Jump to content
hifred

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

Do you need a DAM-program by Serif? And what should it be like?  

106 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you need a DAM?

    • No thanks. I'm just fine with the OS native File Browser / I happily use a 3rd party program for browsing my assets and RAW editing.
      27
    • Yes. I would like to have an Asset Browser. It should provide reliable Preview of all Affinity filetypes and of other popular file types. I do not work with RAW files / the current RAW editing implementation works well for my needs.
      15
    • Yes. I would like to have an Asset Browser, but it needs to have a powerful RAW processor built in. I often work with numerous files which need common base-corrections as well as individual tweaking – therefore the Develop Persona and working on single files one at a time doesn't cut it for me. I would appreciate better interchange with 3rd party RAW editors, hence sidecar files were very helpful. Affinity still could embed the RAW file along with its settings for compositing with other artwork – but in a way that one can return to the DAM for further tweaking of the input RAW file. Note: This implementation should work equally well for those who voted for 2).
      64


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Arte said:

Sorry, I probably misinterpreted your perception of Lightroom as I got the impression you considered Lightroom to be an awesome DAM as well given your description of your non-Lightroom workflow being an awesome DAM option that is at least equal to that of Lightroom.

I initially thought the same, too. Text transmission of ideas is sometimes difficult.  :) 

But despite difference in overall workflow, we're probably asking Serif for similar things. My hope is simply that they deliver a tool that's at least as capable and flexible as those in the Affinity suite of software. Despite my current use of Bridge CC 2019, I'm eager to move away from even that little bit of connection with Adobe. In my case, other than as a simple file browser, it does little else for me. And since I haven't updated to Photoshop CC, I can't use Adobe Camera Raw anyway.

As for Lightroom v6, this was the last standalone version offered by Adobe, but it will not recognize native raw files from newer cameras. I could convert to DNG and pull them in that way. I have nothing at all against DNG. But missing native RAW support would continue to be a bummer. Another reason I moved on to Capture One Pro, which is overall superior in a number of ways, albeit not so much as a DAM. 

All of that to say: I'm eager for Serif to deliver on their own DAM. But Adobe's 20+ years of history in this department shows just how tough it can be to deliver something polished. We may be in for a longggg wait for something with which most of us are happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for voting :o)

46 minutes ago, jepho said:

Making one tool serve every purpose is what is wrong with so many multi-tools and legacy tool and software bloat are just one of the results. No tool will serve every need and purpose. I am happy to use Serif software for what it does well.

This part I don't understand. Most people would expect a DAM to be a separate piece of software. Some would be content with just a competent media management tool, others would wish RAW development to take place in this environment, for possible later compositing inside Affinity Photo. Do you think a RAW Editor which matches your expectations would be too complex a task for Serif?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hifred said:

Thanks for voting :o)

This part I don't understand. Most people would expect a DAM to be a separate piece of software. Some would be content with just a competent media management tool, others would wish RAW development to take place in this environment, for possible later compositing inside Affinity Photo. Do you think a RAW Editor which matches your expectations would be too complex a task for Serif?

Sorry for any confusion. It appeared to me that people were wanting Serif to include the DAM and the RAW processor within Affinity Photo. I am happy to have separate applications and having used many different RAW processing softwares, often with pre, inter and post sharpening provided as separate applications, I am not in need of a DAM. You will have noted that DxO provide adequate filing, sorting and batch processing. It turns out that they also provide outstanding RAW file processing and include all of the lens correction files necessary. 

I will not be using another RAW file processor anytime soon because I am more than happy with the one I do use. I already use the storage and filing provided extensively; with DxO Optics Pro. The interesting question for me is do I think that Serif would find making a RAW processor that matches my expectations too complex a task. I have been processing RAW image files as a professional digital photographer since 2001. I processed and printed all of my own monochrome and colour film as a professional film photographer for all formats from 8 x 10 inches down to subminiature since about 1970.

RAW image processing was very variable in the early days and the standout applications were Adobe's ACR, Apple's Aperture and Phase One. I have tried many others including Pixelmator, Acorn, Iridient and some software which was just a RAW file processor. ACR was not always the best converter and Aperture had a great (almost filmic) way of file processing. Phase one had great software to go with their outstanding digital backs. Iridient was very capable but difficult to drive well or effectively. Eventually I settled on DxO and found it suits my workflow while making my task easy and well organised. The level of quality in the ease of use and the converted file quality, makes me think that serif would be chasing a fast moving target.

DxO Optics Pro started out around the last quarter of 2004 with version 1.1. That development cycle of fourteen years has refined the software to its present state. Effectively that is a fourteen year head start on anything that Serif would bring to the table and if we assume that Serif can shorten the development cycle for a RAW image processor to say 4 years to bring out something as highly polished as DxO Optics Pro, they would still be behind the development and refinement curve by eighteen years. I believe that the task is too complex for Serif and that they will be unable to meet my expectations with a RAW image file processor within the next five years.

Reinventing the wheel is usually not a profitable line of enquiry. The reason that Serif have gained traction with Affinity Designer and Affinity Photo is that the marketplace was smarting from Adobe's rental scheme and the legacy bloat and failure to update old code left Adobe vulnerable. Affinity Publisher is a different animal and providing Serif address several inexplicable omissions, it will gain traction too. Every camera manufacturer and his brother provides a RAW file converter for their own proprietary image formats.All other generic providers have to update the RAW filetype database regularly to make their image processor work with files that a manufacturer would rather keep proprietary. File handling to extract the maximum detail is more than a set of numbers and parameters and the programming has to be very high quality if it intends to make any inroads in the professional RAW file processing markets. I process Dicomed medical image files occasionally. Will a mainstream software house like Serif wish to service the minority medical image market which needs to process Nifti, Dicom, Analyze and Minc images?     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds as if DxO was a great choice for your needs! But one can also get the impression that you here can do to your RAWs pretty much everything you need and only quite rarely in comparison need to edit images in a layer based fashion. Is that impression correct?

I think the more regularly one needs RAW development as well as compositing the more desirable it gets to have a suite of applications by the same vendor, which play perfectly together: in the same way as is highly advantagous to use Photoshop for the source graphics when regularly creating Layouts with Indesign. In my situation leaving the Adobe Suite towards Affinities current RAW develop-workspace would be a terrible step backwards. But using two separate programs for RAWs and Layer based editing was unacceptable too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

14 hours ago, jepho said:

Sorry for any confusion. It appeared to me that people were wanting Serif to include the DAM and the RAW processor within Affinity Photo. I am happy to have separate applications and having used many different RAW processing softwares, often with pre, inter and post sharpening provided as separate applications, I am not in need of a DAM. You will have noted that DxO provide adequate filing, sorting and batch processing. It turns out that they also provide outstanding RAW file processing and include all of the lens correction files necessary. 

I will not be using another RAW file processor anytime soon because I am more than happy with the one I do use. I already use the storage and filing provided extensively; with DxO Optics Pro. The interesting question for me is do I think that Serif would find making a RAW processor that matches my expectations too complex a task. I have been processing RAW image files as a professional digital photographer since 2001. I processed and printed all of my own monochrome and colour film as a professional film photographer for all formats from 8 x 10 inches down to subminiature since about 1970.

I posted earlier that I'd like an integrated DAM as some others do.  And still wouldn't complain if we get one. :D  But the more I read about it and experiment with some 3rd party DAM apps, I see your point and am starting to wonder whether (a) I really NEED an integrated DAM, and (b) Whether it's realistic to expect Affinity's small team can build that in the near future, while also completing their other development priorities.

 

14 hours ago, jepho said:

DxO Optics Pro started out around the last quarter of 2004 with version 1.1. That development cycle of fourteen years has refined the software to its present state. Effectively that is a fourteen year head start on anything that Serif would bring to the table and if we assume that Serif can shorten the development cycle for a RAW image processor to say 4 years to bring out something as highly polished as DxO Optics Pro, they would still be behind the development and refinement curve by eighteen years. I believe that the task is too complex for Serif and that they will be unable to meet my expectations with a RAW image file processor within the next five years.

Reinventing the wheel is usually not a profitable line of enquiry. The reason that Serif have gained traction with Affinity Designer and Affinity Photo is that the marketplace was smarting from Adobe's rental scheme and the legacy bloat and failure to update old code left Adobe vulnerable. Affinity Publisher is a different animal and providing Serif address several inexplicable omissions, it will gain traction too. Every camera manufacturer and his brother provides a RAW file converter for their own proprietary image formats.All other generic providers have to update the RAW filetype database regularly to make their image processor work with files that a manufacturer would rather keep proprietary. File handling to extract the maximum detail is more than a set of numbers and parameters and the programming has to be very high quality if it intends to make any inroads in the professional RAW file processing markets. I process Dicomed medical image files occasionally. Will a mainstream software house like Serif wish to service the minority medical image market which needs to process Nifti, Dicom, Analyze and Minc images?     

While I agree with your overall point (that some of us may not NEED an integrated RAW + DAM app, and that they are complex and will take serious effort to develop), I'm less sure about this supporting argument.  If I follow, you are saying that it took other RAW + DAM app developers X years to build a solid mature product, thus we should expect it'll take Affinity roughly the same amount of time.

I'm not sure that this line of reasoning holds, for software development. There are so many factors that go into building software, you cannot assume a simple apples-to-apples comparison on how long it'll take to build a certain type of project.   Some examples of these factors include:  the effectiveness of the app design and architecture (a simpler, more elegant design from the start can speed development by orders of magnitude), the total amount of man-hours (aka 'resources') they have to devote to the effort, the skill and experience of the devs themselves (a great dev will often complete a project several times faster than a mediocre one, at the same time building it with higher quality), whether they are starting with a 'clean slate' or having to build on some legacy functionality (clean slate is often faster), what kind of design-build-test-deploy pipeline and tools they are using, what awareness they have of existing apps in the same space which can speed the development of their own (example:  the AP team had a good awareness of what functionality they needed to build by looking at mature competitor apps--versus having to sit down and invent from scratch all the functionality that AP would need to include), and so on.  Basically, given the analogy of the rapid development of AP and AD, it wouldn't surprise me if the Affinity team could build a solid RAW + DAM app fairly quickly if they have good devs, sufficient resources to devote to it, a good design, and so on.  

I suspect that today, the main thing blocking them is simply the resources.  They may be able to grow and add more devs, which would let them eventually tackle this.  But for now, I'm moving ahead with a 3rd party app.  I tried XNview and liked it for pure DAM, but it is VERY weak in the quality of the output and the "preferences" options you have to change that, when you are processing files and exporting them to other formats.  I do not see Xnview as a viable choice for anything other than viewing, sorting, tagging, basic file renaming, stuff like that.  I'm experimenting with some commercial apps, ON1 is one that I liked.  And some FOSS alternatives. They are all quite good, though for different reasons.  My 2 leading FOSS options are DigiKam and DarkTable.  Both have good (DK) or excellent (DT) RAW processing that exceeds the basic tools in AP. They both have the ability to do powerful batch processing, plus they are both very good DAM apps for my needs.  Not quite as slick and easy as Xnview for simply viewing/tagging/sorting kinds of stuff, but FAR more powerful in bulk graphics processing while still more than adequate for the DAM aspect.  Right now I'm torn between which one I like better, but leaning slightly toward DT as it seems to hog less system resources, and has much more powerful RAW processing that gets great results.  

What I'd really like to see in the near future--and might be more realistic than to expect Affinity to build a full DAM app with their current small team--is if Affinity would simply partner with some viable 3rd party app, and provide smooth integration between it and the Affinity apps. I'm not sure if partnering with a FOSS DAM app is viable, given that Affinity is commercial, there may be some kind of licensing conflict.  But the principle is the same, whether you integrate with a FOSS DAM app like DT, or a commercial one like DxO or ON1.  GIMP has been doing something like this, partnering with both DT and RawTherapee so that you can open RAW files in GIMP, which pops open the appropriate RAW app, then hands the processed RAW result back to GIMP.  I think Affinity could do something like this, and do it much better than it works in GIMP.  

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hifred said:

Sounds as if DxO was a great choice for your needs! But one can also get the impression that you here can do to your RAWs pretty much everything you need and only quite rarely in comparison need to edit images in a layer based fashion. Is that impression correct?

I think the more regularly one needs RAW development as well as compositing the more desirable it gets to have a suite of applications by the same vendor, which play perfectly together: in the same way as is highly advantagous to use Photoshop for the source graphics when regularly creating Layouts with Indesign. In my situation leaving the Adobe Suite towards Affinities current RAW develop-workspace would be a terrible step backwards. But using two separate programs for RAWs and Layer based editing was unacceptable too.

DxO is more than adequate for my needs. You are correct. I capture the images I need for my clients and I rarely need more than a bit of cropping and some pre printing sharpening. The colour balance and exposure are handled in DxO. Compositing is rarely required because film photographers had to make most of their decisions before using the camera. I am fairly much tool agnostic and will use what I find works.

Adobe lost the plot many years earlier than now, when annual 'upgrades' never really addressed the stultifying slow Photoshop. Illustrator exhibited anomalies for donkeys years. The CS Suite was a wheeze to extract more money while refusing to fix the glaring holes in the software. ACR reached a plateau that implied developmental stasis and it was no longer a given that one vendor had all of the answers.

I can recall paying £500 for Apple's Aperture software. It looked like a real breakthrough but it was abandoned by Apple and I am delighted that I was never locked into any single approach. I find it more economical to have a separate DAM/RAW processing engine. I keep my vector and image processing software separated from it. To my mind, multi-tools are usually disappointing because they don't do anything well. The worst of all possible worlds if you will. Single use tools are fit for purpose and what appears to be costly and difficult to integrate into the workflow, usually proves to be the best method of working, where outstanding quality is the intended endpoint. YMMV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, timlt said:

I posted earlier that I'd like an integrated DAM as some others do.  And still wouldn't complain if we get one. :D  But the more I read about it and experiment with some 3rd party DAM apps, I see your point and am starting to wonder whether (a) I really NEED an integrated DAM, and (b) Whether it's realistic to expect Affinity's small team can build that in the near future, while also completing their other development priorities.

From my viewpoint, the OS of your computer already has the ability to file, sort, open, close and write to digital files and it can also retrieve them. This is DAM by any other name.

4 hours ago, timlt said:

If I follow, you are saying that it took other RAW + DAM app developers X years to build a solid mature product, thus we should expect it'll take Affinity roughly the same amount of time.

My RAW processor is only as good as it is because it was developed and has gone through iterations over 14 years. DxO also include their own database of lenses and all of the corrections required to reduce or remove chromatic aberrations and barrel and pincushion distortions. It is unlikely that Serif will be able to replicate that database of information without the relevant scientific testing and creating the means in the software to apply the numbers thereby derived. 

4 hours ago, timlt said:

Basically, given the analogy of the rapid development of AP and AD, it wouldn't surprise me if the Affinity team could build a solid RAW + DAM app fairly quickly if they have good devs, sufficient resources to devote to it, a good design, and so on. 

Serif know a lot more about layout and publishing. Nevertheless, the pre-press requirements of designers are very specific and well known. Notwithstanding that information, Affinity Publisher took a long time to bring to its beta state and yet, it inexplicably still has many vital omissions. RAW file processing is understood and DAM is also understood. High quality output files are not that often seen, despite the welter of available applications. I suspect that Serif will find that they do not have the resources to bring such a program to the market early.

5 hours ago, timlt said:

I'm experimenting with some commercial apps, ON1 is one that I liked.

ON1 has a reasonable reputation. I have not used it but I have seen many resulting images and in a pinch, I would use it. If you are considering commercial software, have a look at DxO Optics Pro. It will surprise you with just how complete and easy it is to use. I am, of course, biased but then I use it every day for my commercial needs and it has not fallen over or let me down.

5 hours ago, timlt said:

GIMP has been doing something like this, partnering with both DT and RawTherapee so that you can open RAW files in GIMP, which pops open the appropriate RAW app, then hands the processed RAW result back to GIMP.  I think Affinity could do something like this, and do it much better than it works in GIMP.  

GIMP is a 20 year old software with 20 year old thinking. I could not recommend it for any serious image editing. Partnering with DxO to gain access to the lens correction database may make sense. I suspect that the royalty cost would then push the software cost too high for Serif's company philosophy.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have two different uses for my RAW processing: Fast clean-up of the shots combined with basic RAW editing like WB, Color correction, lens distortion correction, cropping, leveling and batch conversion to JPG followed by erasing the most RAW files - keeping the top rated ones (selected by searching by rating). This process I do on all photos. The second process is done on the top rated pictures from the first process. The first process is done in DPP4 (Canon software). The second one is done in Affinity Photo.

I mainly need a DAM software for keeping order of my photos and to easily find them again. My dream scenario would be a piece of software that can replace DPP4 enabling me to do my first process combined with meta tagging. It should be a database that store thumbnails of the photos locally on my laptop so that I can search my photos even though I do not have access to my photos, that is stored on a NAS at my home. Connection to a cloud service would be nice when I'm on the run. I use Amazon Photos for backup. It would also be nice if I could switch databases. Like if I had one for private use and one for professional use. Or one for sport and one for landscape.

I have tried DigiKam but find is slow and heavy to use. I do like the face detection feature though. I do not use the editing functionality at all. But I'm pretty sure that I would use Serif's basic editing tools if they were implemented. Just keep in mind not to clutter it up with a lot of functionality if I loose speed.

Finally I hope Serif does add an export function, so that I do not have to start all over if I switch solution if for instance Serif decide to stop support of their DAM one day in the future.

I have started to look elsewhere because Serif doesn't give me any clue about when they will come up with a solution. No news must be equal looong time before they have a beta version ready I guess...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted no. I use IMatch as my DAM and Capture One Pro as my main raw processor. I think it would take years to catch up to the power of IMatch as a DAM, and I'd rather they put the resources into Photo & Designer. I would like non-destructive raw processing in Photo, and I'd like to be able to copy and paste raw settings on a batch of photos, but neither would be top priority.

I once thought all in one management and processing was a great idea. I no longer think that way. LR is a rather weak DAM and it may be the best of the bunch in that regard compared to the other be all photo raw processors. Same goes for HDR and Pano. I wasn't even happy with the raw processing in the end which drove me looking for another does it all solution. I finally realized I already used a handful of specialized programs for HDR. I used PTGui Pro for panorama stitching with Affinity for finishing. So I changed my search to finding the strongest, most open DAM and a raw processor that was fast, had great color editing, and tethering. IMatch and C1 won out. Since I manage everything in a dedicated DAM, I don't hesitate to process a raw in Affinity,  or DPP if a certain image just isn't getting there in C1 (rare). Maybe I'll add DXO for it's reputed noise and geometry handling. Photo and Designer are great v1 programs, I look forward to them getting even better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bri W said:

I voted no. I use IMatch as my DAM and Capture One Pro as my main raw processor. I think it would take years to catch up to the power of IMatch as a DAM, and I'd rather they put the resources into Photo & Designer. I would like non-destructive raw processing in Photo, and I'd like to be able to copy and paste raw settings on a batch of photos, but neither would be top priority.

I once thought all in one management and processing was a great idea. I no longer think that way. LR is a rather weak DAM and it may be the best of the bunch in that regard compared to the other be all photo raw processors. Same goes for HDR and Pano. I wasn't even happy with the raw processing in the end which drove me looking for another does it all solution. I finally realized I already used a handful of specialized programs for HDR. I used PTGui Pro for panorama stitching with Affinity for finishing. So I changed my search to finding the strongest, most open DAM and a raw processor that was fast, had great color editing, and tethering. IMatch and C1 won out. Since I manage everything in a dedicated DAM, I don't hesitate to process a raw in Affinity,  or DPP if a certain image just isn't getting there in C1 (rare). Maybe I'll add DXO for it's reputed noise and geometry handling. Photo and Designer are great v1 programs, I look forward to them getting even better.

keep in mind that serif could purchase a software company or the rights to something that is already built and make improvements to that product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just carbon copy Aperture and improve on what it always compared unfavorably to LR.

That is basically why I’m even in the forums, to see if Serif will one day tell me if I’m wasting my time looking for such a solution from them or not.

 

Oh and graceful import of Aperture DB, because yes, many still haven’t switched away. What to? Nobody makes a DAM that unified “consumer features” (faces and assigning them to photos) and pro features (smart photo albums, vast tagging, editing and metadata, RAW processing)

 

Basically one application for both your personal but also artistic needs.

 

And I like manual importing, makes sure no “crap” enters my database. Thumbnails, accidents get alerted to me like a missing file that is in the DB but went missing from HDD, I know that everything I add to it has at least gone through my manual initializing like rough tagging, sorting and assigning an event name if applicable, etc...

 

I also would love to be able to manage Live Photos (Apple format) or similar implementations like from Google’s Pixel phones, Samsung’s Galaxy line both of which I think call it Motion Photo.

 

Again, I want ONE application for ALL my photos and video clips. From a casual Live Photo snap to the full-blown well prepared RAW shot from my EOS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But is there real need for new Affinity product? What if Affinity Photo 2 would have more advanced UI ? (Like HitFilm has integrated After effects and Premiere into one software kind of - not as powerful yet but its good and they make fast progress. Or DaVinci Resolve and their fusion integration) what if Affinity Photo 2 or Affinity Photo Studio would come with DAM / catalog  features  (some file explorer ribbon / catalog window in bottom or top UI where user can select next image to process) - if user wants to edit like in lightroom - then developer persona could be activated with this new catalog window. But is there real need for new Affinity product? What if Affinity Photo 2 would have advanced UI with dam features  (some file explorer ribbon / catalog window in bottom or top UI where user can select next image to process) - if user wants to edit like in lightroom - then developer persona could be activated with this new catalog window. Sorry for these bad and fast mockups - but here is the idea what i am trying to explain and this is not the way how it should be. I am quite sure that Affinity team now better how UI could be improved to be all in one photo manipulation software. I would really like to see all in one solution for print media like publishers photo and designer links in publisher UI but integrated into one software it would print media's DaVinci Resolve or Nuke Studio (or HitFilm).

 

mockup1.pngmockup2.pnggallery-views.jpg?resize=1600,1000For lightroom users it could work something like this way - user opens affinity photo - and then select develope persona - if develop persona is selected right after start (with no open project) then develop personas empty working area (image view area) should show catalog window over it (taking all space) - something like this. It would be like homepage if there is no open projects. But this might be bad idea. I am sure affinity team know better what to do and how to do it if there is any idea in this suggestion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, cosmical said:

What if Affinity Photo 2 would have advanced UI with dam features  (some file explorer ribbon / catalog window in bottom or top UI where user can select next image to process)

This has been discussed before, earlier in this thread.
A few users would prefer an inbuilt option, but Serif already stated that the DAM will be a standalone product. To me this makes a lot of sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hifred said:

This has been discussed before, earlier in this thread.
A few users would prefer an inbuilt option, but Serif already stated that the DAM will be a standalone product. To me this makes a lot of sense.

Ok. Well maybe its better after all. Faster workflow for photographers. But some fast links like publisher will have for AP and AD would be nice.
AP with fast link to this new.. erhmm..  (affinity studio/darkroom etc.?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In order to completely break away from the dreaded subscription based model of PS and LR I would love for affinity to have DAM and raw processing built in. I love the way Capture One does things but it is still a bit clunky with Catalogs and sessions. If Affinity could develop DAM and RAW processing with decent tethered shooting built in and have it work seamlessly with Affinity Photo then, and only then, will you have a potential Adobe/Capture One killer on your hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted 'No thanks'. Between Quicklook in Apple's Finder and various image viewers/catalogs with drag & drop capabilities or right-click 'Open with' functionality I do not need another such app which would have to be brought up to functionality standards over - I expect - several versions. Always avoided Bridge in PS as it was considered a bit of a resource hog. These days I would not mind Luminar to recognize AP however. Bit of a bummer that the 'Open with' options seem hard coded in that one.

 

At any rate I tend to set up separate image viewers with the folders opened that I need to work with and then just drag from there.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×