Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Digital Asset Management => Topic started by: Phil Indeblanc on May 03, 2012, 01:13:03 AM

Title: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 03, 2012, 01:13:03 AM
Is this the right area to talk about DAManagers?

I look at LR and it has major limitations as a DAm. I look at C1 and love that it doesn't try and behave like one...then look at Media Pro, and it clunks out. Bridge clunks out. ACDSee has some issues, but rather great in many ways, but NO RAW preview support. I have tried just about all of them. Fast Stone, PhotoMechanic, Bibble, and about 3 or 5 others, and I do like IDImager in a number of ways. It would be a major shift from the so easy to use interface of ACDSee.


It would need to manage Raw files, and MANY other image files to include PDF, PSD, TIF, maybe even see Ai, InDesign...For the last 2, at least let me know the file exists.
I would like to see info like the Bits it has, the color space it is...ACDSee does lots of this, and then some...but no RAW preview, and it is trying to be its own RAW dev program, and less effort on stability and features in the managing area....like network friendly with DBases.

And since there is no RAW preview on viewers I know of...I wanted to ask

WHAT DO PRODUCTION HOUSES, OR AGENCIES USE???


Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Tony Jay on May 03, 2012, 02:26:20 AM

I look at LR and it has major limitations as a DAm. /quote]

Are you able to state what you feel are the limitations with LR regarding DAM?
Currently this is a rather broad statement that needs clarification for it to pass muster.

Regards

Tony Jay
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: bjornaagedk on May 03, 2012, 03:20:05 PM
Extensis Portfolio 10 or Canto Cumulus. Both pricey but does all you mentioned.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: bjornaagedk on May 03, 2012, 03:24:00 PM
You could slso check this out: www.seefile.com
Costs a lot less but also has its limitations. A great product though.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Ellis Vener on May 07, 2012, 04:53:24 PM
Phil, Have you read Peter Krogh's "The DAM Book"? (on it's second version)? The stock photo library I use built their own. I'm positive Getty, Corbis, Alamy etc all have their own proprietary DAM systems. Fotoware (http://www.fotoware.com/) is also very comprehensive and apparently used by many news organizations in Europe and some in the USA as well.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 08, 2012, 04:15:17 AM
Pass muster? Where are the 20 other commonly used image formats we need to manage for production? And for startes, lets cover the family file types like PDF, InDEsign, Illustrator. One that bothers me is PSD in later modes. It is rather slow, and even worse in Compat mode...The later modes save faster for large files (which is what we have), and then to put salt on the would we have to revert back to "Compatibility mode"

Since when can LR do anything but develop raw files, and see 3 other formats?(PSD, Jpeg, TIF). I would hardly call that productive if you run a business for commercial work, or even produce work for web content. If you ever supply a magazine with your image and you want to control the color conversion, say hello to PDF, and GOOD Bye to seeing it LR.  Wouldn't you like to know how many bits that file is, 16, 8 ? Color space? sRGB, CMYK...These are basics it should already coiver.,.it doesn't!

....And not seeing place holders for unsupported file types is a bit "boxed in".



Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 08, 2012, 04:19:59 AM
Well I read the older version The DAM Book/ 2005.

I really like how LR Exports files with all those presets and signature watermarks with resolution presets.
ACDSee also does this, which is great, but no RAW for IIQ files, and the color repro is rather bad, it is unstable with large files and switching from server to server on network.


PhotoMechanic is good for News groups. But will check out the others some of you mentioned.  I'm not a programmer, so writing one is a bit tough for me.  If ACDSee had a Developers edition that can be customized,  I would strip it down to my liking and add Phase One IIQ support.
This still doesn't allow us to see C1 or LR adjustments. That would take some time. I wish someone would work closer with C1 and Adobe to have them license RAW viewers for DAM use, so they can at least display how the RAW is developed.

Or LR could support more of image file types and make it easier for everyone...Simply select the formats to include in Folder Sync....that way it doesn't slow anything down.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 08, 2012, 04:53:19 AM
SeeFile costs a lot less??? Unless you cloud your images. (I don't cloud, I like them right where they are) the option is to purchase the server license and that is a burglary of $1299!

There is a $390/month for 500GB...Hmm I wonder how much 8 to 12 TB of data will cost me...No thanks. 
Regardless nice to know the option is out there.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Farmer on May 08, 2012, 06:35:24 AM
The price seems very reasonable.  If there's nothign else comparable at a lesser price and if they're making sales, then the market supports that.  It's clearly designed for business rather than personal use.  If you are managing digital assets worth, perhaps potentially, hundreds of thousands of dollars over a period of years, then it's not a lot.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Tony Jay on May 08, 2012, 07:41:52 AM
Pass muster? Where are the 20 other commonly used image formats we need to manage for production? And for startes, lets cover the family file types like PDF, InDEsign, Illustrator. One that bothers me is PSD in later modes. It is rather slow, and even worse in Compat mode...The later modes save faster for large files (which is what we have), and then to put salt on the would we have to revert back to "Compatibility mode"

Since when can LR do anything but develop raw files, and see 3 other formats?(PSD, Jpeg, TIF). I would hardly call that productive if you run a business for commercial work, or even produce work for web content. If you ever supply a magazine with your image and you want to control the color conversion, say hello to PDF, and GOOD Bye to seeing it LR.  Wouldn't you like to know how many bits that file is, 16, 8 ? Color space? sRGB, CMYK...These are basics it should already coiver.,.it doesn't!

....And not seeing place holders for unsupported file types is a bit "boxed in".

Thanks for the clarification Phil.

It appears that most of your issues revolve around file conversion to various formats not supported by LR.
Photoshop offers more options including some you have mentioned.
I take your point that it would be nice not to need another piece of software to do these file conversions.

Perhaps this issue needs consideration for updating even in LR4 and definitely in LR5.
Eric Chan and Jeff Schewe might like to add some insight into the issue generally though.

Regards

Tony Jay
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 09, 2012, 04:01:44 PM
Thanks for the follow up Tony, Not really the conversion, As I am fine with saving within the dev app or as you say in Photoshop, etc.  In the DAM I DO rely on export/convert to Jpeg as I watermark and send off for preview...BUT,

My main gripe is that we cannot SEE, or MANAGE these files. They are NOT AVAILABLE.

If ACDSee a $99 app was a bit more stable, handled larger files better, and was able to share the DB on Network...DONE!

This inversely (for usage purposes) works if you had LR simply support other image formats, as the cataloging and the exporting are great, with the bonus of the developer built in...well I don't care for it one way or other, as they are 2 different functions.
In fact if they split and made a proper Library manager and got rid of Bridge, LR would Develop with less effort on mem...But I do see the convenience of the single interface.


I can see enterprise usage, or even 25 plus users working on the Same database and having all sorts of control maybe be over $500 or what ever....$5000 let say.  You are not paying for the software, you pay for the service of not having down time. custom implementation, etc.
But for the studio of 10 or less, and for not even sharing same DB at the same time, I don't see why.

Many of these companies are already using the core of someone elses engineered software with some GUI and added functionality anyway.

Farmer
A reputable company should base their pricing on the technology, not the potential worth of my images.
I know this is done in many businesses...take shaving in the shower for instance...Any other mirror for this purpose is about $5 to $20. They make it fog free and with a light, you got a $49.99 mirror...AHH!??  "Intended usage"!
I find this business practice short sited in our times of the last 7 years, specially last 4. Still possible, but alternatives are many. And no company gets respect for such a business model.

I surely don't expect to do any business with SeeFile until they have something for the studio.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: john beardsworth on May 09, 2012, 04:22:13 PM
Phil, there is a LR plugin called AnyFile http://www.johnrellis.com/lightroom/anyfile.htm. I don't know if it's any good.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 09, 2012, 05:16:57 PM
I will check this out ASAP!!!! John....there maybe a Light, in the Room after all!!
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Farmer on May 09, 2012, 07:13:16 PM
Phil - I think the price is justifiable - if I have digital assets of high value, I want reliable, well supported software and that costs money.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Tony Jay on May 09, 2012, 08:00:05 PM
My main gripe is that we cannot SEE, or MANAGE these files. They are NOT AVAILABLE.

Phil at the risk of misunderstanding your problem it is possible to re-import these images into LR.
Apologies if I have the wrong end of the stick.

Regards

Tony Jay
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 10, 2012, 11:25:55 AM
Not sure I follow Tony, but it's ok if misunderstood, often may bring another perspective not considered. Though, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by being able to re-import files back into LR. :-)

The files I have interest in, like PDF, InDesign, or illUstrator, or even PNG(I have no use for PNG now, but many web dev folks do).  I also would expect LR4 to be able to handle the latest of Pjotoshop file format for PSD, not just Compatibility mode (slow for large psd files).
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Scott Hargis on May 16, 2012, 11:10:54 AM
PDF would be nice. But to say that LR is "not a true DAM" strikes me as hyperbolic, at best. Like saying that a Ford sedan isn't a "true car" because it can't carry 4 tons of bricks.

As a photographer, which I assume most people on this forum are, I need support for RAW, TIFF, JPEG, and PSD. As I said, PDF would be nice, but it hasn't been a deal-breaker for me by any means.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Dan Wells on May 16, 2012, 05:41:28 PM
I'm a little surprised that Lightroom doesn't do PDF ( I primarily use Aperture, and haven't tried to view a PDF in Lightroom), because Adobe usually tries to stick PDF in EVERYTHING...
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 16, 2012, 11:05:47 PM
Maybe hyperbolic in your usage, I can understand. But it isn't a DAM...Maybe a JPEG/MostRAW/TIF/SomePSD of a DAM...but that leaves much in the imaging industry to cry about. (i.e web content creators).

A DAM is a Digital Asset Manager, and it is not limited to a file that is produced by a camera plus 1 other software; Photoshop. It also shouldn't be limited to "culling" files to a Developer that happens to have  a database as LR does. There is no Browser to see your ASSETS..How is it a manager?  It just isn't. LR is supposed to be great at unload images from a card and place in a DB. In fact it actually isn't so good at this task either.

For example: You have a 32GB card. In the day, you shot some street work, and had a few family pictures in the day, and some other specific subject you were working in for a project or FineArt. Large card, you shoot more the next day.
So now you have 3 or so catagories, as I often end up with. I have to open 3 catalogs to off load the files from 1 CF card??  Really?  this is a pain.
Where is the logic? If it had a BROWSER, I could copy or move over to the appropriate folder I have made or already exist, the "Sync" the folder to update it with the content...then do the rating and keywording and some of the "Smart collection" filing etc. Mind you, I shoot like this nearly everyday, besides studio shoots.

If you have a business or a personal library of X amount of images(lets say lots of them), unless you "Import" them(Which means to sift through them to make logical DB titles and categories), AND also means to FORGET any other file in your folders other than the RAW/TIF/JPEG, and some PSD formats)...say bye bye to all else.  Say you have logos, or PDF's or InDEsign, or PNG files?  Not knowing the true content due to lack of a Browser leaves is working blind....Forget all the complex examples and stuff I said above.....know this...

It leaves you in the dark not seeing a place holder for ANY unsupported file types. This just doesn't reflect reality for many users who look for a MANAGER that shows whats on your drives.(Browser).

As a studio which includes photography and delivery of layouts to magazines a PDF is mandatory. As is CMYK.
As a fine art photographer printing straight to RGB and the like, I totally see that, and I understand many users and lanscapers here are in that realm...but there are a good amount of us that are large circulation publisjhing photo/studios. Which translates to Print ready PDFx1a files proofed and ready to print.  Handling Ai illustrator files is standard, or working with InDesign for making the PDF is standard.
Funny enough, the formats are ALL within the Adobe family of formats

To rub a bit of alcohol on the cut....It's NOT 100% compatible with Photoshop...ironically the compatible (slower version) works, not the default CS version.

FYI, a Ford is a car, if your goal is getting from point A to point B, no matter how you (or your image) ends up looking, or feeling at the end of the trip, I can agree. But for the images sake, and how we feel at the end of the day working... I can't see this being a good analogy :-)
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Schewe on May 17, 2012, 02:42:23 AM
Maybe hyperbolic in your usage, I can understand. But it isn't a DAM...Maybe a JPEG/MostRAW/TIF/SomePSD of a DAM...but that leaves much in the imaging industry to cry about. (i.e web content creators).

You wanna push a square peg into a round hole, you go right ahead...LR was designed (from the original roots on up) as a digital capture asset manager, nothing more. The whole purpose of LR was to deal with digital captures, nothing else.

For me, LR handles THAT job well...YMMV if you want or expect it do anything else.

I suspect you won't get a lot of traction to have LR deal with anything other than digital capture–primarily raw but JPEG, TIFF and proper PSDs thrown in. So far, your use case isn't very interesting to me...InDesign, Illustrator, PDF, web only consumable files? I couldn't care less (and remember, I'm kinda the model for the LR design and usability model).

DAM? I really couldn't care less...I organize "projects" on a per folder basis and set up my projects to be "managed" in Bridge when a wide variety of file formats are gonna be deployed.

For digital captures (original images) LR4 is fine with me...everything else is a short-term consumable files I don't give a crap about and can easily recreate. I only care about the original raws and RGB Master rendered files.

I've seen your plaintive posts for MORE from LR...doesn't move me cause you haven't really made a broad spectrum use case yet. So far it seems you are only worried about you...sorry, I don't really care about YOU.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: john beardsworth on May 17, 2012, 04:12:43 AM
You know, that's a rather narrow view of how Lightroom should be helping photographers. It means you have to fragment control of your workflow across multiple apps, Lightroom for some types of files, Bridge (yuck) for others. Not as efficient or effective as it might be, eh? But good enough. Really, it's not for Adobe to decide what files types form part of the photographer's work and the change would not be drastic - just remove the restriction that prevents cataloguing certain file types and transfer it to preventing them going to Develop or output, display OS thumbnails, and move on. It's a wider vision rather than your "it does what I need well enough" argument. I doubt it will happen though.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Schewe on May 17, 2012, 01:44:47 PM
You know, that's a rather narrow view of how Lightroom should be helping photographers.

Yes, I do know that. But the question remains, why should Lightroom which was designed to deal with photographs have to deal with non-photographic material?

PDF? InDesign? Illustrator? Sure they can use photos but are graphics apps. They consume photos not produce them. There are some file formats I would like to see added and some that wouldn't bother me. I hate the fact I can't import PSB files and have to downsize large PSB to TIFF to get panos into LR. I also would no mind if LR could output PNG/GIF and be able to manage them as well. Personally it kinda pisses me off LR added so much support for video files but that was a product management/marketing decision.

Sorry, I just don't see the need for expanding LR's design to include non-photo file types.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 17, 2012, 02:27:56 PM
Schewe, I do greatly appreciate your posts and your straightforwardness. It only makes progress for all. But not giving a "crap" or DAM is just funny and, as mentioned, narrow minded.
Or perhaps money driven? (Get without Give). Hmmm, where does this mentality lead us? (Sorry that sounds like your the end all for LR, and I don't mean that).

If you're the model for the creation of LighRoom, and that being your reply(2 posts before this),  I and LOTS of users should have ZERO expectation of it as a image manager/DAM...as you so clearly state, and I agree with: Glad we agree on this.
_ Schewe- "DAM? I really couldn't care less...I organize "projects" on a per folder basis and set up my projects to be "managed" in Bridge when a wide variety of file formats are gonna be deployed."
I certainly do the same and use Folders to organize, except for the Bridge part as it blows/never ran correctly for me, (as confirmed by many). This is a no brainer for anyone more than 1 computer. Imagine accessing your files from a computer without LR or a manager and needing to find a file, GOOD LUCK!!! Luckly when I use LR, I simply move files off a card to existing folder structure I setup.(Do anything outside of LR, they are non existent).

The title of this post is just that, "DAM questions". Exploring this is only productive. At the least clear misconceptions people have about a DAM.
LR to me..and YOU is not intended to be a full DAM. It sucks in this department. Which IS perfectly fine with me and you...BUT ! (a big one...which relates directly to your quote above)...

...You decided to have a Catalog!!!  Why not a BROWSER along it?  
If it only were a browser it would make LR.....Soooo much faster!, So much open minded, AND, you wouldn't LOCK yourself in and then realize what do I do with these 3.5 file formats when I actually need it do just a bit more...As myself and many others request.  I explore these ideas to make a better product that can actually apply to more than just a simple narrow model. And as you mention, it is you a SINGLE user. While this is GREAT for you and those in your shoes. Don't get me wrong, this obviously has nothing to do with you being Schewe. But it leaves everyone else OUT in some fashion when you LOCK the usability of it.

If it wasn't for the interface layout, and the IDEA of the catalog, along with limit of images loaded...ACRAW works BEAUTIFULLY!
The 2 or 3 issues I mention above are EASILY fixed(in no way would Adobe wanna do that, it would kill LR), as there are a few rather very good programs that handle Library/catalog/metadata/keywords/ratings, etc.

LR is just another way to MARKET a new app and sell it to a somewhat internally created market, no doubt. And it serves a few purposes, as there is this market. With the largest influx of DSLR users at this time, it is a super market. BUT the cost is a handycap of ACRaw, AND LightRoom! Specially for people working with it.

You end up with two applications LIMITING each others USE...With no real reason or logic, other than marketing?

I know this sounds like a bomb shell, but I honestly could care less that it has a Library.....because that's what kills the speed, and limits the functionality of LR....Browser with thumbnails alone would be a huge step up.
There are numerous apps that do the job of cataloging. Sad thing is that LR does this visually very smoothly, and safely, and nicely. An option for a browser window(can even replace the Import) would NOT take away from this. Move Files then decide to catalog. These are not tailoring to MY needs, these are OPTIONS making available so not only more people, but the exisiting users have more function with the product.

Imagine the Library module being a separate app used to launch other apps including the LR Develop app. It would be more capable a program making this change alone.
It is basically how LR came to be in the first place!(from ACRAW with new face), With some KEY functions: Cataloging ability, very nice Export function, Keywording, rating.
Sticking the two functions together..... Locks EVERYTHING else OUT.

So on that note...Either give LR a browser/with thumbnails to see whats on our drives, or give ACRaw an interface like LR (If you so firmly believe LR's Library alone would hold water).
Or better yet, support the family of formats, AND PSB, PNG. UNLESS you do fine art prints, and THAT IS ALL you do...There is graphics involved!
LR is a photo consumer JUST as the graphics apps, except on a pixel level.    LR doesn't produce imagery, it consumes it! Schewe, your terminology sounds like D.C. material. :-)

I say all this with the post title in mind, and the fact that LR is regarded by some as a DAM. It is a Camera image manager, as you define it, and a couple standards that couldn't be ignored.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 17, 2012, 02:29:45 PM
Yes, I do know that. But the question remains, why should Lightroom which was designed to deal with photographs have to deal with non-photographic material?



No one is asking LR to DEAL with it....Just admit they exist...thats all!

It is the 3rd most popular request of Photoshop and LR together on the Photoshop forums!

YES Schewe!, you SHOULD see GIF, see PSB, see PNG... of course you should!

The depth of how to "deal" with it is to simply launch the chosen app for it :-)

Maybe Rodney King can say a few words and make it all better!!
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: john beardsworth on May 17, 2012, 03:09:55 PM
Yes, I do know that. But the question remains, why should Lightroom which was designed to deal with photographs have to deal with non-photographic material?
Because it's failing to integrate the photographer's workflow, and it's the need that's important - not an arbitrary and changing definition of what constitutes photographic material.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Schewe on May 17, 2012, 07:07:29 PM
Or perhaps money driven? (Get without Give). Hmmm, where does this mentality lead us? (Sorry that sounds like your the end all for LR, and I don't mean that).

You want to explain that question? Money driven?

In terms of Bridge, not sure why it doesn't work for you...it works just fine for me when doing design or publishing projects...easy to drag & drop from Bridge to InDesign. I can see and open ID, IL and PDF–even Word docs. I don't use Bridge to "manage" files, just work with them...the file organization I have on disk is how I manage the files. But for digital images. photographs, I use Lightroom.

The design of LR was to make it into a database...yes it takes time to import images into the database. It also takes time to parse images in a browser to extract previews and metadata. Which is faster? In my experience dealing with tons of raw files, LR is. The other advantage with LR is that the database remembers the folders & files even if the HDs drives are off-line. A browser can't do that.

There are other apps out there if you want a full fledged management application...but that's not what LR was designed to do. It was designed specifically for digital images-primarily raw captures. It's like Camera Raw with a mouth and an anus...
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Scott Hargis on May 17, 2012, 08:37:45 PM
Yes, I do know that. But the question remains, why should Lightroom which was designed to deal with photographs have to deal with non-photographic material?

PDF? InDesign? Illustrator? Sure they can use photos but are graphics apps. They consume photos not produce them. There are some file formats I would like to see added and some that wouldn't bother me. I hate the fact I can't import PSB files and have to downsize large PSB to TIFF to get panos into LR. I also would no mind if LR could output PNG/GIF and be able to manage them as well. Personally it kinda pisses me off LR added so much support for video files but that was a product management/marketing decision.

Sorry, I just don't see the need for expanding LR's design to include non-photo file types.

Absolutely. Frankly, the LAST thing I would want is yet another "we're-trying-to-be-all-things-to-all-people" bit of crappy software. Unlike Photoshop, LR was designed specifically for (and ONLY for) photographers. Yes, I think that PDF makes sense, because is pretty much universal. But Illustrator? InDesign? Website-building stuff? WTF?

Phil Indeblanc -- I find it hard to take anyone too seriously when they're unwilling to put their real name under the things they write, but it really sounds as if you just wish they had written an entirely different program. Which is fine; I have my own software fantasies. But I don't insist that existing software be re-written and watered down to satisfy me. Bridge works brilliantly for what you're describing.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 17, 2012, 11:09:47 PM
Extensis Portfolio 10 or Canto Cumulus. Both pricey but does all you mentioned.

I tried this(Portfolio) and it doesn't have the folder structure as ACDSee IDimager, and Media Pro.  These programs understand those user needs and why its important to have one.
Also Portfolio doesn't allow you to have the thumbnails on a separate window from previews(locked interface), Big downer.  Those 2 were deal breakers. I really didn't look too much further and I only took 10 min or so to see if the other 2 issues were something I overlooked. I did notice you can simply type in an extension and it will support it...rather simple and sweet.

Cumulus, I haven't used in about a decade. I'll have to take another look. I think its more enterprise level....Looks like it is cloud based? Maybe Getty Images would appreciate it, but overkill for me. If it wasn't cloud and if it was reasonably priced (about $50-250), I would consider it. If more money, It would have to have a great reason.

So far I have narrowed it down to MediaPro, Idimager, and ACDSeePro5. Any others I missed? (Already tried PhotoMechanic, Breeze, Faststone). All good but have some deal breakers.

I'll have to see how one of these 3 above will interact with LR, as I think it is a super developer and would want to use what it offers in the Dev tab. It also does metadata nicely, and ACDSee is as close to this aspect, while the other 2 are a bit harder to use keywording(So far). Some things take time to adapt to the way they work.

-------------------

Now that you've read my OP, :-) realized this is for creative thinking and looking for a DAM solution(not riping LR apart) :-)...
 
My remark about money driven is like many large companies that lock in products that can soooo easily do something more, but break it off to make yet another product that does a little more than the first. (hard to explain, but I think you get the idea).
Regarding Bridge....Everytime I launch Bridge it crashes, then some progress touch another folder, it crashes. then the wonky steps of export. Its a bit "underdeveloped". I think it has to do with the fact that I have my actual files on servers, and it just gets a white screen of death.

Now your next paragraph sounds exciting.....Which is faster to parse folders or to cull and create a database...

I don't mind the actual time of the import. Its having multiple sessions for each catagory of a catalog... and my example of having 3 or four different ones just for one CF card in a days shooting , transfer/organization.(So I use other apps for moving and then I sync LR DB).
BUT, I do have over 20 years of experience in file management, photography. and The browser is superior in a number of ways which I have listed a few times.
Imagine the resource usage of LR from DB vs browser?...Maybe LR speed would be a very differnt story than what you see now.
FYI, I noticed some DAM's use existing Explorer thumbnails and this makes things SUPER smooth(For using it just for this purpose of a few formats/Otherwise responsibility issues can form), and as LR4 has left XP out, and since the thumbs apply only in Win7/Vista, it makes sense.


Quote
There are other apps out there if you want a full fledged management application...but that's not what LR was designed to do. It was designed specifically for digital images-primarily raw captures. It's like Camera Raw with a mouth and an anus...

Yes, but when you have 1 main format, a standard format PDF ignored...it doesn't make sesne to limit it of such....and I will say even of other Adobe FAMILY apps. WHY, simply no reason. Its not a resource issue, as it would be an option to enable formats people want.  It for now sounds more like a technical issue with that being the last on LR dev teams mind as they try and fix all this memory and studdering issues people are having ( I have them too, somewhat tolerable, but its there).

Scott,

no one is saying a Do-All doodad of a app. Not sure how long you've been shooting, and how you think adding 2 or 3 formats changes the application in ANY way...But I'm over 20 years of shooting. I expressed on a few posts of how LR limitations apply to newbi shooters or very limited to strictly Fine Art printing, but some folks work with these applications beyond the scope of 3 file formats. As you said...You see the use of PDF, FANTASTIC Scott!  In order to make a proper PDF, InDesign is a great tool...so its more layout based...JUST let me know the FILE is there and it didnt move or get deleted, or WTF its doing someplace...I need to know it was made and saved. Is it SOOO much to ask for the Family of Adobe formats to show up if you so want to in an option click ?

You can call me what ever you like, just careful with the rules and moderators.... But I'm not a web newbie with my name (BBS boards since the 80's) so you can call me Phil, same for the past 3 or so years here and same handle on Photo.net for the past 7 years. I hope you can get used to it. ...Just I hope you can look at the substance, not the cover ;-) And I really know what you mean by apps doing the all for all, and your absolutely right about that...This is not what I'm suggesting. Rather the opposite.....a few more Adobe formats.

These are simply Formats you mention...NOT tabu! they are the family of products.  JohnBeardy said it so simply soooo well (I need to trim my posts, I know)....
Quote
Because it's failing to integrate the photographer's workflow, and it's the need that's important - not an arbitrary and changing definition of what constitutes photographic material.

This is the BOTTOM LINE folks!

What a professional photographer is today, was in NO WAY what a professional photographer was just 5 years ago(for the most part). And DO pleaase take another look at my mention of how LR is just that...a CONSUER of imagery, NOT a producer, and see that they is a gray area to allow the existance of.,...and then letting go(seeing a file and allowing the chosen/proper app to launch it).  This grey area are the formats of PDF, maybe PNG, surely PSB Schewe, (forgot about my images I made for billboards) and other files that can simply have the icon to RECOGNIZE THEY EXIST.

Thats my speach for tonight.. Stay tuned for tomorrow!

Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Schewe on May 17, 2012, 11:47:46 PM
And DO pleaase take another look at my mention of how LR is just that...a CONSUER of imagery, NOT a producer, and see that they is a gray area to allow the existance of.,...and then letting go(seeing a file and allowing the chosen/proper app to launch it).  This grey area are the formats of PDF, maybe PNG, surely PSB Schewe, (forgot about my images I made for billboards) and other files that can simply have the icon to RECOGNIZE THEY EXIST.

No, Lightroom is designed to be a producer of images for consumption in other apps for other purposes by maximizing the raw image for later consumption. I think you have production/creation and consumption backwards...LR isn't designed to manage all the derivative files from an original capture just create them.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on May 18, 2012, 01:36:46 PM
I understand it isn't designed to manage ALL or even MANY files, and I completely agree that it shouldn't try to.
Photographer today is for the most part merged into Image-maker.
There was a time not long ago that the term Professional photographer could have been defined with some set of common ground. We don't live then anymore!
Titles were best for industry. Industry has merged to something much larger.
At the end of the day, we need to create...For ourselves or for derivatives.
The tools we use either help us or slow us down.

I don't see consumer/producer the way you do. That model to me is dated.
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Graham Clark on February 27, 2013, 08:31:53 PM

WHAT DO PRODUCTION HOUSES, OR AGENCIES USE???


Hello Phil,

Production houses typically use web-based DAMs. These systems are not designed to serve as replacements for editing tools. They're all designed with a fairly logical workflow in mind:

  1. capture - Batch upload, metadata extraction (IPTC, XMP, EXIF), video storyboarding on ingestion, support for a wide variety of file formats
  2. catalog & index - Metadata tagging, identification of intellectual property rights and distribution policies, bulk edit, versioning, localization, custom metadata
  3. process & review - Customizable workflow, bulk validation, annotations, zoom-in/zoom out, video transcoding and streaming, access to collections by defined internal/external groups
  4. external edit & export presets - Control over editing, export presets for size and metadata
  5. search - retrieve against keyword and metadata

The requirements for these solutions might include:

   * Access / control privileges; view, upload, edit, download (with or without approval)
   * Searching/Indexed; Accessibility for image type, size or format
   * Stores files of any type
   * Download presets; end-user control over re-size, crop, convert etc.
   * Browser-based
   * LDAP support, multi-language, Amazon S3, RESTful API,
   * Branding
   * Keywording
   * needs to be:

      * highly scalable
      * configurable
      * extensible framework for effective management
      * custom developed to match workflow

The above requirements often remove applications such as Aperture, Lightroom or C1 (all incredible applications) from the scoping phase of these projects.

Some players in this marketspace might be Nuxeo (open-source, free), Widen (new player) or Extensis Portfolio10 (well designed but expensive).

Graham

Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on February 28, 2013, 03:36:22 AM
I know of Extensis...but will check out the others.

Thanks Graham!
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: afx on February 28, 2013, 07:53:50 AM
Been using iMatch for a long time.
There are guys who manage stock agencies with it.

cheers
afx
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: Phil Indeblanc on February 28, 2013, 04:55:53 PM
Photo Supreme is another (post IDImager)
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: phcorrigan on June 18, 2013, 07:39:18 PM
In addition to the other recommendations you have received, you might want to take a look at Daminion (daminion.net). It is multiuser, handles multiple file types, and is relatively inexpensive (a home license for two concurrent users is US$195). I have been doing some testing with it and so far it looks pretty good. Of course, it doesn't provide parametric editing like lightroom, but few general purpose DAM packages do.

Patrick
Title: Re: DAM questions
Post by: RyanAdams on January 24, 2014, 10:53:40 AM
In the latest Daminion 3.0 version that is available on the Daminion forum (http://daminion.net/user-forum/index.php?/topic/456-the-latest-daminion-builds/page__view__findpost__p__6628) you can import PSB images!

Daminion can read/write XMP metadata to PSB images and display thumbnails for PSB images but in a specific way:
you need to save a small thumbnail of your PSB image using Photoshop, name it as filename.psb.thumb.jpg and place in the folder where an original PSB file is located.