[mst]

PS CS6 does not work on Sierra, so I doubt 5.5 will?

CS6 works just fine. There are issues with the installers, since they were not designed to be run on modern OS X versions. But there's help on how to work around issues with the installers even on Adobe's web site.

[JJ_SO]

To get the long list shorter, I just scratch out the ones I know they are without DAM:

 

Here are some alternatives to Lightroom:

Darktable (Linux)


digiKam (Linux)

RawTherapee (Linux)

Affinity Photo

Shotwell (Linux)

Polarr

ACDSee

LightZone

Corel PaintShop Pro

Snapseed

Capture One Pro

Apple Photos (Apple only)


photivo

Zoner Photo Studio

Hornil StylePix

Corel AfterShot Pro

Luminar

F-Spot

UFRaw

PicLab

FCorp Imaging

Digital Photo Prefessional

DXO OpticsPro

CyberLink PhotoDirector

ACDSee Photo Editor

ShiftN

Daminion

Sparkbox

Photo Supreme

Light Developer

Batch Image Editor

 

The list goes on. And many are free!

You forgot SilkyPix, Bibble and Picktorial   And ACDSee you put in twice 

 

If I scratch out the apps which have less management functions than LR Classic or Aperture, there's nothing left of the list. For instance, I don't know if there's another one with face recognition. Or one where you only press one button to mail the small JPG export of marked pictures? How many of them have map functions and can read a GPS tracked route?

[JJ_SO]

...As said above, the problem is the library function. For instance, Capture One Pro is an excellent RAW converter and editor, it has got a library, but no virtual collections.

...

 

If you mean "intelligent albums": Yes, there are. Just don't get the idea to make one with all pictures shot at a distance between 0.8 and 1.5 m - that's no criteria for C1, as I miss tons of EXIF entries. (same with Media Pro). Capture One also doesn't show the chosen focus point.

[stoppingdown]

Then the importer is not able to import them from LR (I got an explicit message). I don't have a lot of virtual collections based on EXIF, rather based on keyword. And they are tons: for instance, hundreds for species of birds, mammals, insects, flowers.

 

But I see that there is some scripting capability; I can extract information about virtual collections in the LR catalog, so perhaps I can tweak something.

[JJ_SO]

Virtual collection in LR or Aperture all die when you try to import them. I think, from Aperture you can create Albums out of them, but that's by far not the idea of intelligent albums.

 

I just compared the possibilities of C1 intelligent albums

 



 

to them from Aperture (Step 1)

 



 

Out of this 14 topics I can choose various. EXIF i.e. opens ups like this list:

 



 

This is a choice I haven't seen in any other app so far. Do I miss Aperture! On top of that, make a duplicate of an intelligent album and change few parameters to get another selection is not possible in C1 - so building a group of intelligent albums for each lens I use is a long term thing. 

[Studor13]

To get the long list shorter, I just scratch out the ones I know they are without DAM:

 

You forgot <del>SilkyPix</del>, Bibble and <del>Picktorial</del>   And ACDSee you put in twice 

 

If I scratch out the apps which have less management functions than LR Classic or Aperture, there's nothing left of the list. For instance, I don't know if there's another one with face recognition. Or one where you only press one button to mail the small JPG export of marked pictures? How many of them have map functions and can read a GPS tracked route?

Firstly, from memory about 20 year ago there were two ACDsee products. So, it wasn’t by mistake that I put two in because I did use both.


But I think that it is unfair of you to cross out products because at the crux of this debate is about choice and alternatives to LR. If you want all that LR has then that is what you have to get and that is what you have to pay for.


It’s pointless saying you want LR but you are willing to pay only such and such. The price of LR is $10 per month and that is the end of the story.


It’s Adobe’s way or the highway.

[mike]

If I scratch out the apps which have less management functions than LR Classic or Aperture, there's nothing left of the list. For instance, I don't know if there's another one with face recognition. Or one where you only press one button to mail the small JPG export of marked pictures? How many of them have map functions and can read a GPS tracked route?

 

The Corel sw does all this. Also, I never tried to make an album based on shooting distance, it never seemed relevant to me, but I can select all the photo's based on it. I've also never really cared about facial recognition but it will find them.

 

From everything I read reading on-line reviews the hardest part for any new (to the reviewer) sw is if the flow doesn't match what they are used to, instead of learning, they dis the new tool and complain.

[mike]

Firstly, from memory about 20 year ago there were two ACDsee products. So, it wasn’t by mistake that I put two in because I did use both.


But I think that it is unfair of you to cross out products because at the crux of this debate is about choice and alternatives to LR. If you want all that LR has then that is what you have to get and that is what you have to pay for.


It’s pointless saying you want LR but you are willing to pay only such and such. The price of LR is $10 per month and that is the end of the story.


It’s Adobe’s way or the highway.

 

LOL! that's my opinion of Apple....

 

Unfortunately Adobe has become the standard to which all others are judged. Reading reviews there's bigger emphasis on the parts of the package that might not be as good a Adobe's and a lot less emphasis on ones that are better.

 

People forget how much time they spent to get to where they are on their current favorite software package.

[JJ_SO]

Firstly, from memory about 20 year ago there were two ACDsee products. So, it wasn’t by mistake that I put two in because I did use both.


But I think that it is unfair of you to cross out products because at the crux of this debate is about choice and alternatives to LR. If you want all that LR has then that is what you have to get and that is what you have to pay for.


It’s pointless saying you want LR but you are willing to pay only such and such. The price of LR is $10 per month and that is the end of the story.


It’s Adobe’s way or the highway.

 

Studor13, you beginn to stress my nerves by purposefully misunderstanding and repeating useless recommendations. LR is NOT just a RAW-converter - most of the software you posted is very well limited to only convert, but not manage files.

 

And believe me, you're not improving your reputation by repeating your 10$ shit over and over again - are you playing stubborn donkey or what?  :angry: 20 GB is nothing, 1TB doubles the price - and since the days of LR classic are numbered, you will see very soon a price increase. For not more features, but probably more bugs.

 

Crossing apps out of your list IS fair because it's a replacement of a DAM we're looking for and although I never used LR, it was comparative to Aperture as Adobe copied a lot of Aperture's functions and vice versa. So, if one needs a RAW converter, there are plenty of standalone apps. Any comfortable and reliable file management so far the choice is poor.

 

I just come back from ACDSee forums because they now declared their ACDSee Photo Studio for Mac as beta. Or buggy. I grabbed just one post in the user forum. 1st post on October 3, second of the same user October 8, reply from ACDSee on October 10. This kind of sloppy support I can get everywhere. The Windows ultimate version is 180 €, btw., and the Mac is beta since February, therefore for free - and for patient users. At least, there are two versions - but one for Mac and one for Windows still is only one selectable. Okay, for windows one can choose from standard, professional and ultimate, but it's one DAM - the other tool again is just a RAW converter - for this task, nobody needs LR

[JJ_SO]

The Corel sw does all this. Also, I never tried to make an album based on shooting distance, it never seemed relevant to me, but I can select all the photo's based on it. I've also never really cared about facial recognition but it will find them.

 

From everything I read reading on-line reviews the hardest part for any new (to the reviewer) sw is if the flow doesn't match what they are used to, instead of learning, they dis the new tool and complain.

 

I already read one of the comparing reviews and the quality of the exported picture was worse than LR (which is also not the best on the market).

 

Corel themselves made a comparison with LR. Face recognition in LR yes, in Corel After shot pro No. No to panoramas as well. And if i look at Corel's "director", it's a very ugly reminiscence to Windows 3.11 - thanks a lot. 

 

But people dissing?

 

Or people make a comparison to what they are used as workflow and see "with the new software I need 5 more clicks or one tab is left side, the other right side" for no better reason than to make it different than others? I mean, you can even measure distances made with the mouse. If I need 1 m to finish a picture or 10 m + 50 clicks more... a lot work for no better result does give me reasons for critical comments as I saw it can be done better.

 

Sure sometimes it's lack of knowledge. Aperture was not easy to learn, so if I have to look for an alternative, it's normal I prefer one which is as good or better. If it's worse at 80% of what I need, there's no point in forcing myself to spent more time for worse results.