Lightroom 4 GPS/ Country Code questions and answers

[Murray Foote]

I posted some questions on the Adobe Forum and got answers from Ian Lyons. Below if people are interested:

1. If you import an image with GPS data, Lightroom 4 will add appropriate values for Sublocation, City, State/Province, Country and Country Code. Is there a way to add this data to existing files while retaining history?

You can write metadata to files ([Ctrl][S]), remove those files from Lightroom and then synch folder to reimport them. That reimports them with all modifed settings but without their history. Is there another way that retains the history?

2. Is a google map link available for a GPS location of a photograph?

In Lightroom 3, you could click on the GPS location and that took you to a Google map page with a specific web link that you could then publish, eg on a blog. You can copy and paste the GPS location into a Google map page but that does not give you a web link you can use.

3. Is there a way of publishing a map?

Is there (or will there be) any way of exporting a map page, say as a jpeg?
Is it OK to take a screen dump of a map page and publish it, eg in a blog?

1. There is no way of saving history to the file.

2. Yes, hold down Alt/Option key when clicking on GPS field in Map module.

3a. Not that I'm aware of, and I would have expected such a feature to have been documented if it was possible.

3b. Not at present, can't speak to what might or might not happening in future.

3c. Good question. It's effectively what Adobe, book authors, bloggers, reviewers have already being doing since Lr4 beta came out, and for a very long time before that.

[ATJ]

If you import an image with GPS data, Lightroom 4 will add appropriate values for Sublocation, City, State/Province, Country and Country Code.

Thanks. I'll have to make sure I don't import any images with GPS data. I DO NOT want Lightroom doing this.

This is one of the things that really annoys me about Adobe - or at least their developers. They seem to think that every idea they like, everyone else will want. I find over and over again that there are features I have to avoid because they are, well, quite frankly, stupid.

[Murray Foote]

When you first install Lightroom 4, it asks you whether you want to do this or not.

[ATJ]

When you first install Lightroom 4, it asks you whether you want to do this or not.

Was that added after the last beta? When I installed the beta I was not asked this.

[Murray Foote]

The Beta didn't have the capacity to add the location info from the GPS fix.

[stubbsy]

Thanks Murray - useful info as I'm just about to install the final LR4.

[stubbsy]

When you first install Lightroom 4, it asks you whether you want to do this or not.

Murray

I just uninstalled the released LR4 and was asked this question when I first opened my converted main LR3 catalog.



When you enable it they even tell you how to turn it off later:

[Murray Foote]

I just uninstalled the released LR4...

"installed", perhaps?

I found it straightforward to install and combine both LR3 and LR4 Beta catalogues into LR4. And yes, I got that message (the first anyway).

[Steffen]

"Reverse geocoding"?? Someone at Adobe has completely lost their mind. Next thing we know, eBook readers will be called "reverse writers"...

Cheers
Steffen.

[Mr Darcy]

"Reverse geocoding"?? Someone at Adobe has completely lost their mind.

It is not Adobe's term. Clumsy as it is, the term has been in use in the Geotagging community for quite a few years.
Actually Reverse GeoENcoding. I think Adobe's slight change is an improvement.

[Murray Foote]

I've worked it out. There is a way of updating location descriptions for existing images in Lightroom 4 from the GPS setting.

If you select some images with the same GPS location and [Synch Metadata] for GPS, this fills in the location descriptions, even if none of the images have them to start with.

There are then two ways of doing this for a Folder of images:

(1) Modifying in Library

* Select a bunch of images taken in the same place and therefore with the same GPS setting. (You can check that the GPS settings are the same because under Metadata in the right-hand tab it will show a single GPS location rather than "<mixed>".)
* [Synch Metadata] for GPS.
* Repeat for different locations.

If you have a single image in a location, you'd need to create a virtual copy, [Synch Metadata] for GPS, then delete the virtual copy.

(2) Modifying through re-import

This method is more complex but may be quicker where there are many GPS locations.

It is probably a good idea to first ensure you have a current backup, or backup to a catalogue, in case anything goes wrong.

* Select images with no changes to Develop settings: click the Metadata filter (Library/ Grid mode) and then filter for Develop Preset = "Default Settings".
* [Ctrl][S] to write metadata for these images to files (unless you already do this with every image change)
* Remove the selected images from the Lightroom catalogue: click [Delete] and then select [Remove] (do not [Delete from Disk]).
* Reimport the images: right-click the folder for the images and select [Synchronise Folder ...].

All the images with no Development changes will now have location descriptions.

Now you can update the images with Development changes without affecting the History.
* Filter for Develop Settings = "Custom",
* Select an image (or several at the same location),
* filter for Develop Settings = "All" and
* synch GPS settings from an adjacent image with location descriptions.

[Mr Darcy]

The problem with using the lat/lon geotag to fill the IPTC location fields is that the system often gets it wrong. This is not a problem specific to LR, but seems to be built in to the technology. While the country has always been right in my tests, I have seen cases where State, city, location and sublocation have all been wrong. Sometimes in contradictory ways. E.g. State = NSW, City=Wodonga. I wouldn't be surprised if ATJ has seen cases where even the country is wrong. Also location and sub location may not be what you want even if it gets it "right".
While this is a database error and may be fixed in the future (It may even be fixed now - it has been several years since I gave up on the concept) the pain of fixing it manually is greater than the pain of setting it manually in the first place, or just not bothering to fill it in.

[ATJ]

The problem with using the lat/lon geotag to fill the IPTC location fields is that the system often gets it wrong.

In my cases, I don't think I have ever seen it get it right.

For my dives, I geotag based on the entry point for the dive (combined with the depth data from my dive watch). The lat/lon of the entry point is either determined manually for my frequent shore dive sites or from a GPS logger for boat dives. I also have presets for dives sites that include:

Sub-location: Name of dive site
City: Suburb or other appropriate location
State/Province: State or other appropriate
Country: Country

At the moment I'm using "Jeffrey's Lightroom Geoencoding Support". When I select a tracklog it tells me the number of datapoints. the date range and the starting location (which in my case is the same for all the datapoints). The location information would be pretty much the same information that LR4 would use. This data is always NOT what I want.

For example, a dive at Oak Park.
What I want: Oak Park, Cronulla, NSW, Australia
What I'd get: 92 The Esplanade, Cronulla NSW 2230, Australia.

Or a dive at the Gravel Loader.
What I want: Gravel Load, Bass Point, NSW, Australia
What I'd get: LOT 2 Bas Point Tourist Rd, Shell Cove NSW 2529, Australia.

A dive at Anemone Bay
What I want: Anemone Bay, North Solitary Island, NSW, Australia
What I'd get: Yuraygir National Park, Lot 2 Wooli Rd, Wooli NSW 2462, Australia

[Murray Foote]

You'd have to test it with LR4 to see if that still applies. Apart from accuracy, it sounds as though for Australia you've been getting a road map rather than a hybrid road map/ terrain map.

I don't have any images with GPS locations taken in Australia; mine are all from the Antarctic trip and the Japan trip.

I tried checking with Japanese images. The ones I tried seem to give reasonable results and they are only down to the equivalent of suburb. Probably too hard to give street names and numbers off a map in Japan anyway. One I checked of eagles taken from a boat in the open sea south of the Kuril Islands just shows country code as Japan, which is reasonable.

It only seems to pick up towns or national parks for Patagonia, not street addresses. It doesn't pick up anything for Antarctica and surprisingly, neither for Tahiti.

Curiously, it has filled in most blank locations for Patagonia, though not for Japan. The difference might be that the Patagonian ones were from the LR3 catalogue I upgraded to LR4 while the Japan ones were from the LR4 Beta catalogue I later added. So many people may not encounter the problem of missing location descriptions.

I did discover some Iguazu Falls images correctly identified as Iguazu Falls but shown as in Brazil rather than Argentina. That's a fault of Google maps which shows our room in the hotel being in Brazil but the dining room in Argentina. I'm pretty sure the boundary goes along the middle of the river and the map is wrong.

[ATJ]

The point that Greg was making (and I was agreeing) is that it is only as good as the data available and it appears the data available is not very good and at best unreliable. This pretty much make the exercise pointless if you have to keep checking and correcting. It would have been easier just to set the data you want at import.

I wish Adobe would spend time on fixing all the bugs (some that have been there since LR2) instead of adding features of limited value (or that are broken from the start).

[Mr Darcy]

I did discover some Iguazu Falls images correctly identified as Iguazu Falls but shown as in Brazil rather than Argentina.

I had forgotten that the reverse geocoding got the country wrong several times on the trip. And yes, the border runs down the middle of the river. But I am annoyed that some of my photos claim to have been taken in Brazil even though I have never been there.

As I said earlier, and Andrew has repeated, the issue is not a Lightroom one, but a data one. It shows up in Geosetter and Aperture 3 as well. Until the data is corrected, then this "feature" has only limited use. Andrew's need for a dive site means it will NEVER work for him as it is unlikely these will ever be listed.

The problem also shows up on both my navigating GPSrs. They quite often claim a street does not exist. That is because the data has the street in the wrong suburb. But you have to put the suburb in, then the street, so as far as the GPSr is concerned it is not there. Even though you can see it on the map.

[Murray Foote]

There may still be problems with Google map but the database may have improved for descriptions.

I just tried applying GPS locations to some screen dump images, one location at Blue Lake near Mount Kosciosko and the other at a reef under the sea near Narooma (a possible diving location). In both cases it gave sensible descriptions, if somewhat imprecise, without spurious street addresses. Good enough for me at least.

[stubbsy]

I've worked it out...

Murray much of what you've described here is doable with Jeffrey friedl's excellent Geoencoding plugin for Lightroom. I highly recommend it and it's donation ware - pay what you think it's worth

The latest version has smarter reverse geocoding than LR4 and it also supports a KML file of personal location mappings (might be useful for you too Andrew)

[Murray Foote]

Thanks,Peter.

I did download the plugin a while ago but didn't actually purchase it. Perhaps it was just my lack of drive to understand it properly but it seemed to be more specified to GPS logging than direct GPS recording.

I should devote some time to reassessing it but my first priority is to process may thousands of images from both Thredbo Blues Festival and Japan. At least LR4 seems reasonably functional, to me at least. How much more Geoffrey Friedl's add-on can give me may take me a while to find out.