Five Photos

@sgbotsford yes, that's exactly what I said: I'm also saying that – if you want to switch between DAM apps – the only true future-proof option is to use a DAM that relies on a folder structure on a hard disk rather than on albums and collections because such a structure is defined and stored in the database of that app.

This question is impossible to answer as (a) we have no clue if the Serif team even plans to provide a feature to replicate the catalog structure (albums, collections) and (b) only the developers might know with which other DAMs such a feature would work with if any. Heck, we don't even know if and when there will be an Affinity DAM, yet alone what feature set it would include. That said, your best bet is probably Lightroom. It's currently the most widely used DAM which makes it more likely that a new product – especially if released to compete with Lightroom – might support such a feature. Luminar, for instance, plans to support photo edits made with Lightroom in the future. Also, all current Affinity products are known to be able to work with files from Adobe's products they are competing with such as Photoshop and Illustrator. P.S. as long as we are only talking about the DAM part (and not about the compatibility of the edits made to photos), compatibility actually isn't the big issue. Instead of albums and collections, which depend on the database's structure, you could simply organize your photos in folders instead. Any good DAM would be able to work with that folder structure and allow you to easily replicate your photo organization. The downside is, of course, that one photo can only live in one folder rather than in multiple albums/collections.

Hi guys, I'm the original poster of this thread and I feel all your pain. When I started this thread, Serif said they were thinking about creating a DAM for a couple of years already (and yes @R C-R you are right, somebody indeed said once "I'm sitting next to the guys that are writing the DAM... It's a thing". It was @MattP and it was in this thread in December 2017). Today, more than a year later, it feels like they're still about as far in the process as they were before. My humble advice to all of you is to stop worrying about it. I bet that nothing will be released anytime soon and even if so, it won't be the Lightroom killer we're all hoping for. Even if they actually are developing a DAM right now, it will take Serif another year or two to come out with something and even then, that product will probably be way behind of what Lightroom with its 20 years plus history is capable of today. The best example of this is Skylum with its Luminar software. They said in 2017 that they'll release a DAM in 2018 – pushing everybody's hopes up high. They barely kept their promise with a December 2018 release that was so underwhelming that many of us wished they wouldn't have created anything at all. It will take them another couple of years to catch up with Lightroom, if ever. It's my prediction that, even if Serif puts all their resources in the development of a DAM today, they won't be able to build anything great before 2021 or even later. I think it was a different story creating Affinity Designer and Affinity Publisher as both these apps have quite a lot of similar features to those of Affinity Photo. A DAM, on the other hand, is a whole different kind of beast and I started to realize that quite a while back. I still wish they would give us more clarity about the roadmap or if there's even one in existence, but I buried my hopes for an Affinity DAM and believe me or not, I'm a happier person today. Lightroom is great and what Adobe is doing with the new Lightroom CC ecosystem is only pushing them further ahead of the competition. My two cents.

I hear you. I use Lightroom's develop module only if I need to apply quick fixes to snapshots. Things like cropping, straightening, and sometimes lifting shadows or pulling highlights. If I'm looking at a good photo that needs more work I switch to Luminar. And if I need to do HDR stacking, panoramas, or something else that's more complex I choose Affinity. Have you tried Lightroom's new AI-based auto adjustment option, though? It's quite awesome! Lately, I found myself doing more and more editing in Lightroom because of it. But, basically, I am also using Lightroom solely as my DAM and don't really need its post-processing functions. Yet, I'm more than happy to send the monthly $10 to Adobe for what I get with Lightroom Classic. Here's my take on the value of Adobe's photography plan: https://five.photos/the-value-of-adobes-photography-plan/

@PhilHurd likewise! I also looked at Exposure X3, but it wasn't for me. Tell me, what is wrong with Lightroom? Is it just Adobe's subscription model that bothers you?

Yeah... Unfortunately, I don't think that we'll ever see a true Aperture replacement coming from Apple. I'm pretty convinced by now that Apple's focus lies entirely on iPhoneographers and hobbyists. They completely forgot about the enthusiasts and professionals. As long as they can provide a somewhat useful tool to their iPhone users to keep them captivated in their ecosystem they're gonna be happy. Why build more?

With the newest version of Photos it's possible to send original RAW files directly to Luminar or Affinity for further editing. That said, whatever you do, don't switch to Photos! That's where I came from after Apple lost some of my photos in their iCloud Photo Library. Lightroom is a much more robust solution. The new Lightroom CC looks and behaves a lot like a better version of Photos anyways.

@PhilHurd +1 I have given up on the idea of an Affinity DAM and switched to Lightroom in the meantime, too. I also use Luminar for most of my post-processing needs these days. However, Affinity Photo certainly will stay in my toolbox as a Photoshop replacement, which it is ideal for in my opinion. By combining Lightroom, Luminar and Affinity I created a very powerful workflow that matches my needs. Honestly, at this point, I don't even want Affinity to build a DAM anymore. I also made peace with Adobe's subscription model. Frankly, I don't think it's expensive at all for what I get from Lightroom. And I love the direction the all-new Lightroom CC is heading. For me, a cloud is essential and Adobe's new approach fits my needs perfectly. Right now I am using Lightroom Classic, though. But as soon as Adobe integrates smart folders (aka smart collections), plugin support for external photo editors like Luminar and Affinity, and more metadata options into Lightroom CC, I will switch to the new solution. Luminar would have to build an excellent DAM for me to jump ship.

I currently use Luminar as a Lightroom replacement and Affinity Photo instead of Photoshop. Very happy with that solution. Luminar for all the basic work from developing the RAW to exposure and color corrections. Affinity for all the more complex work like compositions, sky replacements, panorama stitching, and stacks. That said, my setup only works for image editing. I still use Lightroom as my DAM because there’s no good alternative to it.

Interesting... I just tested it with the beta (see attached file) and indeed, shadows recovery works better. Thanks! Still not as good as Luminar or Lightroom, though (compare to PDF I submitted above – same test).

@HVDB Fotografie True, clipped highlights are not recoverable – not with any program. However, @befehr's concerns are justified and I think it's no secret that Affinity's RAW development module lacks the quality of the rest of the app. I did a comparison myself (see attached file). The original photo has both, overexposed and underexposed parts. I simply pushed the shadows slider all the way up (+100) and pulled the highlights slider all the way down (–100) in Lightroom, Luminar, and Affinity Photo. I'm aware that, in a normal post-processing workflow, one probably wouldn't go all the way with those sliders. But... the results in this little test still speak for themselves. RAW.pdf

I get very poor results with Affinity’s RAW development module, especially for highlights and shadows adjustments. Lightroom and Luminar are waaaay better for RAW development. However, it seems like I get superior results with Affinity Photo for iPad compared to the desktop version! Anybody experiencing the same? And if so, why is that? Is the iPad version using a different/better algorithm?

RAW: So true! Good point you’re making. I need to get used to work with TIFF files in Affinity after I treated the RAWs in LR or Luminar. Naming: yeah... I see your point. However, it is nice that Luminar’s plugin renames the edited file like it does. I can now have a smart collection looking for photos with “Luminar2018-edited” in the name and automatically have a collection of all my photos edited with Luminar. Affinity just doesn’t provide any plugin right now. I mean, I don’t know if it’s possible, but it would be great, for instance, if we could select multiple images in LR and send them all over to Affinity for Panorama Stitching or HDR Merging. I guess such things would be possible with a well thought through LR plugin.

Thanks ricks but you're missing my point. I know about this workflow but compared to Luminar's plugin this... ...doesn't send the RAW file to Affinity (but a TIFF) ...doesn't name the TIFF file it sends back to Lightroom like Luminar does It's not a big deal. I was just pleasantly surprised about Luminar's great little implementation into Lightroom's workflow.

As long as Affinity doesn't have DAM capabilities, we have to use other DAM software like Adobe Lightroom. So, why not provide at least a plugin for LR? And I am not talking about setting up Affinity Photo as an additional external editor in the LR Classic preferences because that sends only a TIFF file to Affinity Photo. I was playing with Macphun's Luminar for the past few days and their plugin integrates very well into Lightroom. From the LR catalog, it is now possible to "open the source file" (aka the RAW) in Luminar using the export dialog. When finished editing the photo in Luminar, I just have to click "done" and that edited RAW file is automatically saved back into the Lightroom catalog as a separate TIFF. The plugin even renames the photo to "[original file name]_Luminar2018-edit". What a great solution!

They can’t. It was a metaphor. I get your point, I really do. And I know it’s hard, really hard, and time consuming. But I never asked Affinity for a timeline or the like. I am simply wondering if they are developing something (as previously mentioned in these forums) or not (as some recent twitter posts suggest). Look, I would be thrilled if Apple would pick up their old Aperture, modernize the whole damn thing and keep it under active development again. But I don’t think that this is going to happen. Apple forgot about the photo enthusiasts and professionals. And Adobe’s paths with Lightroom and Photoshop are just so confusing to me. That’s why I hoped Affinity would step in. I like their way of thinking and their commitment to the photography community and mobile platforms (AP for iPad is just killer!). Every product they released so far is just awesome (maybe minus the RAW development module in AP). So when I read about them working on a DAM about 2 years ago, I was excited and thought: that’s gonna be it! Now I don’t know what to think anymore because they leave us in the dark.

I disagree. I think if they would release a great looking and fast working DAM today, they would “sell out” immediately. Basically, they just need to build a new, better and faster Lightroom / Aperture from scratch, like they did for Photoshop with Affinity Photo, add a cloud solution and boom... we have a product. I know that this is not a simple task, but it can be done! A new DAM with the power of Lightroom Classic (but fast), the cloud features of Lightroom CC (yes, I think any forward thinking DAM program should have an optional cloud integration and a companion mobile app), and the speed, look and feel of Affinity Photo would be hard to beat by anyone. I’m 100% sure it would attract tons of paying customers. And it would complement Affinity Photo so well. If I’d be their product manager, I’d suggest to keep all the editing features in Affinity Photo and just develop a separate DAM that does only asset management. Adobe’s approach with some editing options built into Lightroom and others only available in Photoshop just doesn’t make sense to me. In other news: More than a week later, Affinity has still not responded to the initial question of this thread. Amazing!

In case you’re a Mac / iOS user and only need a simple DAM that works well with Affinity for editing, then Apple Photos is actually a solid and free solution. (Well, you might need to pay for more iCloud storage depending on if you want to use the iCloud Photo Library and how many photos you want to store in the cloud). I used that combination for a long time and only switched to Lightroom because of Apple’s very limited Metadata and filtering options etc.

Thanks Alfred. That all makes sense and is fine. But why the conflicted communication and why don't they just give us clarification in a simple statement? I'm really puzzled by the moderators only answering the "easy questions" in this forum.

Interesting discussions in this thread, but still no answer to my question. Why is it so hard for Serif to answer this? I didn’t ask for a timeline or anything the like. I simply want to know if they are still developing a DAM or not. It’s a simple yes or no question.

Yes! But that’s not the topic/question. I (we) want to know if Affinity is developing their own DAM as previously teased or if they abandoned those plans in the meantime.

Hey guys, We desperately need some clarification. For the past two years it was mentioned several times here in these forums that you are working on a DAM. However, we haven’t really seen an update on that topic in the past weeks and months. And in your Twitter feed you mentioned a couple of times now that you are currently not developing a DAM. So which is true? With the recent changes from Adobe with their Lightroom software and with Apple still not improving Photos really, it would be a great time to put a great DAM out there right now. Many, many photographers are looking for a new solution to this old and essential problem. Also, MacPhun just announced a DAM for their Luminar app. In any case, we just need to know if we should wait for a DAM to be released by you guys or if we should look for other alternatives. Thank you!

Morphf, I don’t think you’re gonna find your answer here. Unfortunately, these forums are very slow and unresponsive and not many people seem to be active here. I would suggest you ask the same question at the forums over at dpreview.com and you’ll have several answers and opinions in no time! Oh and by the way: I was in the exact same situation as you are and seeked a pure mobile workflow with my iPad Pro. I ended up buying a new Mac anyways, because what you want is not that easy to achieve. That was before AP for iPad was released, though. Thanks to Affinity, we now have pretty much everything we need for a mobile post-processing workflow. The big problem is the DAM workflow, as you probably noticed by now. I am using Apple Photos and store all my photos in the iCloud Photo Library. If I don’t import my photos on the Mac, then I use the Lightning to SD Card Reader to import them directly to the iPad’s Photo Library. From there the RAWs are available to be imported for editing with Affinity Photo. Are you shooting RAW? While I’m very happy with the iCloud Photo Library – it’s great, once you understand how it works in the background – the functionality of the Apple Photos app on the iPad is very, very limited. No metadata, no good filtering or search options, and no keywording or tagging either, as far as I know. The problem with a mobile only workflow is definitely with Apple not providing a more sophisticated solution. There are other mobile DAMs like Mylio but none of them are perfect imo. It’s a shame that Apple didn’t really improve Photos in all those years since they launched it to become a more robust product like Aperture on the Mac once was...

iCloud Drive is still iCloud Drive in iOS11. The iCloud Drive app was just replaced by the FILES app. That's it. Everything else is the same. In the new Files app you see the iCloud Drive as one of the locations. You can add more like Dropbox and Google Drive if you want. iCloud Backup will still only backup the locally stored files and data, as I explained. No change here with iOS11.

I was just confused because in your last post you talked about brushes... Anyways, I hope this helps: Apple Photos All the photos that are present in the Apple Photos app on your iPad or on your Mac are being saved into the iCloud Photo Library. Of course this only works if you have enough storage space on your iCloud Drive, which the iCloud Photo Library is a part of, and if you turn on the iCloud Photo Library in Settings > Photos on your iPad and/or in Preferences > iCloud in the Apple Photos app on your Mac. You can check if and which photos are saved in your iCloud Photo Library by going to https://www.icloud.com and sign in with your Apple ID. Here you'll find more information about how the iCloud Photo Library works and here you'll find more about how to use the Apple Photos app on an iPad. Affinity Photo Photos you edit in Affinity Photo can either be exported to the Apple Photos library or to many other cloud storage services. If I understand you correctly, you are wondering if the photos or projects you store in the Affinity Photo folder within iCloud Drive are being backed up? If that is your question, then the answer is yes! Everything that you put anywhere in your iCloud Drive, no matter if it is in the Affinity Photo folder or anywhere else, will be saved in the cloud and everything is available on all your devices. You can confirm this by going to Settings > Apple ID, iCloud, iTunes & App Store > iCloud > Manage Storage > Affinity Photo on your iPad. iCloud Backup / TimeMachine Now, I am not sure if this already answers your question or if you also wonder if the iCloud Backup saves those files again somewhere in the cloud. If that's your question, then the answer is no. The iCloud Backup function does back up everything that is locally stored on your iPad but not anything that is already stored in the cloud. See this article from Apple for clarification what exactly is backed up by iCloud Backup. Apple considers the files in the iCloud Drive already "backed up" because they are safely stored in the cloud already. So no duplicate backup is being produced. The same is true for the TimeMachine on your Mac, by the way. Photos stored in the iCloud Photo Library and files stored in the iCloud Drive will not be backed up by the TimeMachine unless they are stored locally on your Mac. So if you have the option "Optimize Mac Storage" in System Preferences > iCloud > iCloud Drive Options turned on, there's a big chance that some of your files are not stored locally on your Mac, but only in the iCloud. Those files in the cloud won't be backed up to your external drive by the TimeMachine. Does that help?