Clearly the presence of digital asset management is very important to a lot of people and signals that your product is a more mature offering.ĭXO Photolab is a top-of-the-line professional-quality raw image converter. I understand in the last few days they have finally released a version with the DAM included.
I’ve been noting online in recent weeks that Luminar had been roundly thrashed for promising to add, and not delivering, a DAM to it’s software even though it’s been promised for some time. At this juncture, it’s probably best to embrace it and make suggestions for things to be included. I’m afraid that the DAM is a done deal regardless of how little some of us may want it. there may be no significant improvement to RAW development performance or quality for a couple of years.
The mysterious DAM eating up limited development time worries me.
I’ll upgrade anyway if I’m using the software and particularly if I’ve acquired new kit. This is not a particularly hot issue with me. Forcing upgrades based on equipment acquisition is a weak way of promoting software upgrades. DxO could win some good will by trailing camera profiles and lenses something like three years. Of course, I’m with you in terms of a lack of obligation to support all cameras and lenses for eternity. to take a hifi analogy - the profiles are just CD media and not a change to the core application. Once DxO has that data, it’s fairly easy to distribute the new profiles to older versions, without the kind of extensive testing about which you are speaking. I can’t agree with you about new camera bodies and lenses. Mark, I agree with you in terms of software bugs. Those choices don’t necessarily always make every end user happy. Why not go back and fix it in Optics Pro 9 for those that still use it? Software development is about making choices regarding the use of limited resources, and getting the most bang for the buck out of them. If updates to the current version of a vendors software were suspended for six months while the development team focused on fixing every bug in a previous version I wonder how supportive you would be of that, especially if you were no longer using the previous version, And what about owners of the version before that? Some would consider the range of adjustment of PL’s highlight slider to be bug.