for RAW files and changes JPG and TIFF.
You can do also the Star rating in Bridge, but I don’t see the possibility there to group a RAW+JPG pair, should you use your camera this way.

From these two software, I would rather use Bridge for keywording.

1 Like

You are right, that keywords and tags belong the raw files themselves, but these files are in an undocumented proprietary format.
Changing them by software from the manufacturer (who has the documentation of the format) is one thing, although reading the Exiftool homepage reveals also many problems which occured this way.

I hope you will be lucky with your files. My first try changing raw files (unintended) with IMatch/Exiftool got to a disaster making the files not readable by Photolab.
After such an experience, I guess you also would think twice about changing your raw files.

Even the well documented JPG files can get corrupted when writing metadata.

Xnviewmp has a strange methode, it updates a mxp when changes something and select something else. A write action creates a iptc container called original. Sort of DNG.

My main use is keywords and xmp creation , organising as in searching for not so much.
So bridge is fine for that. And the selection filters are easy.
I use jpeg plus raw but only because then i have extra menu options in camera and a wifi from camera to my tv for instand view. Most of the time i delete the oocjpegs after or before processing. So pairing is only interesting for the sidecars, dop and xmp. (asociation menu?)

I just create to identical test folders one for xnvmp frv, dxo and one for bridge, frv, dxo.
Run 10 or 15 rawfiles through it and compare outcom in handling, xmp neetnes (the less rubble the better.)
This would be enough to test functionality.

Every file can get corrupted when writing. Distinguish between the possibility of added metadata and the programs that do the writing. It is possible but must have been done in the right way. That counts for normal editing too.


Nice summary of the mess that is metadata. It would indeed be excellent if every developer followed agreed upon standards, but that seems to be a losing proposition!

I’m also an IMatch user; it’s a very capable DAM that follows open standards and doesn’t try to lock users into proprietary metadata. See https://www.photools.com/imatch/, especially the new video there. The challenge for DxO is trying to implement metadata features without having to dig too deeply into the metadata mess. That’s why I use IMatch and don’t try to depend on whatever DxO comes up with.

Another IMatch user here, love it!

made three folders
bridgemap, FBD and XNvmp
same images renamed first letter to know which came from which.
imported the keywords in bridge, easy auto initiate before importing new. (thoughtfull from them)
Started in Bridge random tagging then open in dxo ok.
close open in frv and add title. description and stars random on two.
(see if DxO has that error of disapering images after change of xmp.)

main conclusion:
1 not good: adobe is digging in my system (they told me) when i wanted the application and added creative cloud shortcut i didn’t ask. (but they told me for preformens research and i can change the private settings after install…)

2 user interface Bridge pretty easy to master from start. (better then XNviewMP)
3 works fine with FRV’s xmp update’s
and vise versa.
4 DxO hasn’t lost images yet. (error of disapering probaly by the fact that xnviewmp is using older xmp IPTC-iim in a new format of frv and dxo.)
5 dxo is reading the IPTC correct and write them in export of both applications.
added title
6 changing iptc data after loading in DxO and reopen dxo (database update forcing)
no problem.
title is exported by dxo, description not.
did a large number of iptc entry’s, dxo keeps stable.
(DxO’s author and copyright field isn’t filled by xmp. DB only.)
Last test:
filled in nonsens in bridge and exported it with dxo.
renamed the file so xnviewmp didn’t associate with a xmp sidecar.
And remarkable DxO did write all nonsens in the jpeg file even i didn’t see it in properties in windows.

last remarks:
in bridge doubleclick opens default viewer in my case Fast image viewer.

XNviewMP’s properties viewer is quite good. (exittool) need to test if bridge has the same depth before i delete XNviewMP from my system.

So a very old adobe application and a account made then far back does have value after all. :wink:

I did a test to verify the cross compatibility between ON1photoRaw 2021, XnVMP and DXO PL4. Here are my results in this page…