ail.com
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 6:26 am ((PDT))
I am using bwf files with the bwf writer software $30 and I am very pleased=
,basicaly it is wav files that in bwf use metadata, media monkey reads it v=
ery well.You first records in wav puts the file in the pc opens it with bwf=
writer introduces the metadata exports the file.Is ready to be read. If yo=
u wont to acess the metadata opens the file with bwf writer.
--- In "Wil Hershberger" <> wrote:
>
> Here are some interesting links regarding BWAV files and metadata
>
> http://cool.conservation-us.org/byform/mailing-lists/arsclist/2005/03/msg=
001
> 34.html
>
>
>
> Attempt to standardize that use of metadata fields within the BWAV format
> etc.
>
> http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov/audio-visual/
>
>
>
> It appears that Soundminer V4pro has the capabilities that a lot of us ar=
e
> looking for but $899 US is just too steep an entry point for most of us.
>
> http://www.soundminer.com/SM_Site/V4.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Wil Hershberger
> <http://www.natureimagesandsounds.com/> Nature Images and Sounds, LLC
> Hedgesville, WV
> <http://www.songsofinsects.com/> The Songs of Insects
> <http://cricketman.blogspot.com/> My Blog
>
>
>
> From:
> On Behalf Of Wil Hershberger
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 8:04 AM
> To:
> Subject: RE: [Nature Recordists] from metadata to archiving
>
>
>
>
>
> I would have to say that having the data about the recording IN the metad=
ata
> of the file itself is very important. If the link is broken between the f=
ile
> and the xml file (or whatever external file) then all is lost. If all the
> data is in the metadata of the actual wav file then it can't get lost. Th=
ere
> should be a way to batch edit this metadata and have and external
> application that can read the same metadata into a database. Results in t=
he
> best of both worlds, all the data is safe in the wav file and there is an
> external database of all the data for quick searching.
>
> There is a great deal of effort in the federal government to standardize =
the
> fields to be used within the wav file format as well as what xml or iXML
> fields to setup for sidecar files. I will try to find the pertinent links=
.
>
> Wil Hershberger
> <http://www.natureimagesandsounds.com/> Nature Images and Sounds, LLC
> Hedgesville, WV
> <http://www.songsofinsects.com/> The Songs of Insects
> <http://cricketman.blogspot.com/> My Blog
>
> From:
> <naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
>
> <naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Steve Pelikan
> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 11:29 PM
> To:
> <naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] from metadata to archiving
>
> Yes Rob, I agree 100% that it'd be nice to have all this
> extraction/consolidation/im/exporting of data done automatically.
>
> My point was that even with that nifty technology available we still need=
to
> get people to record important data. And I think that's a much bigger
> problem than the software issue by far. It is hard and time consuming and=
it
> has to be done with thought and accurately to be worthwhile. All this is
> from the perspective of archiving for someone else's eventual use or for
> historical value of the audio data, not the recordist's convenience.
>
> Also as you say, there's also no doubt (say we develop a great template f=
or
> data) that it'll end up getting dumped in a data base of some sort --- an=
d
> I'd bet over 90% of people's use of it would be satisfied with a flat spr=
ead
> sheet functionality.
>
> I also agree with you that there isn't tremendous day-to-day need for the
> metadata data to be included in a file with the audio data itself, if tha=
t's
> what you're saying. Especially if people have been careful about naming
> audio files in a unique way.
>
> But there's a reason that museums insist that all collection data goes on=
a
> label attached directly to a specimen --- otherwise any accident that bre=
aks
> the link between accession data and specimen makes the specimen essential=
ly
> worthless. So from the perspective of long term value and archiving for
> other's eventual use, if I had a choice, I'd say add an extra block to th=
e
> bwav/riff/whatever/ files and put the data there.
>
> Best!
>
> Steve P
>
> --- In
> <naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
> <naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> , Rob Danielson <type@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Steve--
> > You're going to be typing high quality data because that's the kind
> > of recordist/guy you are. If your going to have a template to "store"
> > and use, you need a full fledged-database. The template you use for
> > your DB "records" will allow you to discriminate things I'd never
> > think of,.. And you'll build that template out a basic template that
> > we'll have after the interlinked apps are in beta.
> >
> > Question. Would you like being able to add your high quality info for
> > your database at the same time you log, make excerpts and add
> > reliable "automatic" stuff like place, date, basic weather globally?
> > I'm saying use the time stamp from your SD, use the GPS info when
> > that becomes norm but add everything else in the consolidation app.
> > (Those with less sophisticated recorders can add the time stamp in
> > the consolidation app). Your java code/function can go into the
> > database.
> >
> > I'm not seeing a use for data "attached" to a sound file once its
> > extracted by the consolidation app and related to everything else in
> > a database. Help me! I must be overlooking some need that others are
> > seeing. Rob D.
> >
> > =3D =3D =3D =3D =3D
> >
> > At 2:19 AM +0000 4/22/10, Steve Pelikan wrote:
> > >Friends:
> > >
> > >I agree that one could/should construct
> > >free/cross-platform/easy-to-use software for manipulation of
> > >metadata. I'll share all my java library code and python scripts
> > >with anyone who wants to do it.
> > >
> > >But I think the real problem is much closer to what Vicki was saying
> > >a few messages back: people actually need to take the time and
> > >exercise care and understanding to produce good documentation and
> > >metadata. This can't really be done automatically.
> > >
> > >Even high res and high tech fixes won't do, I'm afraid. As an
> > >example, consider something simple like a recording of a single
> > >bird's song: maybe GPS and chronometer data that's automatically
> > >recorded say when and where to milliseconds and meters. But was the
> > >bird identified by sight or could it be a mimic? Was it an adult or
> > >immature? Male or female? What was it doing while making the sounds?
> > >What conspecifics were present? Where thate predators around? Or
> > >prey? etc. etc. None of this could be logged automatically ---
> > >someone has to notice it, know it is significant, and record/enter
> > >it.
> > >
> > >And of course the potential questions to be answered about a
> > >"soundscape" are this multiplied many times over.
> > >
> > >So I think discussing software is fine --- I even wrote some a while
> > >back for my own use --- but the real issue is spreading an
> > >understanding of the importance of such ancillary data and
> > >encouraging each other to make ever better efforts at recording and
> > >preserving it.
> > >
> > >If we were going to do anything high tech at all here I'd propose we
> > >work towards developing a template ( perhaps an XML format (DTD or
> > >schema)) we could all use to record all the significant facts about
> > >a cut. Anyone implementing a metadata manipulation program would
> > >benefit from such a standardization and in the mean time we could
> > >all work towards including all the important data in our
> > >documentation in some "exportable" form.
> > >
> > >--- just my $0.02 worth
> > >
> > >Steve P
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|