tallrob

The point of a Digital Asset Manager isn't just organizing files. Every OS has a native method of doing that. The reason we need a DAM is to facilitate non-destructive editing. This is where LR and Aperture (rip) excelled, and why people latched on to them. Before LR there was Bridge, which was good for the time but you could easily stack up many GBs of "versions" that shared 99% of the same bits. True DAMs solved that problem by storing master files and saving versions as editing instructions to be applied on export. Aperture was the king of DAM for photography, and happily stored whatever files you threw at it. It could even handle multilayered psd files with ease. C1P is pretty good but lacks Aperture's stacking and album features, plus it's slow as molasses with large libraries. I can't speak much to LR anymore since I haven't used it in ages. The other critical feature of a DAM is culling. That means ratings and filters. This is where amateur applications like Photos fall short. You can "love" a photo, but it won't do star ratings (honestly I would have used Photos if not for this lacking feature because the plugin implementation is pretty decent). I think it's really difficult to invent a method of storing any and every type of file while still allowing for a roundtrip non-destructive workflow. It's not impossible, but there will always be compromise.

But the whole point of this feature request is to remedy exactly that problem.

So, this post is pinned, and it says [Implemented], but I still don't see any obvious way to open an indeed file in Affinity Publisher. If it's indeed now possible, maybe it's a good idea to edit the first post to reveal the method of doing so.

Bingo.

DAM, or something that looks like it. I switched from Aperture to C1 and I'm regretting it, but like everyone else here (I assume) I won't do Adobe. Affinity asset management is a must.

I have to say I don't understand this type of response. Successful companies grow by adding products to their lineup in addition to improving existing ones all the time. They also grow by acquiring existing packages and rebranding them to fit their lineup. This attitude of "please don't add what other people need, just improve what I already have" is shortsighted. Serif is squarely aimed at competing with Adobe, which is their only chance of long term survival. They need to be doing what Adobe does, better and cheaper. So far so good, but asking them to stop short of a 1:1 parity in product offering is shortsighted. That means Serif should develop (or acquire) video editing, special effects and DAM programs to complete their lineup. Affinity is nothing if not a lifeline for folks drowning in the Adobe model.

Bravo. If Serif would just basically rebuild Aperture minus the bloat, their suite would be a miracle product and Adobe would feel it.