I’m more concerned with the edits to my raw files and less concerned with the catalogue. While I’d hate to lose my keywords and whatnot, I can recreate them with a bit of elbow grease. I’m much more concerned about losing the edits I’ve made to my raw files. I do a lot of work in my digital darkroom and simply wouldn’t be able to replicate it if the edits were lost. I know that some of Lightroom’s competitors claim that it’s possible to migrate to their program with edits intact, but I gather certain kinds of adjustments don’t reliably survive the transition.
“This new platform offers seamless migration” - purchasing.
“Do the do or guarantee that ‘seamless migration’?” - IT department.
“No, but what could go wrong?” - purchasing.
Huge collective sigh - IT department.
3 Likes
And apologies from my side if I came across a bit harsh. Above a ways I was interacting with somebody that insisted that any difference I saw between DT and Obsidian was “technical hair-splitting and semantics”, which is absolutely isn’t. 
I’m happy for everybody to use whatever tool they want, at the end of the day. It’s all about figuring out what works for one’s use case.
I just like people to make the decisions based on correct data. And I’ve been bitten in some very unpleasant ways by various tools that didn’t do things at all the way I would expect them to.
4 Likes
Marketing, “customers will love it!”
Customer, “I can’t … with this new system #%@!”
5 Likes
Very interesting. I don’t really care about my edits at all. I hardly do any. I’m doing archival scanning/data collection according to US Library of Congress suggestions so any intervention is only manipulating the curves in the original scan to be sure you capture all the data the hardware and software can. What I care about is the cataloging. That is the added value for all the images I work with and is the second most important thing after the good full spectrum data capture of the original material.
BTDT have the scars and no t-shirt
1 Like