131–140 of 189 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The magic of PHP is it’s fantastic backwards compatibility. You can still execute PHP4 spaghetti code in PHP8. As side effect it even executes faster and uses less resources for it.
Executes faster and uses less resources for probably providing remote exploit opportunities :-))
I got fantastic feedback when I recently asked about a personal wiki that would fit my criteria [2], so I figure I'll ask here for a photo library management app.
My use case isn't just personal photos, but also concept art. I would love to replace the scourge that is Pinterest (which I shamefully admit I use). I used Picasa for this use case before it died.
Here are the features I would like in a photo management system:
- Importing photos should be as easy as drag and drop or "add directory".
- Images in the library should be mirrored to an internal store independent of the greater filesystem.
- It needs to support rich tagging. Images should be easily enumerable by tag.
- It needs to store all metadata in a central database or file that I can easily distribute and back up. (As opposed to writing the data into the images directly.) It would be nice if the primary keys to image were signature-based rather than filename (and especially not full file path) as it could live on different systems.
- Group by GPS coordinates would be nice. Even better if it can pull the location name.
- Group by date taken.
- Find or automatically ignore/remove duplicates.
- Support for a NAS or cloud backup would be fantastic. Especially if it also backs up the database.
- It should generate pre-computed thumbnails so scrolling a large library doesn't show blank images, but keep them off to the side so it doesn't impact backup.
- It should have RAW support, but doesn't need editing/adjustment capabilities. (If not available, I suppose I could pre-process the RAWs.)
- Video support would be extremely nice too, but it doesn't need to have any editing or miscellaneous features.
- It would be nice to keep galleries separate, or at least in different namespaces so I can reuse tags. Family, real estate, conceptual/renders, etc.
- Replication across multiple devices would be a nice to have, especially if it can update tags and metadata across machines.
- Open source would be nice, but I'd be happy with paid/commercial software if it did what I wanted.
- Multiplatform support (Linux, Windows, Mac) would be extremely nice. Even nicer if it supports mobile too.
- It should be snappier than a web-based gallery.
- That said, internet web access (like photos.google.com) would be killer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does that make it a 15-file photo gallery and file manager?
Absolutely. This also makes it completely broken if these dependencies are inaccessible or go missing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand the risks of this approach, but I just dumped everything into google photos and I'm very happy with how it's working for now. I do not miss the days of keeping track of those devices at all.
The thing about Google photos that explodes my brain is that if I use albums to share with family members, Google prioritizes the use case of the recipients _joining_ the album and _adding_ my photos to their own albums. Google is trying to use me as a way to get my family members signed up for Google photos. Then my family is confused about where photos live, etc.
Might try something like this instead.
I am still looking for a simple tool to deduplicate, organize, and tag all the photos I have accumulated over the years. Old laptop hard drives, old cell phones, iPhoto libraries, aperture libraries, etc. I want to dump them into a staging area, remove all dupes, and start organizing and tagging them into a folder structure.
My to-do list is still long, but I'm plugging through it and I believe PhotoStructure already has the most robust tag extraction, inference, and image deduplication heuristics around, and has a novel browsing approach that scales well to very large (100k+ - 1mm+) libraries.
https://photostructure.com/faq/why-photostructure/
(Disclaimers: I'm the solo author, and although I am an open source author, PhotoStructure is commercial software. There are both a free and paid tiers of functionality: details are on the pricing page.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really. This index.php is just a wrapper as it will refer their .js/.php which you have no control of. To use it fully you'll have to write those as well, at which point you can just start from scratch on your own terms.
So is it running arbitrary PHP on my server if I run this?
I like what I see on the site and in the comments here. Im looking forward to checking this out more maybe. Im kind of surprised that as a species we dont have a conclusive ubiquitous solution to the foggy problem of digital photo storage / management. So many of my photos are just in drawers on old hard drives and phones. Anyway maybe its getting better. Or maybe Im just stupid.
I understand the risks of this approach, but I just dumped everything into google photos and I'm very happy with how it's working for now. I do not miss the days of keeping track of those devices at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Files have some drawbacks... they're difficult for multiple people to work on together (slides). They're often not easy to organize, and they're often not available where you want them.
You can have other interfaces in addition to the files, that discourage, perhaps strongly, getting to them directly. But it's always been straight up evil to completely remove all meaningful access to them, and yet Apple et al chose to go in this direction.
The output is very polished and fast, I like it a lot. Unfortunately it's not technically a single file as it depends on code downloaded from their server, therefore it can't be deployed locally without Internet connection. From the forum: "In terms of license, you don't need an internet connection. However, Files app loads it's own Javascript, CSS and several plugins from CDN (jsdelivr.com), and this requires intern…
First off, its already not a "single file" you need a PHP interpreter.
Secondly, you can cram the JS and CSS into a .phar file, the performance is horrible, but it's probably not noticeable in this scenario.