[Poll] Do you need a DAM? And what should it be like?

[user_0815]

On 4/14/2020 at 9:04 AM, darinb said:

Just make Aperture again, but better. Done.

--Darin

😁 I'd take it immediately! It was so good to use!

[DSDowell]

Agree on that!!

[KC Honie]

On 4/14/2020 at 3:04 AM, darinb said:

Just make Aperture again, but better. Done.

--Darin

Had Serif purchased the rights to Aperture they would have been set, but that ship has sailed... 

[chilacho]

Just came across this topic because of preview and DAM. I tested a few DAM, and there are a lot of differences from small to big, from file management to brand-related, etc... As a DAM manager, I can say it's not easy to find the perfect DAM, and if you find it, this will not be cheap - not for private use.

Nevertheless, for private use there are a few good solutions that are suitable. If someone is technically well versed, he can get the free Pimcore DAM, which can be designed according to your own wishes and also extended. As an alternative for the small purse, I can recommend Eagle (https://eagle.cool). This application also handles the preview of all Affinity programs and costs only $29.95 for a lifetime license! Everything else has already been mentioned.

[Amateur John]

9 hours ago, chilacho said:

Just came across this topic because of preview and DAM. I tested a few DAM, and there are a lot of differences from small to big, from file management to brand-related, etc... As a DAM manager, I can say it's not easy to find the perfect DAM, and if you find it, this will not be cheap - not for private use.

Nevertheless, for private use there are a few good solutions that are suitable. If someone is technically well versed, he can get the free Pimcore DAM, which can be designed according to your own wishes and also extended. As an alternative for the small purse, I can recommend Eagle (https://eagle.cool). This application also handles the preview of all Affinity programs and costs only $29.95 for a lifetime license! Everything else has already been mentioned.

Thanks for your suggestion of Eagle. I have been trying  it in a test environment. All files are copied not linked. Sure one can see affinity thumbnails (which you cannot see in Bridge). You can open files in Eagle into Affinity photo. The problem occurs when you want to save or export the files back to Eagle. As far as I can see you have to store stuff in a temporary holding are and the import from there to Eagle. Also the file structure in the library would be a nightmare to untangle should one want to later abandon it.

As far as I can tell Eagle cannot integrate well with any application that generates additional files rather than just modifying existing files. I will leave it installed for the rest of the trial period. Perhaps I have missed some important features.

[KC Honie]

30 minutes ago, Amateur John said:

Thanks for your suggestion of Eagle. I have been trying  it in a test environment. All files are copied not linked. Sure one can see affinity thumbnails (which you cannot see in Bridge). You can open files in Eagle into Affinity photo. The problem occurs when you want to save or export the files back to Eagle. As far as I can see you have to store stuff in a temporary holding are and the import from there to Eagle. Also the file structure in the library would be a nightmare to untangle should one want to later abandon it.

As far as I can tell Eagle cannot integrate well with any application that generates additional files rather than just modifying existing files. I will leave it installed for the rest of the trial period. Perhaps I have missed some important features.

When I checked out Eagle, I quickly abandoned it because of its "file Structure".  Not linking files is a deal killer for me.

So far I have been relatively happy with NeoFinder, I am still trialing it but it seems to work fairly well...  It simply links files.

[Amateur John]

NeoFinder is for Apple only. abeMeda seems to be a Windows lookalike.

abeMeda looks pretty good. I would have liked to be able to update a partial catalogue starting at a node where I had been working. Perhaps I have missed something.

 

 

[chilacho]

5 hours ago, Amateur John said:

Thanks for your suggestion of Eagle. I have been trying  it in a test environment. All files are copied not linked. Sure one can see affinity thumbnails (which you cannot see in Bridge). You can open files in Eagle into Affinity photo. The problem occurs when you want to save or export the files back to Eagle. As far as I can see you have to store stuff in a temporary holding are and the import from there to Eagle. Also the file structure in the library would be a nightmare to untangle should one want to later abandon it.

As far as I can tell Eagle cannot integrate well with any application that generates additional files rather than just modifying existing files. I will leave it installed for the rest of the trial period. Perhaps I have missed some important features.

Then this is certainly not for your use case. But a DAM usually has its own structure and does not copy the one not from the desktop, because it is on an external drive/server to which all users have access. So you can't use your local structure. In this case, you might be better off with a file manager that includes a preview for the applications you need. You could look at the new „ACDsee for Mac“ DAM that works with your existing structure, but I don't know if the Affinity apps have previews.

[Amateur John]

1 hour ago, chilacho said:

Then this is certainly not for your use case. But a DAM usually has its own structure and does not copy the one not from the desktop, because it is on an external drive/server to which all users have access. So you can't use your local structure. In this case, you might be better off with a file manager that includes a preview for the applications you need. You could look at the new „ACDsee for Mac“ DAM that works with your existing structure, but I don't know if the Affinity apps have previews.

Indeed a DAM does normally use its own structure. My first experience of a simple system now called DAM was a system which I built over 35 years ago. It was for controlling CAD drawings in a multiuser environment. The files were on a server and copies were moved into user directories on the same server.

A later system built with a colleague added functionality for engineers. The new database (now Oracle) and drawing files were on a server. The user interface was built with Oracle forms and the stuff hidden from end users was written in C and SQL. That sort of system is not what is needed for a single user system. I have been retired over 25 years and my skills with C ,Oracle 8 and Oracle forms are long forgotten.

What is needed is something like LR. The database needs to run without the services of a DBA. LR uses a local SQLite which is perfect for the job. I have not investigated neoFinder or abeMeda in detail but it seems to use a similar system. Ideally one needs to be able to recover all files even if the DAM becomes obsolete. That seems to be the case for LR and abeMeda. Extracting the files from Eagle without Eagle would be very laborious. Eagle seems not to use a proper database. I see it as very ingenious but a dead end.

[chilacho]

25 minutes ago, Amateur John said:

Indeed a DAM does normally use its own structure. My first experience of a simple system now called DAM was a system which I built over 35 years ago. It was for controlling CAD drawings in a multiuser environment. The files were on a server and copies were moved into user directories on the same server.

A later system built with a colleague added functionality for engineers. The new database (now Oracle) and drawing files were on a server. The user interface was built with Oracle forms and the stuff hidden from end users was written in C and SQL. That sort of system is not what is needed for a single user system. I have been retired over 25 years and my skills with C ,Oracle 8 and Oracle forms are long forgotten.

What is needed is something like LR. The database needs to run without the services of a DBA. LR uses a local SQLite which is perfect for the job. I have not investigated neoFinder or abeMeda in detail but it seems to use a similar system. Ideally one needs to be able to recover all files even if the DAM becomes obsolete. That seems to be the case for LR and abeMeda. Extracting the files from Eagle without Eagle would be very laborious. Eagle seems not to use a proper database. I see it as very ingenious but a dead end.

Yeah, it doesn't seem like what you're looking for. Personally, I wouldn't necessarily call it a DAM either. If you want to be able to copy or move your data 1:1 again and keep the structure, it's certainly not suitable for that.

Neofinder I had also used for a while, even back when it was still called CDFinder I had it once in use, but with this interface I just can not make friends. abeMeda looks pretty similar, also there is no Mac variant. Otherwise, as I said, maybe ACDSee Photo Studio is an alternative for you?

[Seweryn]

Hi,

On Windows I am using FastStone:

https://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDetail.htm

I am not what "selling point" would be to have it in Affinity Studio.
It shall be a kind of separate tool, which serves for all Studio parts.

Regards,

Seweryn.
 

[pdussart]

Dear all, 

 

References to XNview and other tools looks like metadata management is important for many of us. 

This does not make these tools real DAM tools as far as I am concerned. Limited search capabilities do not help.

I would suggest Serif managment to look at Daminion. See https://daminion.net/feature-tour/daminion-server/

The free version can manage up to 15.000 pictures per database. Paid versions ar affordable as single user. There are ways to upgrade for teams and share files management through the cloud.

This is a powerful tool that covers JPG but also PDF and many other formats. It is geared to document files, but also to retrieve them by various search facilities

Bulk functions are very powerful

Regards, Philippe

 

[loukash]

On 12/19/2020 at 3:39 PM, KC Honie said:

 Not linking files is a deal killer for me.

This.

They will have to pry my iView/Expression Media from my cold, dead hands. Now if only I could make it see my Affinity documents… (There is a way by assigning each Affinity document a fake MacOS type & creator code – e.g. something like "AFFN" – but that's definitely an ugly and tedious workaround. It also works with file extensions but only up to 4 characters. Damn *.afpub *.afdesign *.afphoto!)
The next closest thing is NeoFinder (user since 2001 while it still was CDFinder), but its roots and strengths are definitely elsewhere, even though the new "Albums" at least attempt to somewhat mimic the iView killer feature that are Sets.

[ashf]

iView was my love all the time... Screw Microsoft(and Phase One)!
Why there's no affordable and decent DAM anymore.
 

[j3rry]

After switching from Adobe, I discovered Neofinder as my DAM to my complete satisfaction.

[EddCh]

Have any Nikon shooters seen or tried their new NX Studio app? As far as free v1.0 software goes, it's not half bad.

https://www.nikon.com/news/2021/0304_soft_01.htm

[Ulysses]

2 minutes ago, EddCh said:

Has Nikon shooters seen or tried their new NX Studio app? As far as free v1.0 goes, it's not half bad.

https://www.nikon.com/news/2021/0304_soft_01.htm

Yep. Tried it. Don't care for it. However, it's the best way of achieving on your desktop computer the identical results you'd get from the in-camera JPEG. So I agree... for free it's there as an option. However, it's nothing at all like a true DAM. It's simply for browsing, editing, and processing Nikon raw files.

[EddCh]

Just now, Ulysses said:

Yep. Tried it. Don't care for it. However, it's the best way of achieving on your desktop computer the identical results you'd get from the in-camera JPEG. So I agree... for free it's there as an option. 

Yeah, as far as it stands, it's not going to replace Capture One Pro (or even Aperture) for me – but I think I will keep an eye on its future development.

[Amateur John]

Its nothing to do with DAM.

It does give a very good raw conversion with raw edits in a sidecar file. It is probably the best Nikon raw converter.

It does not have any of the advantages of Affinity for ambitious editing.

A problem with it is that it can not open a file in another application such as Affinity or even the unmentionable using a hidden 16 bit tiff file. Even  NX-D can do that. If Nikon fix the obvious bugs and omissions then Studio could become a good front end to Affinity.

We still require an alternative to LR for DAM. DAM does not seem to be within Affinity's realm of expertise. That is not a criticism. Affinity is a company of creatives. DAM depends on database experts. The difference between artists and technical nerds. perhaps?

[Ash777]

My two cents on DAM needed...

I am looking for a good DAM that supports RAW and sidecar files for metadata. Sidecar files have extraordinary benefits, including that minor changes to sets of large RAW files do not require all of the RAW files to be backed up, which would be extremely expensive and wasteful. As well, I prefer for photo editing programs to keep their hands off the "original pixels"... sidecar files help achieve this.

I see some people talk online about sidecar files, saying that they can get lost, or some such commentary... well, in that case, any file can get lost... I mean, if you use sidecar files, they should be right there side-by-side with original. Before I moved to Affinity, I used a very large suite that came with a fairly decent DAM supporting sidecar files... I NEVER, never once in my life, lost a sidecar file.

Side car files are a great way to make note of fundamental changes to RAW images (exposure, shadow, white balance, other major, if not minor adjustments)... after those major changes kept in sidecar files, you can easily bring those few RAW files into Affinity for final development... where you make a new separate file when you are finalizing images and touch ups.

To me, RAW files are originals and I do not want them edited, and I do not want to back up all of my raw files again simply because I changed exposure slightly on all of them.. again, total waste, not to mention I am weary about 3rd party programs (even with great reputation) partying directly on the original RAW media if there's good innovations, such as sidecar files, that alleviate the need.

Final important point: Supporting sidecar files does not mean lack of support for embedded metadata. Generally, I've seen cases where sidecar is used because, supposedly, RAW files cannot be updated directly. I disagree with such a design choice. Sidecar files, most optimally, would be available at the editor's (user's) discretion as a configurable option, not only as a default based on file type, but perhaps overridable for certain types of export/save operations. So I'm not saying never allow embedding... I'm just saying, sidecar files rock, they are awesome, you learn about this when you have to backup loads of photos... go back and touch them up slightly after you back up GB of data and you will weep when you see you need to backup another nnnGB of essentially duplicate pixel data, all because you changed the copyright message, or some silly thing like that. 

Perhaps beyond fundamental metadata (copyright or whatnot), I think embedding changes to files should happen as part of final post-processing, or when you are sending something out or creating some "final" version. 

Again, my two cents, not to knock anyone else, even those who do not need a DAM. 

Thanks,

Ash

[kirk23]

I very much prefer they woudn't spread  their resources over too many projects. Considering APhoto is still far from perfection and  lacks  lots of necessary features.   The market is full of both  RAW dev and DAM softs  free included .

I personally use RAW therapy  for RAW development and iMatch as DAM  for  more then a decade.  Paying Adobe subscription too   and nothing  ever made me consider switching  to one of Lightrooms .  Classic Lightroom is nice and process files in more quick manner   but lacks  a few important features comparing to RAWtherapy.  Same as a DAM . It became better through years  but still can't touch iMAtch .    So Lightroom just collects dust on my computer.  I am surprised so many people value it so high.

I'd say  they need to make APhoto  better than Photoshop  first .

 

[GFS]

On 9/7/2021 at 7:16 AM, Ash777 said:

To me, RAW files are originals and I do not want them edited,

You never alter a RAW.  You can't.  I think it may be a common misconception, where people make copies so as to leave the original 'untouched', but in fact, the original is always untouched.  RAW editors are always using 'sidecar' files, it's just that you don't see them.

The argument for sidecar to be kept alongside a RAW, is that metadata could, in theory, corrupt a file.  However, if you are using a DAM like Aperture, or Apple Photos, then all of those bits and pieces are indeed kept separately... but out of sight.  So for example, in Photos, you can make duplicates of your RAW, to have different looks, but secretly there is still only 1 RAW which just sits there, unaltered.  You'd notice that they have the same name.  Aperture was more professional with its UI and made Versions instead of Duplicates... as many as you wanted.  But there was still only 1 RAW.

[Ash777]

On 9/7/2021 at 5:36 AM, kirk23 said:

I very much prefer they woudn't spread  their resources over too many projects. ...  The market is full of both  RAW dev and DAM softs  free included . ... I personally use RAW therapy  for RAW development and iMatch as DAM  for  more then a decade.  ... I'd say  they need to make APhoto  better than Photoshop  first .

@kirk23 Great point... yeah, I was just expressing my preference in case they ever have the resources and priorities structure to embark on a DAM... but you are correct, there are a number of options out there already. That Affinity Photo exists with its power to provide an alternative is, by itself, really wonderful... so I definitely do not want my opinion to mean I am waiting for Affinity to create a DAM at expense of Affinity Photo forward momentum. 

Curious, have you ever heard of, used ACDSee?? It seems to have a DAM with support for sidecar files... was thinking it may be worth it for just the DAM to use with APhoto.

[Ash777]

5 hours ago, GFS said:

You never alter a RAW.  You can't.  I think it may be a common misconception, where people make copies so as to leave the original 'untouched', but in fact, the original is always untouched.  RAW editors are always using 'sidecar' files, it's just that you don't see them.

@GFS It sounds like you may be using different software/platform that I have used because what you're saying about a RAW file never getting altered with a photo app is unfortunately not true everywhere. For example, Canon Digital Photo Professional (DPP) will embed metadata relating to edits into the raw *.CR3 files. I have firmly confirmed this with zero doubt.

I am on PC and always change my File Explorer defaults to show all files, including hidden operating system files, so I see sidecar files when they are used (I used a DAM that used sidecar files for years)... so I can see everything in the folders I access. Additionally, saving changes in DPP yields a *.CR3 raw file with a modified date/time, and a binary compare program clearly shows metadata embedded into the file when changes are saved.

It sounds like you've been fortunate enough to work within a photography ecosystem which uses sidecar files. I have too before, and the sidecar files are readily visible given my usage, system setup, and the raw file itself never changes (modified date/time never changes) when a sidecar file is used.

So instead of using Canon DPP, I'm trying to use Affinity Photo... but APhoto does not provide a DAM. Canon DPP sort of has a DAM in that you can browse thumbnails and edit etc. So this has me looking for a good DAM to use with Affinity Photo. 

[kirk23]

2 hours ago, Ash777 said:

Curious, have you ever heard of, used ACDSee??

I loved ACDSee a lot  around 2000  but then switched to IMatch  .  It was lack of features I need  like being  able to read categories and keywords set directly in Photoshop.  And limited search criterias.     Like sorting out everything  except 16 bit per channel images.  Or finding images of similar  color scheme.  Automatic keyword suggestions.   Finding images taken within 1km radius around certain point on a map  or ability to sync and write geo tags into your  photos from your phone geo-tracking  app   and so on and on.   Same with Xnveiw . Another cool and free soft.    So have no idea what ACDSee is able to do now.  I lost track of it .