DAM Luminar

Comments

9 comments

  • Avatar
    Tom Pickering

    Miguel -

    Hopefully they are being truthful and concentrating on the DAM before anything else.  Windows users have been waiting a long time for fixes and feature parity with the Mac version but have been told everything is waiting on the release of the DAM, which has been promised before the release of Luminar 2019.  This makes the wait even harder for us Windows users. d:¬{(

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    K.G. Wuensch

    @Tom, at the moment that only mseans that any of the critical bug fixes won‘t make it into Luminar 2018 because Luminar 2019 is around the corner. And with only an internal beta (other software companies call that a pre-alpha) going on currently I don‘t expect the ill fated DAM not before november at best...

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Matt Caminiti

    I hope the DAM is optional as well though.  I want to leverage Luminar without the DAM portion of it.  If its good enough I might use it similar to how I process with Lightroom, but I would be upset if using the DAM was the only way I could use Luminar to edit a photo.   

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Dann Lavery

    Don't let the door hit you folks on your way out.  I've been using other DAM software since leaving the "software rental" world.

    Matt is correct in an OPTIONAL Luminar DAM is the right thing.

    -1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Rembert Oldenboom

    I have bought Luminar 2018 only because of their promise to deliver the DAM. I am not using Luminar, I would never have bought Luminar without the promise of the DAM. I definitely won't pay for a 2019 version. As the DAM was never delivered I expect the 2019 version to be free. Either that or the DAM is to be released with the 2018 version.

    Which makes me wonder: could it be the DAM will be a totally different product which can be run standalone? I have tested Adobe Lightroom with Luminar as a plugin. I stopped using it 10 minutes later as the image got converted to TIFF, eating *lots* of precious disk space.

     

    @Dann: what other DAM are you using? Mind to share it with us?

    2
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    David Dengler

    A few months ago I posed a question on the FB page about using something else for the DAM, maybe use Bridge with Lum18 as the editor. Needless to say it drew scorn due to the suggestion of using an Adobe product (free by the way). I personally have no experience with Bridge or LR or PS for that matter. I am an amateur, and pretty much a newbie when it comes to postprocessing. I really liked Lum18 from the outset because of it's ease-of-use. Being organizationally challenged I was really looking forward to the DAM. Since it has not materialized I have decided to again look at other options. I have a copy of PS Elements 14 which has simply never clicked with me, probably because it is so slow. Anyway, I recently downloaded a free copy of ACDSee photo studio standard 2018. The standard version appears to be first and foremost a DAM. I was able to configure Luminar 2018 as the external editor. I have to say already that the ACDSee is much faster than dealing with PS Elements for organization and the help files are also helpful! Imagine that!

    Since I just started with this I am wondering if anybody else has experience with this combination. Like Rembert I would like to hear from Dann about what he is using.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Dann Lavery

    Rembert / David,

    When I did my initial quick Google search some years back, after opting out of the software rental market, I tried a few but landed on BRIDGE.  Within BRIDGE I can still make "collections", do labeling and key-wording, create and update meta data and IPTC data.  Even has GPS, though a tediously manual task.  Once the image file has been catalogued etc, in BRIDGE I either drag n drop into L18 or A18, or right click and "open with"

    For me the main reason was BRIDGE was the least change to what I was used to using from LR.  In hindsight, based on the volume of images I had to re-cataloge I should have gone back to the amazingly awesome (yet very slow) Apple Aperture as my DAM.  I may yet do that pending, on the features of the pending Skylum DAM.

    In NO WAY am I presuming Skylum will produce a DAM that is everything to everyone.  They can't; and that's fine with me.  They produce a very good editing software, but if the DAM is not what I want, I'm NOT throwing the baby out with the bath water.

    Glad that David D has found one that works for him.  In one way I hope the SKYLUM DAM isn't fantastic, because it will be months of re-catalogueing files for me. LOL.  Whenever SKYLUM releases theirs it will be interesting to say the least.  Having some Pros doing beta testing can only be a good thing.

    Keep on enjoying photography and the images you create.  

     

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Julian Fricker

    Hi Dann,

    I was trying to do the same with Aperture but after upgrading my camera Aperture is no longer an option as it doesn't support it.

    I've tried using Photos instead and it does a lot of things really well, the problems start when I try to interact with Aurora HDR. I always shoot in RAW, if I choose my 3 bracketed images and edit them in Photos then try to edit with Aurora that doesn't work as it is editing 1 of the files at a time.

    If you select the 3 photos and then choose "Edit With" you can send the 3 photos to Aurora HDR (first you have to find it yourself as for some reason it doesn't show up n the list of editors. The problem with this is Photos does not send the RAW file to Aurora but instead sends over JPEG. You can check this yourself by looking inside the mpaur2 package saved by Aurora.

    So the only option is to select the 3 photographs, choose Export Unmodified Original, save them somewhere and open the manually in Aurora. When you're finished in Aurora and want to save the HDR to edit again you're left with an mpaur2 file which photos doesn't understand (or any software apart from Aurora) that you have to manage manually.

    This process isn't Luminar's fault, but it shows how difficult it is to integrate their software into a workflow which is why their DAM is needed to fix these issues.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Dann Lavery

    Thanks for the info Julian!  Good info.

    The reasons you mentioned are why I like BRIDGE.  It is simple to begin processing in either L18 or A18.  No "compatibility issues" because all Bridge is, is a DAM.  The fact its free doesn't hurt either.  

    Skylum has updated their roadmap for release of their DAM for later this year.  Personally, I'm in not stressed by this.  I have a very workable solution.  For those that purchased based on the "future" DAM version I can partially understand the frustration.  The DAM release didn't match my need so I found a very workable alternate solution.  Skylum makes good software, its not a subscription service, its being improved.  No worries.

    All the best in your photographic journeys.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.