havovubu

Hi Timo
 
You make many good points so thank you for being constructive. Summing all this up, I absolutely agree that a DAM is essential for most users who like you, want that one stop approach where everything is at hand. Of course I see the benefits to that approach. I used this approach myself for many years with both Aperture and Lightroom. I am very familiar with all their excellent features. Some of these features are crucial for many users.
 
 
To conclude I just make the following points in relation to AP together with MAC OS:
 
AP & MAC OS combined can offer the vast majority of the features found in most DAMs including LR and Aperture: I agree that you do need to the capabilities of the MAC OS. But like any software (including LR) you need to know this too.  
Many people if they were aware of the power of AP combined with MAC OS would not need a DAM (Most features essential to them would be right there). I do not need a DAM.  
A DAM for me personally just adds a 'middle man' into my workflow and duplicates many of the features I already have; making things more complex.  
Like you though, I feel know need to convince anyone that this workflow works for me. My initial aim was to change your original misconception that the MAC OS was only capable "putting some stars and colour to a picture or reading the metadata from a file". As I made clear above "AP & MAC OS combined can offer the vast majority of the features found in most DAMs including LR and Aperture!"  
 
Having said all this, I really do look forward to the Affinity DAM. If developed correctly then I too may want to give it a go. For information though, I consider Apple Aperture to be the best DAM ever! :) If Serif purchased Aperture and developed an Affinity DAM it would be a great day!
 
For now though. I will stick with my OS combined with AP.
 
Regards
Wayne

Agreed - I've had more than one experience of someone insisting they "need" a DAM, when all they actually needed is a proper understanding of what their OS can do for them.
 
(Not saying that's true of DC, but it's a conversation I've had quite a lot...)

Yes havovubu, that is a good idea. That could lead in some interesting results and message towards Serif. I like it  ;)  Please those of you who can state these additional features join the discussion..... I can only say what I do not like about LR :D
Cheers

I totally agree Keith
 
For me the MAC OS keeps me away from Adobe products completely and for me at least measures up to LR.
 
I would be interested DC what specific features you consider to be included within a 'proper' DAM that the Windows & MAC OS (Plus of course AP) can't do? I am very happy to be persuaded otherwise :)
 
Cheers

I totally agree Keith
 
For me the MAC OS keeps me away from Adobe products completely and for me at least measures up to LR.
 
I would be interested DC what specific features you consider to be included within a 'proper' DAM that the Windows & MAC OS (Plus of course AP) can't do? I am very happy to be persuaded otherwise :)
 
Cheers

Yep, you can do the same in Windows - and (if it's your thing - it is mine) - you can also do a lot of Exif/IPTC-based management too, as Windows can display/sort/search by pretty much any Exif or IPTC field you can think of..

Sure ... when DAM for you is done with putting some stars and colour aside a picture ;-) .... you kind of get it FOR FREE! Congrats :-)

Hi havovubu,
thank you for answering!
I'm very curious about your advice but I don't see any screenshot... (reading from an old ipad2...)
I'm hoping you can post it again!
arfo

I agree with havovubu,
I coded my own DAM about a year ago, and it hooks in to the macOS file system for all of that functionality.
 
This means that I don't have to bother with updates and any incompatibilities, as the OS itself does most of the work. My app just acts as the UI where everything gets co-ordinated from.