Yes, Image *Management* apps.
Posted Apr 18, 2005 21:41 UTC (Mon) by pizza
Parent article: The Grumpy Editor's Guide to Image Management Applications
So, how well do they *really* scale?
My collection has grown to well over 10,000 photos (21 gigs!), and is currently growing at about a gig a month. That's what I mean by scaling.
I also need the ability to publish stuff online, and keep the two in sync.
And let's not forget about web-based apps. While there are a lot of "online gallery" tools, only a handful are really designed to manage images as opposed to "share photos" or whatnot.
I ended up settling on Photo Organizer, (http://www.k-i-s.net) which is web-based and uses PostgreSQL as its backend. Its feature set is modeled after commercial image management tools that professional photographers use.
The feature which sold me on it was the distinction it makes between folders of images, and albums, which are arbitrary views into these folders. An image resides in one folder, but can be displayed in any number of albums. This makes it easy to create categorical views.
Another added benefit is that since it's a [real] SQL database on the backend, you can do some truly insane things with bulk updates and other advanced queries. Nevermind the benefit that an app crash won't hose your metadata backend.
Unfortunately, I've had to make so much use of the SQL backend because PO's current interface for bulk updates is crummy to non-existant -- but that's the main feature slated for the next release. (...along with a pile of other stuff I've added or fixed to satisfy my own itches)
It's worth a look.
to post comments)