How we work
This page describes the rules this site publishes under, enforced by the publishing system itself rather than left to editorial discretion.
01
Criteria first
What a list optimises for is written and published before any platform is scored.
02
Vendor documentation
Record what the vendor states publicly, and the date it was stated.
03
Commercial terms
Read the pricing page properly: billing unit, limits, minimum term, what is an add-on.
04
User reports
Read reviews for what breaks in daily use; summarise in our own words with a link.
05
Re-check
Every factual page carries the date it was last verified, and it moves when we revisit.
Disclosure
This site is published by PicaJet, which makes photo management software. Where our own product is mentioned, it is described on exactly the same criteria as every other product here, and it is left out of comparisons where it does not fit the use case.
What we will not do
Sell placement in any list or comparison
Publish a rating without publishing the criteria first
Quote a price we cannot attribute to a source and a date
Republish review texts that belong to the platforms hosting them
Present vendor marketing copy as an independent finding
This page describes the rules this site publishes under. They are enforced by the publishing system itself, not left to good intentions: a page that breaks them cannot be published.
What we publish
Product pages describe what a vendor documents publicly, with the date we last checked it shown on the page. Where a figure appears — a price, a limit, a supported format — it carries a line in the Sources block naming where it came from and when it was verified. A figure without a source does not get published.
Rankings, and the rule that governs them
We do rank platforms, and we publish the criteria before the ranking rather than after it. That order matters: criteria chosen once the winner is known are not criteria, they are a justification. Every list states what it optimises for, applies the same axes to every platform on it, and shows where each score came from.
Three inputs decide a position. What the vendor documents publicly. What the commercial terms actually are once the pricing page is read rather than skimmed. And what users report going wrong after the system is in daily use — summarised in our own words, with a link to where we found it.
Rankings are always scoped to a decision: a sector, a deployment model, a type of file. We do not publish one absolute table of “the best DAM software”, because a firm that must keep files on its own servers and a team that wants a library running by Friday are not shopping in the same market, and one ordering would have to mislead one of them.
Separately from those editorial rankings we publish a transparency index, described in full below. It measures one narrow, checkable thing — how much a buyer can learn without a sales call — and says nothing about how good the software is.
What we do not publish
- A star rating without a published method behind it. Every score on this site traces back to stated criteria.
- Prices we cannot attribute. Most vendors in this category do not publish price lists, and quotes circulating in blog posts are usually from a different year and a different seat count.
- Paid placement. Position in a list is never for sale, in any list, at any price.
- Copied reviews. User reports are read, summarised in our own words and linked back to their source; the original texts belong to the platforms that host them and the people who wrote them.
- A claim we could not verify. Where a gap exists the page says so, because an unverified line inside a ranking looks exactly like the verified ones around it.
Corrections
If something here is wrong or out of date, write to support@picajet.com and say which page and which claim. Corrections are made on the page, and the checked date is updated when they are.
The transparency index, in full
One number per platform, out of 10, measuring how much a buyer can learn without a sales call. It deliberately says nothing about how good the software is: that takes months of use to judge honestly, and we would rather publish a narrow claim we can defend than a broad one we cannot. Every axis below is read off the vendor’s own pages, so anyone can re-check any score. The scale was published before the first platform was scored.
| Axis | Weight | How points are given |
|---|---|---|
| Price transparency Is there a figure on the pricing page at all, and does it cover the DAM product or only part of the range? | 0–4 | 4 — Full price list for the product itself · 3 — Prices published for part of the range · 2 — Only the free tier is priced · 1 — Pricing model described, no figures · 0 — No figures and no model |
| Billing model Does the bill grow with every person you add? Seat-based pricing decides more budgets than the headline figure. | 0–2 | 2 — Not per seat — flat, per account, or unlimited users · 1 — Metered usage with published units · 0 — Per seat, or not disclosed |
| Try before you buy Can you load your own files and see how it behaves, without a sales call? | 0–2 | 2 — Free tier or free software, no time limit · 1 — Time-limited free trial · 0 — Demo only |
| Deployment control Can the library live on infrastructure you control, if that is a requirement you cannot negotiate away? | 0–2 | 2 — Self-hosting or on-premise available · 1 — Mentioned but not confirmed · 0 — Vendor cloud only |
An axis we could not verify is left out of both the score and the maximum, rather than scored zero: zero means “checked, and poor”, while missing data means “not checked”, and a platform should not be penalised for our gaps. A platform with fewer than 8 points of verifiable axes is not ranked at all — a low position reads as a judgement, and on incomplete data no judgement was made.
Frequently asked
Do you test these products yourselves?
We describe what vendors document publicly and what their published material states, with the date we checked it. Where a claim comes from a vendor rather than from our own observation, the page says so. We do not present vendor material as an independent finding.
Why are there no star ratings on this site?
Because a rating implies a scoring methodology, and we do not publish one. A number that averages incomparable criteria across sectors reads as precision that is not there. We describe what each product does and who it suits, and let the reader weigh it.
Where do the prices on this site come from?
From whatever we can attribute. Most vendors in this category do not publish price lists, so many pages state pricing model rather than an amount. Where a figure does appear, the Sources block names where it came from and when it was verified.
How current is the information?
Each factual page shows the date it was last checked, separately from the date it was published. If that date looks stale to you, treat the specifics as stale — pricing and packaging in this category move faster than anything else on the page.
Does the publisher sell software covered on this site?
PicaJet makes photo management software. Where our own product appears it is described on the same criteria as the others, and it is left out where it does not fit the use case being discussed. That is stated in the disclosure above rather than buried.
Can a vendor pay to be included or ranked higher?
No. Placement is not for sale, and there is no arrangement under which coverage or position depends on a commercial relationship. If that ever changes, it will be stated on this page before it appears anywhere else.
How do I report an error on a page?
Write to support@picajet.com with the page address and the specific claim you think is wrong. Corrections are made on the page itself, and the checked date is moved forward when the fix is published.
Do you use affiliate links?
Where a link earns a commission, that is stated on the page carrying it. Links in Sources are citations, not affiliate links, and are never marked nofollow because they credit the original.
Why do some products appear on one list and not another?
Because the lists answer different questions. A platform that suits a studio versioning technical files may be a poor fit for a marketing team publishing campaign assets, and appearing on every list would make each list less useful.
Who writes the articles here?
Articles carry the name of the person who wrote them, with a link to everything else they have written on the site. Where a page states a fact about a product, that fact is sourced on the page rather than resting on the author's authority.
Sources
- Publishing rules described on this page checked 2026-08-06 — PicaJet editorial standards