Overall Satisfaction with Canto
Previously, the division where I am working was using an obsolete tool for image management. Last year we've switched over to Canto because the features we can use with Canto are much better than the old system was providing us. We use it currently mainly as an Image Library, but we can do much more with it.
- Share collections of images in Portals to logged in users OR to guests. Flexible!
- Ability to convert original images to low-res images within the platform, so users can download based on their permissions and/or their needs.
- Interactive PDF search and scroll behaviour.
- You can tag images in multiple ways with keywords and with tags but also with pre-defined categories and such.
- Administrative rights management can be improved. Admin rights on multiple levels are not supported so working with multiple department admins is a no-go.
- UX/UI can be improved sometimes, but is a work in progress for the developers.
- Compared to previous (Obsolete) system only slightly more expensive, but this is paying back in userfriendly asset management.
Do you think Canto delivers good value for the price?
Are you happy with Canto's feature set?
Did Canto live up to sales and marketing promises?
Did implementation of Canto go as expected?
Would you buy Canto again?
Canto DAM can be used really well for situations where multiple asset types should be gathered and shared in multiple ways and with different audiences. The way folders are handled during mass upload can be a difficult situation (folder/album structures can be hard to arrange properly) Support is really fast. Extensive Knowledge Portal available.