# Macphun Showcases Their Digital Asset Manager in Response to Adobe



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 19, 2017)

```
There seems to be a lot of mixed feelings about Adobe Lightroom CC Cloud and Adobe Lightroom Classic CC, as well as the long standing and polarizing subscription based model for most of Adobe’s software.</p>
<p>We’re not here to give our opinion on all of this, we’re going to see how things play out with Macphun’s future software.</p>
<p><strong>Macphun had this to say:</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p dir="ltr">After the recent Adobe news about Lightroom updates, we received a lot of questions about our plans for creating a photo manager, so we’d like to shed some light on this.</p>
<p>At the moment we’re working on the digital asset manager (“DAM”) which will work with both hard drives and cloud storage platforms. It’s going to be the perfect tool for organizing and managing images. Users will be able to run our DAM alongside their LR library and choose which one fits them best.</p>
<p>The new DAM will be added to Luminar in 2018, and will be a free update to everyone who owns Luminar 2018 after it is release. We’ll be sharing more details soon, so keep an eye out for them!</p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Macphun is asking:</strong> <a href="http://macphun.evyy.net/c/260424/412165/3255">What do you plan on doing after the Adobe announcement</a>?</p>


		<style type='text/css'>
			#gallery-1 {
				margin: auto;
			}
			#gallery-1 .gallery-item {
				float: left;
				margin-top: 10px;
				text-align: center;
				width: 50%;
			}
			#gallery-1 img {
				border: 2px solid #cfcfcf;
			}
			#gallery-1 .gallery-caption {
				margin-left: 0;
			}
			/* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */
		</style>
		<div id='gallery-1' class='gallery galleryid-31853 gallery-columns-2 gallery-size-thumbnail'><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Gallery-Views.png'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Gallery-Views-168x168.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Gallery-Views-168x168.png 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Gallery-Views-144x144.png 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Single-Image-View.png'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Single-Image-View-168x168.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Single-Image-View-168x168.png 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Single-Image-View-144x144.png 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><br style="clear: both" />
		</div>

<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Famateur (Oct 19, 2017)

As an amateur that, in the last five years has spent a total of about $150 on two versions of Lightroom, I'm disappointed that Adobe has decided to discontinue perpetual license for future versions. The upside of that is I can probably get by for the next few years on Lightroom 6 as it currently supports the camera(s) I'm saving up for.

In the meantime, I'll be cheering on MacPhun, Affinity and others to produce some worthy competition to Lightroom. When one comes along (with a perpetual license) that can replace the workflow and results I achieve with Lightroom, I'll switch (unless Adobe brings back the perpetual license). If they can do it along with the ability to import my Lightroom catalog (or at least XMP sidecars) with edits intact, I'll be doing the happy dance!


----------



## snappy604 (Oct 19, 2017)

I finally got a good grasp of lightroom and they pull that subscription crud. Definitely looking at alternatives... but so far haven't seen a clear leader with similar functions. Probably continue with LR6 until my camera isn't supported anymore.

Couldn't care less about the tagging/database.. I constantly wipe it.. but the rest of the features, damn useful.


----------



## LesC (Oct 19, 2017)

I currently subscribe to Adobe's photography plan but once Macphun's Luminar is available for PC & has a DAM, I'll give it a try.

If as many suspect Adobe plans to discontinue LR Classic to focus on phone-snappers, I like many others will have to look elsewhere.


----------



## dak723 (Oct 19, 2017)

Never used Lightroom. Use a combination of Paint Shop Pro, Photoshop Elements w/ Nik Collection, and Macphun's Beta version of Luminar. As an enthusiast (and not a working pro) would never go with a subscription product.


----------



## pwp (Oct 19, 2017)

Whatever happened to CameraBits (of PhotoMechanic fame) long awaited DAM software? I can only assume the project has been quietly shelved. 

Pity, I would have assumed that CameraBits would have done this really well. Oh well...

-pw


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 20, 2017)

I see nothing they offer that even remotely competes with the new lightroom cc. Being able to edit raw images on various platforms is a potentially useful feature. 

I may only add new photos to the cloud version while away from my main computer, and remove them after they transfer to my NAS later, but it is another option that seems fairly easy to do. I do need to figure out a work flow that can do this, perhaps a 3rd party will automate the task.


----------



## -pekr- (Oct 20, 2017)

Luminar might be more popular, but right now, the biggest competition to LR, is the on1 Photo RAW. Exposure X3 is a nice app too, having DAM for quite some time. I would never use a product without a Browse. My bet is, that Topaz Studio will add one too


----------



## LDS (Oct 20, 2017)

dak723 said:


> Never used Lightroom. Use a combination of Paint Shop Pro, Photoshop Elements w/ Nik Collection, and Macphun's Beta version of Luminar. As an enthusiast (and not a working pro) would never go with a subscription product.



The idea behind LR was exactly to avoid the need of using multiple applications for each task, the design was around an end-to-end, workflow-based solution from importing photos, cataloguing them, processing and output (web or prints).


----------



## BasXcanon (Oct 20, 2017)

Has anyone here experience with editing 5Dm4 raw files on the Galaxy Note 8 in the new lightroom?


----------



## luissales (Oct 20, 2017)

I have the Photographer Subscription with Adobe, using Lightroom and Photoshop. I honestly don't see myself using anything else in the near future. The "new" Lightroom is just another option for those that find it useful. I'll stick to the "classical" Lightroom. If Macphun is bringing a new DAM, that's great! More choices for people and more competition which means software will keep improving. I see it as a win-win for everyone.


----------



## JonAustin (Oct 20, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> Luminar might be more popular, but right now, the biggest competition to LR, is the on1 Photo RAW. Exposure X3 is a nice app too, having DAM for quite some time. I would never use a product without a Browse. My bet is, that Topaz Studio will add one too



I'm still on Lr 5.7, but have been using ON1's tools for a while now, and would seriously consider switching over if / when my current version of Lr no longer meets my needs.

I'm also keeping my eye on Macphun Luminar (although their feedback link for the current beta is perpetually broken) and Affinity Photo.


----------



## JonAustin (Oct 20, 2017)

LDS said:


> The idea behind LR was exactly to avoid the need of using multiple applications for each task, the design was around an end-to-end, workflow-based solution from importing photos, cataloguing them, processing and output (web or prints).



And yet, Lr doesn't avoid that need for multiple apps for many users. Hence, the myriad plug-ins available for it. Sure, those plug-ins are called from within the Lr interface, but (at least) some of them require that a second copy of the image be created for the plug-in to work on, rather than writing those changes into the Lr database.


----------



## JonAustin (Oct 20, 2017)

The Macphun survey needs a fourth response category: "I'm sticking with a pre-subscription version of Lightroom." Unless by "Classic" in the first response, they mean the perpetual license version of v6. Chalk one more bit of confusion up to the Adobe nomenclature.


----------



## Hornet (Oct 20, 2017)

I also resent being forced into a subscription model, which is costing me much more over time. The problem is that none of the other options provide a single package that matches LR's features. Yet! This is a great opening for Macphun and others to up their games and poach a lot of unhappy Adobe customers.


----------



## Tom W (Oct 20, 2017)

As a FORMER user of the stand-alone version of Lightroom, I can safely say that with this new forced version of LR, I am switching back to Canon's software. It's not quite as powerful, but it's free and Canon doesn't try to hoodwink its users into some sort of perpetual subscription model. 

I just made the mistake of clicking "update" and it wiped out my old LR and tried to get me to either use the trial version for 7 days or buy the new one. Adobe can KMA.


----------



## Talys (Oct 20, 2017)

JonAustin said:


> LDS said:
> 
> 
> > The idea behind LR was exactly to avoid the need of using multiple applications for each task, the design was around an end-to-end, workflow-based solution from importing photos, cataloguing them, processing and output (web or prints).
> ...



There's no way to avoid that. The main reason to have a plug in is to do a modification not supported in Lightroom. If it's not already in lightroom, you can't add to the XMP data (whether it's in LR or the sidecar), and have it be something that LR could interpret. And if it is, chances are, you'd just do it directly from LR.

For example, the history may contain something like this:

<crs:ToneCurve>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li>0, 0</rdf:li>
<rdf:li>32, 22</rdf:li>
<rdf:li>64, 56</rdf:li>
<rdf:li>128, 128</rdf:li>
<rdf:li>192, 196</rdf:li>
<rdf:li>255, 255</rdf:li>
</rdf:Seq>
</crs:ToneCurve>

If you use another application, it would be really hard for that application to understand all of lightroom's XML (especially since it's a moving target -- lightroom adds new features every year or so), and lightroom would not understand other software's XML, for the same reason.


----------



## JonAustin (Oct 20, 2017)

Talys said:


> JonAustin said:
> 
> 
> > LDS said:
> ...



No argument with the what or why of your post. I was just challenging the notion of Lightroom as a standalone, end-to-end solution.


----------



## Chaitanya (Oct 20, 2017)

Got the email in morning and since Adobe went into full retard mode, I am seriously considering either Macphun or On1 RAW as my next RAW editor.


----------



## LDS (Oct 20, 2017)

JonAustin said:


> And yet, Lr doesn't avoid that need for multiple apps for many users. Hence, the myriad plug-ins available for it. Sure, those plug-ins are called from within the Lr interface, but (at least) some of them require that a second copy of the image be created for the plug-in to work on, rather than writing those changes into the Lr database.



IMHO LR plug-ins are far less successful than PS ones. Lots of presets, but few workflow plug-ins (export/publish plug-ins are another story). Unless you have specific needs, LR tools are quite powerful end-to-end, being specifically designed for photo editing.


----------



## JonAustin (Oct 20, 2017)

LDS said:


> IMHO LR plug-ins are far less successful than PS ones. Lots of presets, but few workflow plug-ins (export/publish plug-ins are another story). Unless you have specific needs, LR tools are quite powerful end-to-end, being specifically designed for photo editing.



Certainly possible that your LR skills far exceed mine, but I find that I can get the look I want far more quickly with a plug-in or external tool like ON1 Effects, PerfectlyClear or Luminar than tweaking the myriad adjustment sliders in LR.


----------



## jolyonralph (Oct 22, 2017)

Well, I am extremely happy with the new Lightroom CC Classic, it is significantly faster at displaying thumbnails in the library than before. It's worth the upgrade just for this in my mind.

Haven't really tried the Cloud version because my library is too big.


----------



## Talys (Oct 22, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Well, I am extremely happy with the new Lightroom CC Classic, it is significantly faster at displaying thumbnails in the library than before. It's worth the upgrade just for this in my mind.



+1

Though the range masking features are pretty awesome too.


----------



## nvettese (Oct 23, 2017)

Famateur said:


> I'll switch (unless Adobe brings back the perpetual license). If they can do it along with the ability to import my Lightroom catalog (or at least XMP sidecars) with edits intact, I'll be doing the happy dance!



For me Adobe has already done the damage. I have LR6, but will never purchase another Adobe product, as their business model is not consumer friendly. Most who defend it, only do because they can continue to pay on it. I want to hear from them the day they don't have the income, and can no longer use the software they've been paying into. I will look at any company who takes the greatness of Adobe and builds a business around it. Looking at Capture One, and now MacPhun.


----------



## GammyKnee (Oct 23, 2017)

Adobe's switch to subscription-only is definitely going to result in more choice software-wise, and the competitors are working quickly to make the most of the opportunity they've been given.

Right now Alien Skin Exposure 3 is at the top of my list; I've been trialling it for the last few days, re-editing recent shots that I'd first processed in LR. The results look better to me and I got there faster than I did in LR6, with no need to dump a tiff and do a partial edit in PS. Looks like that will be my new go-to editor.


----------



## jalbfb (Oct 23, 2017)

I switched from Apple's Aperture to Lr several years ago and have the subscription to Lr & PS. I am not really interested in Adobe's new LrCC model since I really do not see the need for me to do processing on multiple devices except on any iPhone photos I might take. So I'll stick with the Classic update. I am waiting about another week before I do the update to wait and see if there are any issues. I use Luminar as a plugin with Lr. when Macphun comes out with Luminar 2018 and its DAM, I'll give it a try. I am used to Lr's workflow and post-processing and will wait and see how the new Classic works and what future updates Adobe does to it other than new camera RAW updates. I can see somewhere down the road that I might abandon Lr and switch to Luminar IF there DAM works as well as I am comfortable and used to with Lr.


----------



## Famateur (Oct 23, 2017)

GammyKnee said:


> Adobe's switch to subscription-only is definitely going to result in more choice software-wise, and the competitors are working quickly to make the most of the opportunity they've been given.
> 
> Right now Alien Skin Exposure 3 is at the top of my list; I've been trialling it for the last few days, re-editing recent shots that I'd first processed in LR. The results look better to me and I got there faster than I did in LR6, with no need to dump a tiff and do a partial edit in PS. Looks like that will be my new go-to editor.



Thanks for the mention of Alien Skin Exposure X3. I hadn't heard of it, but perusing their site and watching their video is highly encouraging! Gonna install the trial to kick the tires myself...

Have you tried their Blow Up program? I'm curious to know if the results are as impressive as they claim...


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Oct 23, 2017)

nvettese said:


> Famateur said:
> 
> 
> > I'll switch (unless Adobe brings back the perpetual license). If they can do it along with the ability to import my Lightroom catalog (or at least XMP sidecars) with edits intact, I'll be doing the happy dance!
> ...



Same here. Adobe pissed me off when LR6 came out and I was running XP. They dropped support for XP and I had to spend about $1,500 to put new guts in my PC and install Win 7. 
I have always bought standalone software, but now those days are over with LR. Not getting any new tools as a standalone user when CC subscribers get them is really a pisser. 
Seriously looking at McPhun as my next great adventure.


----------

