Hi all!

I’d like to share some slow, but steady progress I’ve made on my self-hosted personal photo gallery - a Google Photos alternative. It’s been a while since I last posted any updates - the last time was about v0.9.2 on /r/selfhosted, so it’s actually my first post here.

What’s new?

Lots of things! Here’s a quick summary:

Show me the demo

https://demo.photofield.dev/

Now hosted on Hetzner’s arm64-based CAX11 - 2 vCPUs & 4 GB of RAM - the cheapest one.

The photos are © by their authors. Since migrating to the CAX11, it only uses one size of internally pregenerated sqlite-based thumbnails, taking up roughly 4% of the disk space of originals. Support for Synology Moments thumbnails is still there, but doesn’t seem as crucial as before.

How do I try it out?

It’s very low commitment, a single executable or Docker image that you can mount with read-only access to an existing file structure, see Quick Start (also on GitHub if the website is dead).

Another one??? Why?

It’s a conspiracy to increase fragmentation and increase shareholder value of big tech companies. 😄 Jokes aside, I think there is some space for a fast, self-contained, extremely easy to deploy solution. But mainly, it’s to scratch my developer itch and I get to learn new things.

Thanks

Thanks to everyone who’s been using it, contributing, and giving feedback! See also foss_photo_libraries for alternatives if this doesn’t fit your needs.

Let me know what you think and what you’d like to see next! 🙏

  • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    Out of curiosity, what are the primary differences from Immich? I’ll be starting down this path soon.

    • mlunar@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’d say Immich has quite a few more features, with the primary focus of backing up your media from your mobile devices with a more “managed” approach (it takes care of storing and organizing the files).

      Photofield is more minimalistic (both in terms of user interface and as an application) and more useful if you have an existing directory structure that you want to view as a gallery. It also pulls a few neat tricks to make it work smoothly with up to ~600k files.

      See also the linked comparison for more details. It’s mostly accurate, though video is a bit better with this release.

      • paldepind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Thanks for the link to the comparison. Setting up a self-hosted photo solution is on my todo list and that comparison looks like a great starting point to explore from.