Which is better for compatible archival photos (comment or EXIF IPTC info)?

Which is the better format, "comment" or "IPTC info" for JPEG photos?

I recently switched from Internet Explorer to Irvanview to view photos
on Windows XP and I really love iview as I can now resize, crop, and
COMMENT all my digital pictures of my kids.

Presently I add BOTH a JPG "comment" & "IPTC info" (EXIF?) because I
don't know what will be used in the future (twenty years from now) when
I still look at these photos of the kids so I'm scared all will be for
naught.

My question is, which is the better JPEG comment ("comment" or "IPTC
info") for software compatibility and long-term archival purposes?

Vanessa C. Stancinni

 

Although the jpeg "comment" feature of irfanview works well
and I use it extensively, I also write descript.ion files
known to users of 4dos. This is an invisible text file which
can hold the information which you may be afraid of losing.
It is a backup for me.

Xnview up to the most recent version handled this very well
allowing you to make identical comments in the file view part
of the xnview interface.
Ctrl-a to mark all, Ctrl-d to describe all.

As a further wrinkle, you can use several command line tools which
will make the job much easier.

Although this is not what you asked for specifically, you may
have an interest in chasing down jhead or file or pich, or listpics
which I also use for modifying the iptc, comment, or for creating
html lists of directories . All the files mentioned are
commandline from this paragraph.

 

In any case IPTC is more promising. IPTC is also possible for TIF files
and some others. It is worldwide used in press communication and lots of
programs can read it or build up catologues from it. My bet for the next
30 years is IPTC.

AFH
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

For archival purposes, you could attach a text box just below the photo, and save the
comment as part of the file. The text can be easily cropped off when a print is made.