REQ Best photo management software

I have about 60,000 photos (100GB) that are currently manages with iPhoto. This library will grow by about 10,000 photos per year. I'm really tired of the crashes, freezes, and corrupt library file problems with the software. I would like some opinions about the best alternatives. I don't do much editing, so perhaps LR is too robust, but if it has the most bulletproof database/file management system, I'll be happy to pay for it. Other options I've read about are Picasa and Aperature.

Thank you!

Check also ACDSee Pro: supports Ratings, Categories, Keywords, has decent database engine, and is quite fast. Editing capabilities are quite decent as well.

I have been using it for a few years (since version 3 came out), and never had an issue.
--
Peter

I resisted purchasing lightroom for 2 years, as I edit in ACR in Adobe Bridge.. I finally broke down and Purchased Lightroom, and don't regret the decision. It's orginaational capabilities are much superior to Bridge. I still edit in Bridge,as that is whar I am accustomed. However, I am trying to edit more in Lightroom for a smoother workflow.. For me , Lightroom is indespensible-just for it's orgazational capabilities--- even if I continue to edit raw images in Bridge.
Buzz

Came across similar problem.

daminion.net (free) is my choice due to extremely flexible db management, you can use many dbs simultaneuously.
Tried ACDSee, PSE Organizer, and FotoAlbum.

Only one DAM for me.. Idimager. new native version is in beta for the MAC - go check it out.. you won't regret it!

For years I used IMatch, it allows unlimited nested categories. Keywords and rating may at will be streamed into categories, leaving the user free to virtual sort files in a project for a client without the sort word stored in the file itself. In other words if one creates a virtual categorie 'rejected' it will not show up in keywords.

Downside of IMatch? The programmer prefers quality over fast money. This means current version is a bit outdated but still stable.

daMatrix said:

For years I used IMatch, it allows unlimited nested categories. Keywords and rating may at will be streamed into categories, leaving the user free to virtual sort files in a project for a client without the sort word stored in the file itself. In other words if one creates a virtual categorie 'rejected' it will not show up in keywords.

Downside of IMatch? The programmer prefers quality over fast money. This means current version is a bit outdated but still stable.

Click to expand...

IMAtch certainly offers power.. but the UI is a mess and as you mention the system hasn't been updated in years with a promise of a NG version that has never materialized.. personally, I would look elsewhere until that new version appears.. Idimager is a much better solution with similar power but at least with an active development team.

I agree that IDimager has an ambitious marketing team which IMatch cannot afford, This goes at the cost of the need to add new features (most times unneeded ones as editing capabilities which most people put in another step of the workflow)

I've used both and still prefer IMatch by far, even though it still lacks and attractive UI, and some more refinements. Stability is extremely important in large database management, and IMatch has got it well implemented.

I prefer a digital image management software which does just this and does it well. Editing and sending it to online services are different parts of my workflow. Some people may differ, of course.

fuego6 said:

daMatrix said:

For years I used IMatch...

Downside of IMatch? The programmer prefers quality over fast money. This means current version is a bit outdated but still stable.
...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Idimager is a much better solution with similar power but at least with an active development team.

Lightroom 4--no question. It is a terrific organising program (that was it's original intention) and has the benefits of geolocation, book production, slideshows, and post processing should you need it. The new pricing makes it pretty competitive. The new version also has soft proofing capabilities, which is also useful if you print images.

One of the other benefits is that it interfaces seamlessly with Photoshop, so if that is something you use, that adds to its usability.

Aperture I'm not familiar with, but Picasa, in my opinion, is not really designed for the use to which you are intending. Like Photoshop, Lightroom is an industry standard used by a lot of professional photographers. Not too many of them use Picasa.

prusiner said:

I agree that IDimager has an ambitious marketing team which IMatch cannot afford, This goes at the cost of the need to add new features (most times unneeded ones as editing capabilities which most people put in another step of the workflow)

I've used both and still prefer IMatch by far, even though it still lacks and attractive UI, and some more refinements. Stability is extremely important in large database management, and IMatch has got it well implemented.

I prefer a digital image management software which does just this and does it well. Editing and sending it to online services are different parts of my workflow. Some people may differ, of course.

Click to expand...

Idimager (as far as I know) is run by 2 developers.. no marketing team besides them and their user base. iMatch seems to be run by a single developer so not much difference there.

IMatch is most certainly a power user application - but that has always been its downfall as well... its very complex. Yes - it is stable but is lacking in many basic elements. New version has been promised for years... we are still waiting.

Idimager has its own issues (speed/stability) but is actively developed and a new version has already been released that is much more stable and faster.

Anyway.. lots of choices out there.!

I'm surprised that no one yet has mentioned Phase One Media Pro: http://www.phaseone.com/media-pro

For the sole task of managing digital assets (not raw conversion, etc) it cannot be beat. Media Pro existed long before all the other applications as a standalone product, then it was acquired by Microsoft, who then sold it after a few years to Phase One. It is still actively developed and can handle more digital file formats than any other Asset Manager on the market.

Powdercarrot said:

I have about 60,000 photos (100GB) that are currently manages with iPhoto. This library will grow by about 10,000 photos per year. I'm really tired of the crashes, freezes, and corrupt library file problems with the software. I would like some opinions about the best alternatives. I don't do much editing, so perhaps LR is too robust, but if it has the most bulletproof database/file management system, I'll be happy to pay for it. Other options I've read about are Picasa and Aperature.

Thank you!

Click to expand...

suddie1215 said:

I'm surprised that no one yet has mentioned Phase One Media Pro: http://www.phaseone.com/media-pro

For the sole task of managing digital assets (not raw conversion, etc) it cannot be beat. Media Pro existed long before all the other applications as a standalone product, then it was acquired by Microsoft, who then sold it after a few years to Phase One. It is still actively developed and can handle more digital file formats than any other Asset Manager on the market.

Click to expand...

MP is a complete mess of a product at this point - the forums are ablaze with unhappy users and this is just another example of a decent product going down the tubes thanks to many changing hands. IView wasn't bad.. it had some quirks for sure but still it was up there with iMatch and Idimager... then, Microsoft bought it and it took a bad turn as Media Expression Pro... along comes Phase One, another name change and still additional issues.

Some shortfalls - the inability to embed data directly into an image and the need to write out to sidecar files (ick). The fact that this is a manual process as well (no auto-sync) is the icing on the cake for most...

There is a 20-day full-featured trial version (even 2 different ones for the Mac, depending on which version of the OS you have).

For me, the outstanding feature of PM is that, at least on the PC, it uses your existing folder structure and so isn't tied to a proprietary catalog or a particular editor (as LR is). I assume the same is true for the Mac.

So if you want to change editors, all your work in PM is still there. If you want to change to another DAM, you still know where and how to find your photos w.o. having to hope you can get them out of a proprietary catalog successfully.
IMHO that's the only way to fly.

Dl the trial and see how it works for you:

http://www.camerabits.com/site/index.html

+1 for Photo Mechanic.

SantaFeBill said:

There is a 20-day full-featured trial version (even 2 different ones for the Mac, depending on which version of the OS you have).

For me, the outstanding feature of PM is that, at least on the PC, it uses your existing folder structure and so isn't tied to a proprietary catalog or a particular editor (as LR is). I assume the same is true for the Mac.

So if you want to change editors, all your work in PM is still there. If you want to change to another DAM, you still know where and how to find your photos w.o. having to hope you can get them out of a proprietary catalog successfully.
IMHO that's the only way to fly.

Dl the trial and see how it works for you:

http://www.camerabits.com/site/index.html

Click to expand...

I think you are missing the boat a bit on how a good DAM catalog functions... so let me explain. Programs like Lightroom, Idimager, etc use a catalog to store information about the image - Exif, IPTC, ratings, image previews etc... they do this for a number of reasons - a couple: speed (much quicker to access memory than disk) and the ability to search and view offline images without having to load the media (ie: DVD's, EHD's).

Most catalog based programs also allow you to write this data back into the image - either in sidecar files or directly to the image itself... this enables you to shift programs as needed without having to redo your work or try and find a conversion of the catalog.

The folder structure itself on your drive is becoming less and less important... and with the explosion of "offline" devices, is really not needed any longer. You can have images on 3 local drives, in the "cloud", on DVD's, on your Mom's PC, your phone, etc... so long as you imported it into the catalog, it's all there without the need for the physical file itself.

That's the beauty of a catalog.. and something that PM seriously lacks. Again, PM is great for photojournalists - someone who takes 500 images of an event, wants to tag those images with 70 keywords, send to an editor and then never look at those images again.. it really isn't suited to amateur and non-event style photography for the above reasons IMO.

They are supposedly working on a more catalog based product.. but - like iMatch - this has been in discussion for about least 7 years with no product yet.

Enjoy!

I currently do not use any software, simply have my photos in a structured directory tree.

the reason i ask for open source is: It should run even after 10, 20 or 30 years, no commercial program can ensure this ( adobe currently discontinues flash.... ).

Because i - well - could compile simpler open source programs, i ask for such a program.
For storing the information,

XML storage might be better than storage in a database, because xml is also easier maintainable 20 years.

So some simple** xml storage would also be a possibility, the best would be, xml and open source combined.

Hi Martin,

As every DAM software relies on database behind, you should only pay attention on what database particular DAM uses. Anyway, no one can guarantee you what will still run and be in use in say, 30 years from now. On the other hand, I'm 99% convinced, that it will be you, who will change it's DAM in that time. I mean, can you imagine how hardware, OS and software will improve in next 30 years?

Most databases (mySQL, PostgreSQL, Firebird, etc.) are SQL conform, so data inside is transparent (open, so to speak) for user. Meaning: user (knowing SQL language) can access data inside database without having "original" software -I mean, that is the whole point of databases.

For example: we all know Lightroom is not open source. But (AFAIK) Lightroom uses SQLite database which is SQL (and open source, if I'm not mistaken). I don't use Lightroom, but I'm quite sure one can read all data from LR database stored by user (places, names, keywords, etc.), without even having Lightroom.

On the other hand, there might be DAM's which use their own (propretary) database. In such case you're dependant on particular DAM software on how to access data and if needed, how to transfer that data into another database.

What is more important for me personally, is: DAM should be capable to write metadata into image files directly (if you choose to).

Bogdan

Martin Frost said:

I currently do not use any software, simply have my photos in a structured directory tree.

the reason i ask for open source is: It should run even after 10, 20 or 30 years, no commercial program can ensure this ( adobe currently discontinues flash.... ).

Because i - well - could compile simpler open source programs, i ask for such a program.
For storing the information,

XML storage might be better than storage in a database, because xml is also easier maintainable 20 years.

So some simple** xml storage would also be a possibility, the best would be, xml and open source combined.

Click to expand...

In 20-30 years.. I hope my software will be so far advanced beyond what I can do now that I wouldn't want to touch it with a 10 foot pole. How often do you use DOS today?

Open source is good.. but there aren't very many DAM applications for windows avaiable that are any good.

hbx2004 said:

Hi Martin,

What is more important for me personally, is: DAM should be capable to write metadata into image files directly (if you choose to).

Bogdan

Click to expand...

Bingo!

If you are looking for an open source program you can check vvvP:

http://vvvp.sourceforge.net/

it is open source and it uses as a back end the Firebird open source relational database.

Available for Linux, Mac and Windows.

A new version will be released in a few days.
--
Fulvio Senore