Catalogue · By industry
DAM software for architecture, engineering and construction
A skeptical look at 10 DAM vendors serving AEC firms — which ones actually tag CAD/BIM support, and which just claim to serve the industry.
AEC teams organize assets by project, not by campaign or channel: one job site generates drawings, permits, site photography and marketing renders from several disciplines at once, often across years. Of the 10 vendors in this catalogue’s aec pool, only OpenAsset is tagged as AEC-only. The rest — Mylio, Daminion, Canto, Kontainer, Aprimo, Optimizely — serve aec alongside ten or eight other verticals, with the same generic feature set they sell everywhere else.
The concrete thing to check is this catalogue’s dedicated CAD/BIM feature tag, not a vendor’s general claim to ‘support drawings.’ Four of the ten here — Daminion, Canto, Kontainer, Aprimo — carry that tag. OpenAsset does not, despite being purpose-built for AEC: its fit is project-numbered proposals and photography synced to Deltek, not CAD files themselves. Long project lifecycles and subcontractor or client sharing also argue for checking on-premise availability (only Daminion and Mylio offer it in this pool) and editor-versus-viewer seat structure before signing — Canto’s own dont-buy criteria flag limited editor seats for external users.
What decides it here
What matters most in this vertical is telling apart the vendor actually built for AEC from the ones tagged into it after the fact. OpenAsset is the only one of the 10 vendors here that serves aec exclusively — everything else in this pool is a general-purpose DAM sold across ten or eight verticals with an identical feature list. None of the ten publish price; all require a quote or a signup form. If your library is mostly drawings and BIM files rather than marketing photography, check the CAD tag directly — Daminion, Canto, Kontainer and Aprimo carry it — rather than trusting a generic 'supports your files' claim. If it's proposal and project photography tied to Deltek, OpenAsset is the narrower, purpose-built option, but only if you can enforce tagging discipline at upload.
Watch out for
What surfaces after you buy
- None of the 10 vendors here publish a price. All require a quote or a signup before you see a number.
- Only two of them, Daminion and Mylio, offer on-premise deployment. The rest are cloud only, which means project drawings sit on vendor infrastructure for the life of the project.
- Only one vendor here, OpenAsset, is built specifically for AEC. The rest serve aec alongside ten or eight other verticals using the same generic feature set.
- The CAD/BIM tag applies to four of the ten vendors here (Daminion, Canto, Kontainer, Aprimo). Check the tag directly instead of assuming drawing support from the word 'DAM.'
- OpenAsset's own reviewers say search quality falls off fast without disciplined tagging at upload — a real ongoing cost for a firm with a high volume of drawings.
- Canto's editor seats, as opposed to view-only seats, are called out as the more limited and costly kind — relevant if subcontractors or clients need to upload, not just view.
Before you shortlist
Work out about yourself first
- Confirm whether 'CAD support' means opening or previewing CAD/BIM files, or just storing them as an opaque blob. Ask for a demo with your own file formats before buying.
- If drawings can't leave your own infrastructure, narrow to the two vendors here with on-premise deployment, Daminion and Mylio, before evaluating anything else.
- If your firm already runs Deltek Vision or Vantagepoint and produces InDesign-based proposals organized by project number, start with OpenAsset — the only vendor here built around that specific workflow.
- Map out who needs upload or edit rights versus view-only access across your own staff, subcontractors and clients before pricing. Editor seats cost more than viewer seats on at least one vendor here.
- Ask what happens to search quality as your drawing library grows past a few thousand files. Kontainer and Canto both have documented gaps at scale in this data.
How this list was ranked
These criteria were written before any platform was placed. Each one is checkable on the vendor’s own pages or in what users report, so the ordering can be argued with rather than taken on trust.
| Criterion | Why it matters here | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| CAD/BIM file handling | AEC libraries mix drawings and BIM files with ordinary marketing photography. Only vendors carrying this catalogue's cad feature tag have that handling confirmed — a generic DAM claim isn't enough. | high |
| On-premise availability | Long project lifecycles and sensitive drawing sets push some firms to keep files off vendor cloud infrastructure entirely. Only Daminion and Mylio offer that option in this pool. | medium |
| Project-based organization and practice-management sync | AEC work is structured by project number across disciplines, not by campaign. OpenAsset's fit is built around exactly that, including a direct Deltek sync. | high |
| External sharing with subcontractors and clients | Projects involve people outside the firm who need upload or edit access, not just viewing. Seat structure and cost vary; Canto's own guidance flags this as a weak point for external editors. | medium |
OpenAsset
The only vendor in this pool tagged AEC-only rather than sold across multiple industries. Fits firms already running Deltek Vision or Vantagepoint that assemble InDesign proposals organized by project number.
Price published
No
Billed on
Quoted per customer
Transparency
0%
Weak spot
A page titled pricing that contains a benefit calculator instead of prices
Not for you if: Its own reviewers say search quality drops fast without consistent tagging discipline at upload, and its selling points don't transfer to non-AEC use. Pricing is quoted per customer; the pricing page has a benefit calculator, not a price.
Daminion
The on-premise option in this group, useful when project files and drawings can't leave the firm's own infrastructure. Carries the cad feature tag and is priced as a single annual subscription covering all features.
Price published
No
Billed on
Annual subscription covering all features, integrations, updates and support
Transparency
30%
Weak spot
Like the platforms it competes with, it asks for a form submission before naming a price
Not for you if: Interface is functional but dated per the data, there's no independent verification of reliability at enterprise scale, and AI-tagging costs are flagged as a potentially unpredictable recurring line item.
Canto
Strong search and tagging at scale if you have a dedicated taxonomy owner, and it carries the cad feature tag.
Price published
No
Billed on
Team size and storage volume
Transparency
20%
Weak spot
The tiers are named and described but cannot be compared on cost
Not for you if: Cloud only, per-power-user pricing not disclosed upfront, and editor seats (versus view-only) are called out as limited — relevant if subcontractors or external agencies need upload access, not just viewing.
Kontainer
Fast to onboard without heavy IT involvement, carries the cad feature tag, and comes with a thirty-day no-commitment trial to test fit before buying.
Price published
No
Billed on
Depends on configuration; several features are priced separately
Transparency
20%
Weak spot
Feature-level add-on pricing makes the final figure hard to anticipate before a quote
Not for you if: Cloud only. The data flags storage-tier costs, batch-upload and search performance, and duplicate detection as weak points once a library gets large or high-resolution — worth stress-testing against a real drawing set.
Aprimo
Carries the cad feature tag and ties the DAM into broader marketing and approval workflows for firms that need more than asset storage.
Price published
No
Billed on
Chosen products and number of users
Transparency
10%
Weak spot
A modular line-up means the total is assembled from several unknowns
Not for you if: Cloud only, with a realistic all-in budget the vendor itself puts at roughly $50,000+/year plus a multi-month implementation. Its own dont-buy criteria rule out anything under $20-30k/year without dedicated implementation staff.
Optimizely
Makes sense only if the firm already runs or plans to run Optimizely's CMS, Content Marketing Platform or DXP and wants assets bundled inline with that workflow.
Price published
No
Billed on
Quoted per customer
Transparency
0%
Weak spot
Not one tier and not one figure on the pricing page
Not for you if: Does not carry the cad feature tag in this data. Optimizely's own customer feedback forum shows open requests for bulk asset operations, metadata governance and content-based search — exactly what a drawing-heavy library needs.
Also in this category, not ranked here
These carry the same facet in our database but did not make the shortlist. They are listed rather than hidden: a shortlist means more when you can see what it was drawn from.
Frequently asked
Does any DAM in this AEC vertical publish its price?
No. All 10 vendors quote per customer or list named plans without amounts on their pricing pages. You'll need to submit a form or talk to sales before you see a number.
Which vendor is actually built for architecture, engineering and construction, rather than just compatible with it?
OpenAsset. It's the only one of the 10 vendors here tagged as AEC-only rather than sold across multiple verticals, and its buy-if criteria are written around Deltek Vision/Vantagepoint sync and project-number-organized InDesign proposals.
Which vendors here handle CAD or BIM files?
Daminion, Canto, Kontainer and Aprimo carry this catalogue's cad feature tag. OpenAsset, despite being AEC-specific, doesn't carry that tag in this data — its fit is proposal and project photography organized by project number, not drawing files.
Can any of these run on our own servers instead of the vendor's cloud?
Two of the 10 vendors do: Daminion and Mylio both list on-premise deployment as an option alongside their cloud offering, which matters when project drawings and client files can't leave the firm's own infrastructure for contractual or security reasons. The other five vendors in this pool are cloud only, with no self-hosted tier available at any price point.
Is Mylio a fit for a construction firm's shared project library?
Not based on this data. Mylio's buy-if criteria describe personal photo sync across a single person's own devices, and its stated best fit is families and private libraries, not a multi-user library shared with subcontractors.
What's the realistic budget for the enterprise option in this pool?
Aprimo's own buy-if criteria state a realistic all-in budget of roughly $50,000+/year plus a multi-month implementation. Its dont-buy criteria flag anything under $20-30k/year without dedicated implementation staff as a mismatch.
Does OpenAsset work well without disciplined tagging?
No. Reviewers cited in its dont-buy criteria say search quality degrades fast without consistent tagging at upload, and its core selling points — Deltek sync, project-number structure — don't carry over to general-purpose use.
How do we share drawings with subcontractors or clients without giving them full access?
Check the portal and seat structure for each vendor individually. Canto's own dont-buy criteria specifically flag it as a weak fit if you need many editor, not just viewer, seats for external agencies — worth confirming the same distinction before buying for subcontractor access.
Sources
- Pricing page shows a savings calculator estimating $3,600–$4,800 a year from user inputs and leads to a demo; no prices of its own checked 2026-08-06 — OpenAsset — OpenAsset pricing page
- Pricing page directs to a Request Pricing form; the only published figure is AI tagging from $3 per 1,000 images checked 2026-08-06 — Daminion — Daminion pricing page
- Pricing page shows four plans, each with a Get pricing or Talk to sales button and no dollar amount checked 2026-08-06 — Canto — Canto pricing page
- Pricing page offers currency switching and a thirty-day no-commitment trial but publishes no figures; several features are marked as priced separately checked 2026-08-06 — Kontainer — Kontainer pricing page
- Pricing page lists packages without figures and explains that price depends on chosen products and user count checked 2026-08-06 — Aprimo — Aprimo pricing page
- Pricing page states that every plan is packaged individually and names neither tiers nor amounts checked 2026-08-06 — Optimizely — Optimizely pricing page