|Jun 14/06, 11:28 AM||#1|
Last Online: Jan 14/07
Join Date: Oct 2002
Portfolio 8 vs Aperture
I've been shooting digital almost exclusively for 4 or 5 years. I'm embarassed to admit that my filing system for my digital work is a stack of DVDs and CDs about four feet tall. I am about to purchase asset management software and wanted to know if anyone has had the opportunity to compare Apple's Aperture to Portfolio 8. Going by each company's website I am leaning toward Aperture. I'm a Mac user.
Any feedback will be appreciated.
|Jun 14/06, 01:07 PM||#2|
Founder & Administrator
Last Online: Jun 16/13
Join Date: Sep 2001
I've been trying to revise and update my archiving system as well. I've been reading The DAM Book by Peter Krogh, which seems to be becoming the bible of digital asset management (DAM). Krogh recommends a workflow based on Adobe Bridge and iView Media Pro. Here's what he says on his web site about Aperture:
"Aperture is not ready, IMO. It locks all your work into the application, which I consider to be a dealbreaker. There are other problems as well. It might be a viable product for the professional by the second or third version."
I'm still working my way through the DAM book, and I find I'm actually saying "damn" quite a bit, because some of his solutions are pretty sophisticated and complex. However, I still think it is worth a read if you want to get serious about this stuff.
If you're interested in purchasing the book it can be found in the CanPhoto Bookstore:
|Jun 14/06, 02:53 PM||#3|
Last Online: May 22/12
Join Date: Nov 2001
My wife is a certified Project Management Professional (PMP) and has been involved in the data processing area all her working life. She has worked for gov't for most of that time, so DAM has been a large part of her responsiblities for most of her career. So...I am in much the same situation as you, John, with having only a stack of DVD's and CD's and now a pretty full couple of hard drives, coming close to having to finally do something about it all and I asked her for her advice. She told me to stick with my DVD solution.
Now you have to understand that I have zero filing system skills. My DVD's are burned with the files arranged as they are on my hard drive, that is alphabeticaly by folder (client name). I have never shot stock, don't know that business and have no desire to enter into that business. I have always shot custom for my clients. I have 5 or 6 really regular clients and quite a few occasional clients. Each DVD is labelled with whatever is on it and that's about it.
My wife's advice comes from a "time spent for retrieval" vs. "how many retrieval requests do you get" standpoint. When she asked me that question, I had to say...."not a lot!" Since I went completly digital in 2001 (and even well before that) with only one exception, my clients haven't asked for old files. I can count on half a hand how many times someone has asked me to find an old file. One of my clients has specified that they want to be able to access files for, well, a LONG time. They are almost 80 years in business and expect to stay in business for at least another 80 years, so they want to be able to retrieve "historical" shots when they need them. But they are the only ones. So she said if it takes you three hours to find a file every 3 or four years, so what? Save your money, burn your DVD's and forget it!
Now John, if you are a portrait shooter or are into stock, then you will certainly need a better way, but before you spend too much money and/or effort, maybe take a look at your real requirements.
Just a thought...
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:34 PM.