DAMs - Opinions


I can only assume this post originated from someone employed from the likes of *n1 or the even worse, *uminar. Both which are complete disasters.

Topaz Is a professional outfit. By that it surely knows/assumes that those that arrive at it have already sorted their catalogs out long ago.

Thank you Topaz for (hopefully) not falling for this nonsense from goodness knows where. .

Desperate nonsense surely crafted to bring you down…

‘They’re’ getting scared

Lightroom anyone?

Forgot to add: ACDSee or whatever it’s called is GREAT. It can rival and outdo the other nonsense from the likes of those mentioned above.

Forget the origional rather questionable post from goodness knows where hoping that Topaz will fall into the trap…

1 Like

ON1 and Luminar are relative newcomers to digital asset management and are in the early stages of development, and have a way to go yet, I have both. I also trialled ACDSEE and found it no better. My original suggestion was that Topaz might like to consider using its expertise to compete in this field, competition being good for the consumer. I find the tone and rudeness of a couple of these posts offensive. It’s been a while since I worked and it was certainly not for the two American companies whose names now seem to begin with an asterisk.

I agree with the consensus here. Unless Topaz could be confident of delivering a decent DAM that is capable of competing with the existing offerings, they should leave well alone, and not divert their attentions.

Skylum made a huge mistake with theirs, and it has been in development of well over two years. They didn’t even bother improving it at all for Luminar 4.

The DAM/Editor packages that have worked well are those that started off as primarily DAM with Raw processing as a basic function, and then gradually added and developed the editing tools over time.

Topaz makes some good products, although not without their own issues - early versions usually seem to arrive with bugs, but Topaz do get on top of them quickly.

Clearly it takes a lot of resources to develop a decent DAM and integrate it into an editing workflow. Many of the big names have teased us with suggestions they may add DAM (Affinity was rumoured at one time too), but little has come of it to compete with the existing tops names.

Of course a well developed DAM/workflow manager would be very welcome.

1 Like

If you want a true Digital Asset Manager, an app that will catalog images with searchable metadata, map assignment features and launch the images in external editors, options are limited, in my opinion. Among the best are Lightroom, Photo Supreme and ACDSee (the various Windows versions are far superior to the single Mac ACDSee app). Camera Bits is currently public beta testing its version of a digital asset manager for both Windows and Mac platforms – Photo Mechanic Plus. It’s the best I’ve ever used. Unfortunately, only those owners of Photo Mechanic 6 are eligible to participate in the public beta program.

I would prefer Topaz Labs concentrate on improving Topaz Studio 2 and its AI replacements for Topaz plugins and leave the DAMs to the companies with experience in that field.

1 Like

P i c a s a still works wonders. There are many legacy sites where you can d/load

In my opinion, we don’t need another DAM, there are enough to meet most needs.
But what we urgently need for all current Topaz products (and I’m not the only one pushing for it) is a way to easily and quickly transfer settings from one photo to many other photos.
And I don’t mean the old batch process and this strange procedure with Gigapixel AI, both not very comfortable.
But simply the possibility that all photos from a folder are displayed in the programs and that then the current filter settings can be transferred to all selected photos by copy & paste. For example as with Exposure X5 without all the other functions of a DAM.

1 Like

Please raise your own feature request so others that want a feature like that can vote.

I agree.