Picktorial is on sale right row for $40, and I believe they have a demo available so you can decide for yourself. I tried the demo and like it better than Luminar in many ways, although it doesn't do layers (but I have other stuff for that). The comparison tools are pretty nice, and the interface makes more sense than Luminar's as well (YMMV obviously).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Luminar 2018
- Thread starter MCAsan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Picktorial 3 has some rudimentary digital management features (I didn't upgrade Luminar 2017 so dunno about 2018). You see Finder folders in a sidebar, and can add them. And use Find... to say find your iphone photos vs DSLR, or find keywords, and I think there might be a way to save searches, which would be helpful. In Luminar 2017 you pretty much have to already know where the photo is you wanna open unless you're not using it as a standalone, but out of Lr or Photos.
Whether they are really working on them and will have something out, who knows. Others have announced vaporware DAM features only to give up or never come through. Let's hope these two follow through; “One good solid hope is worth a cartload of certainties" said the Fourth Doctor (not sure I agree, but it is Doctor Who, so who am I to argue?
)
Whether they are really working on them and will have something out, who knows. Others have announced vaporware DAM features only to give up or never come through. Let's hope these two follow through; “One good solid hope is worth a cartload of certainties" said the Fourth Doctor (not sure I agree, but it is Doctor Who, so who am I to argue?
)How come people keep talking about Piktorial in a Luminar 2018 thread?...
After Aperture was abandoned, I used Lightroom CC for a while as my DAM but couldn’t get on with it...I’ve now switched to simply using Apple Photos and it is actually pretty good and properly integrates with the iPhone and iPad and Finder as well for sharing. Luminar 2018 works really well as an extension in my short experience. I’m very pleased with how well it is integrated. I have no interest for it to provide another DAM compromise...
After Aperture was abandoned, I used Lightroom CC for a while as my DAM but couldn’t get on with it...I’ve now switched to simply using Apple Photos and it is actually pretty good and properly integrates with the iPhone and iPad and Finder as well for sharing. Luminar 2018 works really well as an extension in my short experience. I’m very pleased with how well it is integrated. I have no interest for it to provide another DAM compromise...
Vaporware DAMs....as in Serif's for Affinity Photo, On1's for Photo RAW....etc? Yep, talk is cheap. I guess we will know by this time next year a lot more about which companies and products will be viable in this market and who is just a flash in the pan.
Last edited:
I think this obsession with DAM is misguided.
The DAM is important to professionals, and to some hobbyists. But in the end, most people (consumers) simply want to locate their photos. Smaller companies like Skylum/Macphun won't experience much of a return on such a complicated endeavor - which is why there is not much of a push.
As stated earlier, I'd rather see faster and better image processing than a full-fledged DAM.
Besides on OSX there is already a free DAM...It supports key words, it auto recognises faces and locations, and it allows for plug ins/extensions for other software..
Yes, I'd like slightly better ratings opposed to a work around, or I loved the hierachical keywords from Aperture. But in the grand scheme of things I find Photos doing a pretty good job.
Yes, I'd like slightly better ratings opposed to a work around, or I loved the hierachical keywords from Aperture. But in the grand scheme of things I find Photos doing a pretty good job.
I just scan through my images in Photos using the AI and facial recognition and my memory. Adobe Sensei works really well and I may go with cloud CC once the editing tools are improved and plugins are available.
Point is that I never have, and never will keyword every single image and group into particular events/shoots. I don't make a living from photography, so I won't treat it like a job.
People get wrapped up wanting an entire toolbox in one application. I think it is smarter to have a DAM as a standalone application to make your processing workflow unaffected by changes in raw developers.
Photos already do it on location, faces. Can do it on keywords as well. And you can create virtual albums. And integrate in the OS for easy access and sharing. Isn’t it a DAM anyway?
Only thing it’s lacking in my opinion is easily bringing together images from across multiple drives.
Only thing it’s lacking in my opinion is easily bringing together images from across multiple drives.
That is because Photos, like Aperture before it, defaulted to a managed library instead of referenced one. My Lr referenced library can be scattered across N number of different volumes/drives.
Luminar DAM will likely only do a referenced library as they want folks to compare it to the Lr Library module.
Luminar DAM will likely only do a referenced library as they want folks to compare it to the Lr Library module.
Yes, but both, Photos and Aperture can also work with referenced files. IMHO Aperture was doing it perfectly, and the only quibble I understand some people have is what the default is. That question aside, I don't understand how Luminar is doing is better by just offering referenced files.
I really, really hope that Luminar will include a managed option. But given that Luminar went cross platform, I am not holding my breath.
I really, really hope that Luminar will include a managed option. But given that Luminar went cross platform, I am not holding my breath.
This is the reason Apple created iCloud photo library I suppose. Whether it is safe is a different story (but there are workarounds to keep things backed up)
I suggest the reason Apple created iCloud photo library was purely for business reasons: increase revenue, increase profits, and foster greater customer dependency on Apple. All are valid business reasons.
[doublepost=1514483683][/doublepost]
Adobe does not seem to have suffered by only doing referenced libraries. I guess the same can be said for On1, Phase1 and others.
[doublepost=1514483683][/doublepost]
Adobe does not seem to have suffered by only doing referenced libraries. I guess the same can be said for On1, Phase1 and others.
It also had the advantage of Apple not developing Aperture for years, and was effectively a monopoly for some years. I don't see how this is proof of anything.
Even if only a sizable portion of the users wants their library — or part of their library — to be managed, that would make it a desirable feature to have.
That's easy: in Aperture you can select single photos or projects and relocate them. Or you can create a new library and move the other one to another volume. Again, having the option to have your photos managed gives you additional, well, options.