XMP/IPTC: What tags for the retoucher?

[marcchristopher]

Hi all,

I'm not sure, if this has been addressed... couldn't find any thread regarding this question:

I would like to embed suitable XMP/IPTC tags in the images that I retouched. Basically, I would like to correctly name the photographer, identify myself as the retoucher and add some copyright text and usage restrictions.

How is everyone handling this? Is there a kind of industry standard? Are there any tags reserved for the retoucher?

Thanks in advance for your help,
Marc

[mistermonday]

The XMP/IPTC specifications define field names. There are no restrictions to what data goes into those fields or who uses which field. If the information is for your own records, you are free to input whatever you wish, in whatever fields you wish according to how you might recall or search for keywords (tags) later.
When retouching an image for a job, I never add any metadata without the customer's permission. Some of them are very particular to what if any data they want added.
While the standards are defined, some manufacturers of image editoring s/w do not follow specs fully. They change the names of certain fields and sometimes put data from one field into a different one than you would expect. It is alway best to run a test by using a program which is fully compliant like PS, filling in sample data, then opening with another product to see where the data ends up. It's usually a very close match.
Regards, Murray

[marcchristopher]

Thanks, Murray, for your reply.
I just thought there was a kind of "commonly accepted" industry standard, which fields are reserved for the photographer, the retoucher, the right holder...

Basically, what I'm trying to do, is leave a way to identify me as a retoucher in cases where I have no control where the image ends up... without neglecting to credit the photographer. E.g. I send a finished work to a client, who then sends it to some agency, who then sends it to a designer, who sends it... etc.
Now, if someone in that chain happens to like the image, they have no chance to trace it back to me. I will, thus, not be able to restrict usage of the image or prove that I was involved in the creation (which I regard as necessary when the retouching drastically changes the image).

Or maybe I'm being overly picky here?

[mistermonday]

As I understand the laws, the copyright holder holds all rights to the image including any modifications that you have made to it, unless you have a separate legal agreement with the copyright holder which grants you some rights (usually not the case). Photographers generally do not acknowledge even that a photo has been retouched. How many magazinehave you read that ever reference a retoucher even though the photographer is credited. That's just the way it works.
Even if you did include your name in the Metadata, that metadata can be edited or completely deleted with Select All > New Image > Copy > Paste - and its all gone. Many photographers strip now keep a master copy with orig metadata and all releases have just a copyright notation and embedded digital watermarks or other non visible security.
All that being said, it never hurts to ask you client if you can add the data and have it be part of the tracking.
Regards, Murray

[marcchristopher]

Hmm, I am not a lawyer and my knowledge about image rights is very limited. You may be right about the fact that the original copyright holder holds all the rights, including all modifications...

However, I was told once that when an artist (or a retoucher, for that matter) makes significant (!) contributions to the work of an other artist (i.e. a photographer), he can claim that the resulting image is a new artwork... for which he then holds the rights.

It may be different in the US (I live in Austria). And I do know that that's not the way it works. And, of course, I know that the info can be stripped...
Dunno... I just want the info to be there when the image leaves my computer. I think that's the least I can do to claim any rights, when the image is used without my consent. (Provided, of course, I can claim any rights... oh, we're going in circles...)