Meta Data: The devil's in the details?

* warning - contains iphone *   <- red


I never use meta data.  I never use WMP library.  Because - i dont rip cds - made by companies - all the meta data in my MP3s is basically useless. (canadians pay media taxes for right to download)

When Vista came out, I railed against the removal of type / modified - alot.  I thought ratings were for kids.  Tags as well. etc.

Luckily - I havent had to deal with meta data - until now.  I will spare you 4 paragraphs of swearing at itunes - and a days worth of google searching - to make iphone work like i want - but the end story is:

itunes SUCKS....  oops sorry.  ok now that that is out of my system -

Itunes uses meta data - to the extent that you cannot get around using it.  I have a beatles folder.. every song..mp3.
The only way into the iphone - is itunes - although after disabling everything - i got drag and drop (to itunes) to basically work.

I say basically - because itunes uses meta data to the extreme.  You finally get going dragging folders in - but all that crazy hidden meta data - is how the phone works/displays.

You end up with folders called abbey road with one song - then 8 octopuses gardens..

SO - i finally LEARNED metadata - as i had to - to BYPASS itunes SYNC garbage.

in a nutshell - meta data my well be cool and offer lots of data options - but in general - META DATA IS A SYSTEM SO COMPLEX that it is being used as a way (at least on iphone) to ensure you get "real" content.

NOone is going to fill out this crap for every song and item they have - all 15 options -and if they do - well i feel sorry for them

Back to the removal of type/modified and yes UP and the aping of mac OSX in vista =

Could it be big companies like ms and apple love this meta data stuff - and are supporting it - at the expence of regular FILENAMES and types?

Building an interface out of it (iphone) or leaning towords it (vista) ..

Meta data is the realm of MACHINES not people.  UI's should not be built around 15 sets of data that MUST MATCH exactly to be usable.

Ill end this rant here - but in closing - I have now learned that tags and ratings and group - in file editing is useful - like CSS is useful..

but neither UI's or experience should be built around - or relly apon these structures - top level.

The only reason to do so - is to limit human interaction and force controled distribution?


yes - i read 1984 too many times.


what do you think: meta freedom - or meta control?

*edit - yes i am aware of group editing - doesnt work like machines - options not there

I don't even understand your problem. Folders and filenames are metadata too. So is file type and date modified etc.

Additionally, I have about 2500 songs in my music library. About 20 of those don't have valid Artist, Album, whatever fields in their metadata. The number of songs where I actually entered this information myself: 0.

I don't know where you get your music from, but unless you're recording it from an analog input they usually come with metadata preset.

Sven Groot said:

I don't even understand your problem. Folders and filenames are metadata too. So is file type and date modified etc.

Additionally, I have about 2500 songs in my music library. About 20 of those don't have valid Artist, Album, whatever fields in their metadata. The number of songs where I actually entered this information myself: 0.

I don't know where you get your music from, but unless you're recording it from an analog input they usually come with metadata preset.

Perhaps there is programmer meta data - that is behind the scenes.  fine. im talking front facing UIs based on this hidden info.

Hoops to jump through.
Barriers to work around.

get an iphone - you will quickly see how this is very unfriendly to "un-sanctioned" (be that right or wrong) content

jamie said:

Sven Groot said:

*snip*

Perhaps there is programmer meta data - that is behind the scenes.  fine. im talking front facing UIs based on this hidden info.

Hoops to jump through.
Barriers to work around.

get an iphone - you will quickly see how this is very unfriendly to "un-sanctioned" (be that right or wrong) content

What you have an issue with is iTunes's UI for managing metadata. That has nothing to do with metadata itself. You've been using metadata since you first turned on a PC, whether you know it or not.

And it's not behind the scenes: file name is perhaps the most important piece of metadata. Most of the Windows UI is based around file names (explorer shows file names; icons on your start menu are just the filenames of the shortcuts). Its a prime example of a front facing UI based on pretty much nothing *but* metadata.

Sven Groot said:

jamie said:

*snip*

What you have an issue with is iTunes's UI for managing metadata. That has nothing to do with metadata itself. You've been using metadata since you first turned on a PC, whether you know it or not.

And it's not behind the scenes: file name is perhaps the most important piece of metadata. Most of the Windows UI is based around file names (explorer shows file names; icons on your start menu are just the filenames of the shortcuts). Its a prime example of a front facing UI based on pretty much nothing *but* metadata.

re  "What you have an issue with is iTunes's UI for managing metadata."

i sure do!..  it is a system designed rigouresley strindgentley and bogusly hard - and spelled wrong

with vista i see common ways to organzie things being removed...and being replaced by - this apple-esque style of control

i said i read 1984 too many times.. but can you picture a time where everything must be labeled (media) 15 times to be displayed or found on your machine?

in other words:  How can we make it very hard for people to copy content?
a: we could build UI's around 15 sets of data our machines make - instead of what the user calls the folder and names the file

jamie said:

Sven Groot said:

*snip*

re  "What you have an issue with is iTunes's UI for managing metadata."

i sure do!..  it is a system designed rigouresley strindgentley and bogusly hard - and spelled wrong

with vista i see common ways to organzie things being removed...and being replaced by - this apple-esque style of control

i said i read 1984 too many times.. but can you picture a time where everything must be labeled (media) 15 times to be displayed or found on your machine?

in other words:  How can we make it very hard for people to copy content?
a: we could build UI's around 15 sets of data our machines make - instead of what the user calls the folder and names the file

with vista i see common ways to organzie thigs being removed...

Such as? The classical metadata types of filename and folder etc. are still there. These are very rigid organisations and do not take into account the type of the data stored. Vista adds additional metadata for certain file types (actually it exposes metadata that was already there in most cases) but I don't see what was removed, so please give an example.

Sven Groot said:

jamie said:

*snip*

Such as? The classical metadata types of filename and folder etc. are still there. These are very rigid organisations and do not take into account the type of the data stored. Vista adds additional metadata for certain file types (actually it exposes metadata that was already there in most cases) but I don't see what was removed, so please give an example.

i have many times..  trying to add arrange by type back or view by modified  back .. and again up - not the removal of the file tree - but the downplaying of it - to make way for - undisplayable files - unless sanctioned.

* yes its not like that now.. but sales guys are in charge!  

*i guess its sort of a main st / wall st  dilema

jamie said:

Sven Groot said:

*snip*

i have many times..  trying to add arrange by type back or view by modified  back .. and again up - not the removal of the file tree - but the downplaying of it - to make way for - undisplayable files - unless sanctioned.

* yes its not like that now.. but sales guys are in charge!  

*i guess its sort of a main st / wall st  dilema

I'm sorry but your experience is perpendicular to mine. I organize primary by folder and file name and I still do so in Vista, and I don't feel anything was taken away. The breadcrumb bar actually makes the hierarchical relationship more clear than before.

Sven Groot said:

jamie said:

*snip*

I'm sorry but your experience is perpendicular to mine. I organize primary by folder and file name and I still do so in Vista, and I don't feel anything was taken away. The breadcrumb bar actually makes the hierarchical relationship more clear than before.

haha

how about this - pretend windows worked like itunes. (and it IS starting to lean that way)

would you like windows?

ill assume no.

so ..ms - can we please have type and modified on every file right mouse - and please never build a ui - like apple has - out of meta data - populated by machines not humans.

*not saying ms would ... just saying they could

ps - i wish i had an iclip of my iday idealing with this icrap

Metadata is the most wonderful thing that has ever happened to my media collection. Back in the day, I would spend hours carefully organizing my photo's and music that I'd ripped. There are too many headaches with doing that though. If I have a picture of me and my friends on vacation in disneyland, should it be in a folder for pictures of my friends, should it be in a folder named Disneyland? After a while it gets too complex to manage.

It makes finding stuff even harder. I'm looking for all of the pictures of my friend Fred. Oh, I think there are some in the Fred folder, and in the 2008 anniversary party folder, and in the Disneyland folder.

With metadata, I don't have to care about the physical organization of the files on the disk or filenames. Generally when I dump the contents of my camera card, I just dump them into folders with the date grouped by year. Then I import everything into Lightroom and while I'm editing, I tag with relevant information about where, and who. Most of the interesting stuff like aperature and shutter speed is already embedded by the camera.

Searching and browsing then becomes a breeze. It's easy to search by any combination of data like how many pictures of my cat did I take last friday that used a shutter speed greater than 200.

Now, I've only limited exposure to iTunes, so maybe it handles metadata poorly, but in general, metadata is going to give you a lot more flexibility. Also, it give you more time to spend on actually using media, rather than sorting it.

kettch said:

Metadata is the most wonderful thing that has ever happened to my media collection. Back in the day, I would spend hours carefully organizing my photo's and music that I'd ripped. There are too many headaches with doing that though. If I have a picture of me and my friends on vacation in disneyland, should it be in a folder for pictures of my friends, should it be in a folder named Disneyland? After a while it gets too complex to manage.

It makes finding stuff even harder. I'm looking for all of the pictures of my friend Fred. Oh, I think there are some in the Fred folder, and in the 2008 anniversary party folder, and in the Disneyland folder.

With metadata, I don't have to care about the physical organization of the files on the disk or filenames. Generally when I dump the contents of my camera card, I just dump them into folders with the date grouped by year. Then I import everything into Lightroom and while I'm editing, I tag with relevant information about where, and who. Most of the interesting stuff like aperature and shutter speed is already embedded by the camera.

Searching and browsing then becomes a breeze. It's easy to search by any combination of data like how many pictures of my cat did I take last friday that used a shutter speed greater than 200.

Now, I've only limited exposure to iTunes, so maybe it handles metadata poorly, but in general, metadata is going to give you a lot more flexibility. Also, it give you more time to spend on actually using media, rather than sorting it.

cool

but what i hear you saying is that you ...filled out all the tags and meta data..

how long did it take?  do you do that for every file?

i call things 1.jpg 2.jpg ....  its expendable - why waste time on labeling stuff you may not want in a month.

* I did sit here and organize every single beatle mp3 into folders- in order - with meta tag names for genre, #, artist, title - and got all album cover.

manually.  but heck - its the BEATLES
as if im going to waste 5 hours on the stones ha

you do this?  often?

jamie said:

Sven Groot said:

*snip*

i have many times..  trying to add arrange by type back or view by modified  back .. and again up - not the removal of the file tree - but the downplaying of it - to make way for - undisplayable files - unless sanctioned.

* yes its not like that now.. but sales guys are in charge!  

*i guess its sort of a main st / wall st  dilema

What does "up" have to do with meta data?

You're concerned that the "up" button isn't there, not that the functionality is gone (because it isn't). Why don't you just trick yourself into seeing the parent item in the breadcrumb bar as the "up" button? It might be less painful in the end... Heck, you can trick yourself into seeing the parent of the parent item in the bar as a "double up" button. Nifty, eh?

Also, what does Vista's organization have to do with iTunes?

I believe iPhoto also crapifies the directory structure. I noticed this when someone gave me a cd with her iPhoto library on it. There were folders for each individual date, and then folders within those folders for just the thumbnails for photos that existed in other folders within the parent folder. It was an utter mess.

Explorer->View by list (if you're truly concerned about order) -> Right click on list headings bar and select Date modified (if not already there). How hard is that?

jamiezewhiner said:

i call things 1.jpg 2.jpg ....  its expendable - why waste time on labeling stuff you may not want in a month.

Generally, you tag items as you add them...If you're burning from a cd, the meta data is already there. WMP will fill in the rest. Importing from a camera gives you the option to tag the items. Live Photo gallery is amazing when it comes to tagging photos, in fact. Now, you can even tag faces in photos....you can't do that via just folders. Office 2007 lets you tag docs as you save them.

jamie said:

Sven Groot said:

*snip*

haha

how about this - pretend windows worked like itunes. (and it IS starting to lean that way)

would you like windows?

ill assume no.

so ..ms - can we please have type and modified on every file right mouse - and please never build a ui - like apple has - out of meta data - populated by machines not humans.

*not saying ms would ... just saying they could

ps - i wish i had an iclip of my iday idealing with this icrap

What do you mean by "type and modified", in the list pane? Those columns are there for me. If they aren't you can right click and select from any number of a bajillion different columns to see.

edit: what he said

jamie said:

kettch said:

*snip*

cool

but what i hear you saying is that you ...filled out all the tags and meta data..

how long did it take?  do you do that for every file?

i call things 1.jpg 2.jpg ....  its expendable - why waste time on labeling stuff you may not want in a month.

* I did sit here and organize every single beatle mp3 into folders- in order - with meta tag names for genre, #, artist, title - and got all album cover.

manually.  but heck - its the BEATLES
as if im going to waste 5 hours on the stones ha

you do this?  often?

You're making it sound like Vista forces you to fill out all those fields. It doesn't. I have plenty of unnamed unlabeled pictures and my experience dealing with them is no different than in XP.

As for music: why don't your files already have that metadata preset? Like I said, unless you recorded them manually from an analog source, it should be there already. All music you buy online has it set. All music you rip from CDs has it set. I'm willing to bet 99% of music you can download with p2p file sharing already has it set. So where did these files come from that they don't?

mVPstar said:

jamie said:

*snip*

Generally, you tag items as you add them...If you're burning from a cd, the meta data is already there. WMP will fill in the rest. Importing from a camera gives you the option to tag the items. Live Photo gallery is amazing when it comes to tagging photos, in fact. Now, you can even tag faces in photos....you can't do that via just folders. Office 2007 lets you tag docs as you save them.

i agree with you.  2 points:

"if not already there"  it isnt usually

"it was an utter mess" - made of / caused by meta data dependant  UI?

jamie said:

Sven Groot said:

*snip*

re  "What you have an issue with is iTunes's UI for managing metadata."

i sure do!..  it is a system designed rigouresley strindgentley and bogusly hard - and spelled wrong

with vista i see common ways to organzie things being removed...and being replaced by - this apple-esque style of control

i said i read 1984 too many times.. but can you picture a time where everything must be labeled (media) 15 times to be displayed or found on your machine?

in other words:  How can we make it very hard for people to copy content?
a: we could build UI's around 15 sets of data our machines make - instead of what the user calls the folder and names the file

You're trying to use iTunes in a way that it wasn't designed to be used.

iTunes is designed around two ways of getting your music into the software:
  (1) Purchasing from the iTunes Store
  (2) Ripping music directly from your CDs

In the case of (1), all the metadata comes prepopulated for you.  Songs from the iTunes Store come with song name, artist, composer, album, year, etc. already set, so you never have to worry about metadata in any way.

In the case of (2), iTunes will automatically download data about any CD you put in your CD drive and store that data in the MP3/M4A along with the music.  Again, you never have to worry about metadata in any way--  even though you're not within the Apple "ecosystem" when you're ripping music from your own CDs.

Metadata's not about limiting users to one particular vendor's system or way of thinking.  It's about giving users the flexibility to do anything they want with their music (or data, or files, or whatever) when they decide that they want to hunt down a particular song, or create playlists out of songs, or find similar songs.  It may be a pain to get metadata into your music library if you have a bunch of music that you already ripped and didn't bother to tag when you ripped it, but it's worth it in terms of organization and workflow if you can get all your music tagged in a uniform, orderly way.  There's a lot more that you can do with a fully tagged music library than you can with a plain Artist/Album Title folder structure (although you can emulate that in iTunes if you feel so inclined, using the Browser view:  View -> Show Browser).

Sven Groot said:

jamie said:

*snip*

You're making it sound like Vista forces you to fill out all those fields. It doesn't. I have plenty of unnamed unlabeled pictures and my experience dealing with them is no different than in XP.

As for music: why don't your files already have that metadata preset? Like I said, unless you recorded them manually from an analog source, it should be there already. All music you buy online has it set. All music you rip from CDs has it set. I'm willing to bet 99% of music you can download with p2p file sharing already has it set. So where did these files come from that they don't?

i cant comment on that post

suffice to say not all content is ripped from store bought cds - or purchased online

CannotResolveSymbol said:

jamie said:

*snip*

You're trying to use iTunes in a way that it wasn't designed to be used.

iTunes is designed around two ways of getting your music into the software:
  (1) Purchasing from the iTunes Store
  (2) Ripping music directly from your CDs

In the case of (1), all the metadata comes prepopulated for you.  Songs from the iTunes Store come with song name, artist, composer, album, year, etc. already set, so you never have to worry about metadata in any way.

In the case of (2), iTunes will automatically download data about any CD you put in your CD drive and store that data in the MP3/M4A along with the music.  Again, you never have to worry about metadata in any way--  even though you're not within the Apple "ecosystem" when you're ripping music from your own CDs.

Metadata's not about limiting users to one particular vendor's system or way of thinking.  It's about giving users the flexibility to do anything they want with their music (or data, or files, or whatever) when they decide that they want to hunt down a particular song, or create playlists out of songs, or find similar songs.  It may be a pain to get metadata into your music library if you have a bunch of music that you already ripped and didn't bother to tag when you ripped it, but it's worth it in terms of organization and workflow if you can get all your music tagged in a uniform, orderly way.  There's a lot more that you can do with a fully tagged music library than you can with a plain Artist/Album Title folder structure (although you can emulate that in iTunes if you feel so inclined, using the Browser view:  View -> Show Browser).

"You're trying to use *insert product here* in a way that it wasn't designed to be used."

story of my life