What Are The Types of Metadata Online Video Creators Can Use?

What Are The Types of Metadata Online Video Creators Can Use?

During my research of metadata, I have run across some interesting discussions about it.  The basic definition of metadata is "stuff that describes the thing," but not all metadata is the same.  Metadata can be created by those who make the video, or generated by other users in the course of a video's life.  In this article I am going to discuss some broad and specific metadata, with the help of two posts I have run across that I believe tell the story of metadata expertly.  One is from 5 years ago at Udi's Spot, the other is from 3 years ago at Philip Hodgetts' blog.

Types of Video Metadata:

First, let's talk about the kind of metadata you can actually control, or is automatic: the stuff that you personally write or your video equipment derives to describe a video.  Philip Hodgetts has described about six different types of metadata, but as it got past three, some of them started to run together (much of the later ones require extrapolation from clues or logical exercise).  So, I'm going to keep it short and leave it at three.

Hodgetts goes over these metadata types:

  • Source Metadata.  This is the type of metadata that is instantly created by the camera or editing software.  File types, GPS, camera settings, time, duration, etc., are all technical details of a video that your production and post-production tools stamp on a video from the outset.  In other words, it's technical information generated by your various devices.

What Are The Types of Metadata Online Video Creators Can Use?

 

  • Added Metadata.  This is where you actually generate keywords on your own to describe the video, likely by hand during production and then entered into a keyword (tags, titles, descriptions) field during editing and publishing.  Hodgetts also adds "comments" to the Added category, as a number of comments can increase visibility in search.  These are all metadata that a computer can't generate (at least not yet) on its own.  While speech and facial recognition is getting better, it's not entirely reliable as of yet.  Even with "perfect" speech and facial recognition, a computer will be unlikely to be able to distinguish emotion or context in the dialogue.  This is why you need to be able to describe your video to a computer in the best way possible.  You can also add metadata during shooting (like the clackerboard) and editing (descriptions of takes) that will help communicate what each take is as you work towards a finished product.
  • Derived Metadata.  This is the area of speech and facial recognition, or GPS coordinates that "add up" to a certain place, contribute to metadata.  Speech recognition can give you a transcript of the video, and facial recognition can tell you if the same person from another tagged piece of footage is the same person in a raw piece of video.  Shot recognition can also tell you if the shot is a medium or close-up, as Final Cut Pro X does.

What Are The Types of Metadata Online Video Creators Can Use?

In the video SEO world, the user-generated metadata is the preferred kind.  The words you use to describe the finished video and the user engagement dictates how a video will be located through a search engine.  The other types of metadata are what producers and editors need to find the correct footage during the video's completion.

Here's a broad overview of metadata, as provided by the Udi's Spot post.  This is the metadata you basically have no control over:

  • Explicit metadata, where users provide search engine fodder by rating a video or posting a video to a social media network.
  • Implicit metadata, where it's obvious that users have watched and enjoyed the video, without sharing it or ranking it.

In the world of video marketing, you kind of want both.  What the Udi post argues is that one is more trustworthy than another: implicit metadata is an actual measure of relative enjoyment, while explicit metadata can easily be manipulated (views that are bought, or a video that is shoved through a social network with people who can manipulate the system).

You have some sort of control over explicit metadata, but it requires a bunch of work and you have to hope the right person finds the video and shares it.  Implicit metadata, which you really have no control over at all, can be measured quite a bit from YouTube Analytics: how long are people watching the video, are they skipping ahead, are they turning it off before it ends?  These kinds of things matter to a video's overall life, and in YouTube's database, it matters a great deal for search rankings.

The point of all this is that from shooting to editing to publishing, relevant metadata is important to increase video's visibility.  When we speak of metadata offhand on this site, we usually refer to search engine optimization.  But there are many different types of metadata that increase a video's value all throughout its life, and this is especially true if the video passes through a number of hands during the pre-published phase.


Don't Miss Out - Join Our VIP Video Marketing Community!
Get daily online video tips and trends via email!


Posted in Video SEO
About the Author -
Chris Atkinson joined ReelSEO in 2011. He is a longtime film and television reviewer, and has almost two decades of experience in the theater industry. He also writes on his personal blog - http://nymoviereviews.com. View All Posts By -

What do you think? ▼
  • aaranged

    There are two types of metadata that are important to video SEO that are important and not mentioned here (I guess they would fall into your category of "Added Metadata").
     
    The first are (Google) XML video sitemaps.  Rather than being used simply for URL discovery, these allow webmasters to declare things like the video thumbnail, title, location, duration, publication date, rating, cost and more.
     
    The second is structured data markup for video, either in RDFa or microdata.  The schema.org type VideoObject (designed for microdata but also expressible in RDFa), in particular, allows webmasters to markup more than 60 properties of a video - in a way that the search engines expressly understand.

    • Chris Atkinson

       Thanks for the input!  I wasn't really trying to break down all the metadata as much as give examples for a general overview, but those are some things I might talk about later on in a more specific post.  But those are some great examples.  Thanks for sharing.

  • http://nextshoot.com Mikemacnamara

    In addition to submitting video sitemaps we've now begun using structured data markup or 'rich snippets' on our own site and we're advising our clients to do the same. This is a very simple way of attributing authorship information and other data to a video tag. This other data can include a title, description, thumbnail image, comments and ratings. In theory, this may be returned in search results along with the link.
     
    It's only a few months since the standards were agreed but in principle the result should look something like a freeindex/google places link complete with (we hope!) 5 gold stars. If you have comments and ratings enabled for the video object it's another way of allowing crawlers to gauge popularity and interaction when rating a video.
     
    It's very simple to implement on the page and can be tested via the rich snippets tool in Google's Webmaster Tools.
     
    Mike, Technical Director,
    http://nextshoot.com

  • PhilipHodgetts

    The other types - inferred, analytic and transform are actually those that will drive production in the future. You shouldn't have skipped them as they are quite specific.

    • Chris Atkinson

      Thanks, Philip.  I think your thoughts on metadata are great, and that's why I discuss some of them here.  The only reason why I didn't post the others is that they didn't seem to fit for my broad purposes here--but I'll probably add a "Part 2" in the next few days to discuss those as well, because you're right, they do serve some good functions.  Appreciate the comment!

  • Video Production Company

    In addition to submitting video sitemaps we've now begun using structured data markup or 'rich snippets' on our own site and we're advising our clients to do the same. This is a very simple way of attributing authorship information and other data to a video tag.
     
    This other data can include a title, description, thumbnail image, comments and ratings. In theory, this may be returned in search results along with the link. It's only a few months since the standards were agreed but in principle the result should look something like a freeindex/google places link complete with (we hope!) 5 gold stars.
     
    If you have comments and ratings enabled for the video object it's another way of allowing crawlers to gauge popularity and interaction when rating a video. 
     
    It's very simple to implement on the page and can be tested via the rich snippets tool in Google's Webmaster Tools.

    • http://www.reelseo.com/about/mark/ Mark R Robertson

      You'll want to be very careful about how you do structured data markup in terms of comments/ratings/stars. Google is VERY good about finding out if you're trying to game it. Not that you're saying that, just adding some clarification ;-)

  • aaranged

    There are two types of metadata that are important to video SEO that are important and not mentioned here (I guess they would fall into your category of "Added Metadata").
     
    The first are (Google) XML video sitemaps.  Rather than being used simply for URL discovery, these allow webmasters to declare things like the video thumbnail, title, location, duration, publication date, rating, cost and more.
     
    The second is structured data markup for video, either in RDFa or microdata.  The schema.org type VideoObject (designed for microdata but also expressible in RDFa), in particular, allows webmasters to markup more than 60 properties of a video - in a way that the search engines expressly understand.

    • Chris Atkinson

       Thanks for the input!  I wasn't really trying to break down all the metadata as much as give examples for a general overview, but those are some things I might talk about later on in a more specific post.  But those are some great examples.  Thanks for sharing.

  • PhilipHodgetts

    The other types - inferred, analytic and transform are actually those that will drive production in the future. You shouldn't have skipped them as they are quite specific.

    • Chris Atkinson

      Thanks, Philip.  I think your thoughts on metadata are great, and that's why I discuss some of them here.  The only reason why I didn't post the others is that they didn't seem to fit for my broad purposes here--but I'll probably add a "Part 2" in the next few days to discuss those as well, because you're right, they do serve some good functions.  Appreciate the comment!

  • http://nextshoot.com/ Video Production Company

    In addition to submitting video sitemaps we've now begun using structured data markup or 'rich snippets' on our own site and we're advising our clients to do the same. This is a very simple way of attributing authorship information and other data to a video tag.
     
    This other data can include a title, description, thumbnail image, comments and ratings. In theory, this may be returned in search results along with the link. It's only a few months since the standards were agreed but in principle the result should look something like a freeindex/google places link complete with (we hope!) 5 gold stars.
     
    If you have comments and ratings enabled for the video object it's another way of allowing crawlers to gauge popularity and interaction when rating a video. 
     
    It's very simple to implement on the page and can be tested via the rich snippets tool in Google's Webmaster Tools.

  • http://www.facebook.com/rowby Rowby Goren

    Another fascinating, essential article on reelseo! On a slightly different subject, I have a question regarding Google video sitemaps. I saw an earlier article you wrote about a video sitemap program. One you mentioned was sitemapwriter.

    http://www.reelseo.com/video-sitemap-pro/

    Your article is about 5 years old, so I am wondering if that program creates what is currently needed by Google webmaster tools? Might there be other new metadata that sitemapwriter does not include and Google wants. --

    Thanks!

    Rowby

    • http://www.reelseo.com/ Mark Robertson

      Thanks Rowby. I honestly havent kept up much with the sitemap tools out there (aside from helping someone build one and getting no credit ;-). Honestly, I tend to just manually create them myself. Im sorry I'm not too helpful with this but happy to take a look at one you find.