Suggestion: a DAMbook-feature comparison chart?

[billseymour]

I'd like to suggest the following: Might Peter, possibly with input from knowledgeable others, begin a comparison chart of DAM-book relevant features contained in the most popular catalog software programs?

A 'head to head' feature list in terms of DAM-book 'must haves', rather than the manufacturer's feature list (which highlights the strengths, but omits the weaknesses), would permit consumers to easily see which products fully meet the workflow reqs outlined in the DAM book.

Items could include:
- virtual grouping of images?
- do Bridge ratings appear in the catalog product?
- writeback of metadata (and to which types of files)?
- import and export of metadata (and from which products)?
- realistic maximum # images in a catalog (as opposed to the product's marketing dept #)
- handling of DNG files (ie- fully DAM-book friendly?)
- etc, and etc

I would imagine that many of the experts/power users of these products would help 'fill in the blanks' concerning features.
Thanks- Bill S.

[peterkrogh]

Unfortunately the list of software that would get over the first threshold would be few (for me, writing back to RAW/DNG files is a must).

That list includes iView, idImager, PS Elements, and Cumulus.

I have thought about this comparison chart, but it never gets any closer to the top of my to-do list.
Peter

[billseymour]

Peter-
Appreciate the reply. I suppose I was really thinking of a list of "must have" features, rather than every feature big or small. I am focusing in on iView and idImager (since I am PC user both are candidates), and will evaluate in terms of points raised in the DAM book (which I thought was extremely helpful, high in content and readily understandable).
Bill S.

[AlanDunne]

Bill,

in the spirit of forum participation, why don't you take a crack at starting such a list, post it for comment, and let the forum members contribute to it. It would have to be a living document anyways as DAM s/w is evolving rapidly. Maybe an Excel spreadsheet, or pdf table would be good formats for capturing the results. This has successfully working in other forums. In general, once a "tool" such as this reaches an acceptable level of correctness and maturity, Peter has been quite open to posting it for download from his site.

This would take the burden of this task off Peter. I can imagine that his "To Do" list is extensive, and as he suggests, this task never makes it to the top.

Cheers ... Al

[havezet]

I would like to point out this great resource:

http://www.impulseadventure.com/photo/flow-catalog-compare.html

Considering how hard it is to keep up with features for DAM software I think Cal is doing a great job keeping the list as up-to-date as possible.

Hert

[billseymour]

Good thoughts- I'd not seen the Impuse Adventure comparison chart- quite interesting. I want to reread DAM book when I have time, and will hopefully start a must-have list as I see it in terms of book's ideas. Perhaps folks might add any 'must haves' to this thread in the meantime, too.

Not to drift this thread into a single 'must have' issue, but I am personally concerned with the iView catalog size limit (discussed elsewhere in forum)- seems to me that this is an acceptable limitation in the eyes of the more knowledgeable contributors, but I also read of many users hitting this wall and having to work around it. Shouldn't a bigger catalog space be a 'must have', considering that some software does permit larger catalog size than iView?  Bill

[peterkrogh]

Bill,
iView provides some workarounds for collections larger than a single catalog can hold (like searching multiple catalogs.)
I'd like to see iView adopt a solution like Portfolio has, where thumbs are stored in a separate document.

Hert, how many images can you put in idImager.
Peter

[johnbeardy]

Peter

A correction here re Portfolio - though not as dramatic as learning my script is cross platform .

Portfolio stores previews as JPEGs in a folder, while thumbnails are stored within the catalogue file. By keeping previews outside the catalogue, it obviously sidesteps its file size limit, 4Gb.

John

[billseymour]

I am experiencing frustration wondering why many of these vendors are not correcting (or at least promising to correct) obvious limitations being pointed out regularly by users-

Portfolio- why not fix the DNG writeback issue? (is this really so hard to do?)
iView- why not fix the 2 gig catalog limit (put the thumbs in separate file, for ex)
iMatch- why not make interface/use more friendly, like pretty much every other asset manager
idImager- re new Professional edition- not an established problem, but I see beta users on idi forum saying that installation and automatic update of idi is more difficult than current version

etc.

I know about John B.'s 'serial monogamy' assessment of DAM, and I agree with it. But beyond that, it is very curious to me why there is such sluggishness to improve limitations in these products. Carrying the marriage analogy further, if I 'spurn' an app today and instead 'marry' another, then even if the spurned app fixes its flaws, I am not likely to suddenly abandon my chosen app. (... the 'alimony'/'ill will' of having to transfer to new app, learn new workflow, preserve all info, etc)

The time that a user invests in this type of app (keywording, work flow methods, etc) will tend to keep a user linked to its chosen application. Thus, sluggish 'fixing' of products in this field will result in lost customers. I think that in particular, iView and Portfolio are losing business when there are pretty simple solutions available (just look at each other's programs- each has solved the other's problem).

I really think that the first product to really 'fix itself' will surge ahead of the pack.
Bill

[peterkrogh]

Bill,
In general I agree with you, but I should point out that this is a rapidly changing landscape and I think it only *seems* that change is very slow.  In fact, there has been a revolution in how digital photographs can be handled in only the last several months.  The workflow that I outline was not even possible until 4 months ago, so it's not surprising that everything is not perfect.

iView has been hampered by a lack of resources to implement planned features.  I'm hoping to see this change. 

As to the problem of Portfolio not writing to DNG files, I find that hard to explain, given the much larger resources they have, and the longstanding nature of this request.

And I agree that one of the chief complaints that I hear is the time spent learning software.  It's a company's market to lose, once they have the user.

Peter

[billseymour]

Peter-
Good points, and of course I agree that going from the 'idea' of an improvement to a robust consumer-ready product is a process that takes time. I also am learning, from reading posts on DNG, that this format and its acceptance is also a work in progress.

It might help the user posting (and wish-listing, and griping) if vendors who ARE planning to be responsive to a clear weakness would announce their own intentions (so, for example, iview users might know that a larger catalog size is in the works, etc).

(Gotta admit, though, that a micro-gripe post now and then feels good!)
Bill