Hi,

I'm running RedHat FC3 and looking for an easy photo gallery application. Yum-available would be great.

If your just looking for an application to view and go thru your images/photo's, I always use gthumb myself.

If your actually looking for a web based one, the most popular one these days is probably and yes, simply called "gallery".. go figure

http://gallery.sourceforge.net

I just wrote my own in Perl / HTML::Mason It probably would be easier with straight SSI, but I'm trying to learn Mason, right now.

The advantage of this approach is that it's much easier to install your own application. The disadvantage of this approach is that if you want to consider the development work as part of the install, then it's much more difficult to install your own application

What exactly are you looking for in your gallery application? If you just want a simple web-based gallery that allows you to upload images, create thumbnails from the uploaded image and load them on the home page, then that's pretty simple to write. If there's interest, I'd be happy to share some of the code.

Good luck with your project!

JAlbum is really cool too. Written in Java so it's also cross-platform. http://www.jalbum.net/

I use IDS,Image Display System,ids.sourceforge.net
really simple to use,it does come with shutterfly stuff which I don't really want or use ,but someone may want a hard copy of one of your images and doesn't own a photo printer,(no one I know)
simple,fast,functional

If you dont want web-based applications, I can't really help you.

If you want only web-based apps, the two leaders (by far) are Gallery (as an earlier poster said) and Coppermine. I've had very good results with coppermine - it's awesome - however I now use a script I wrote myself in PhP. It was inspired by the blog software Blosxom, as it uses the filesystem as a database to store descriptions, comments, etc. I was thinking of releasing the code, but I'm not sure it's really in a fit state to be released (quite ugly, etc.). What do you guys think?

http://gallery.sourceforge.net - Gallery
http://coppermine.sourceforge.net/ - Coppermine
http://djcf.sytes.net/gallery/index.php - My Gallery

Dude, clean and simple != ugly

I thought it was cool, and it certainly serves its purpose. It was a little slow to load, though. Was it generating thumbnails on the fly, or does it scale the images to fit several per page without really resizing them? Or maybe I'm just used to watching mine on an internal LAN, so even though it would really load that slow for others, it just seems faster to me?

My image gallery is at http://www.gecko-ak.org/Gallery/inde...?UserName=mike so, I would be curious to know if it is slow to load, too.

Your gallery seems pretty fast to me! But then again, my gallery seems fast as well, surfing from my college (which is maybe 500 metres from the home server!). I havnt tested it on any other conections 'cept my own though. It does in fact use the GD image library to generate "normal" / intermediate images and thumnails, although it has no problem just displaying the names if thumnails are set to off, or if they havnt been generated yet.

The principle reasons I say it's ugly is - no standardisation for confusing variable names, and it's hard(er) than I would like to change the inbuilt templates - you have to change an obscue (though well commented) variable halfway down the page. You also can't load external templates from a file, as PhP doesn't parse variables inside of files. I probably wouldnt tidy it up because it already suits my needs... althogh I would if other people were interested.

What do you guys think - should I release the code? I don't believe there are other systems out there that do galleries this simply.

Daniel

Just another vote for Coppermine, I've used it through several versions. There were some bugs a while back, but it's gotten stable. Gallery(.sf.net) is also good, and they have new releases fairly often.

The main difference is Coppermine requires a database, whereas Gallery uses the filesystem directly. If I recall correctly, this has caused a number of security issues with Gallery, but I haven't kept up with it that much. Actually, I don't know if anyone is paying as much attention to security in the Coppermine camp, so Gallery could end up being more secure. /note to self: check that out.

It does? Damn! The main reason I switched from Coppermine was its reliance on a database - if you wanted to move, say, 10 images from one album to another you had to do that by hand using the web management interface. You cant copy-and-paste them into a new directory (which would have been easiest). If I'd know Gallery used the filesystem, I'd probably have gone with Gallery rather than making my own!

Oh well, it was a fun project!

A little SQL will take you a long way, grasshopper. And save you disk space. (Unless gallery can follow symbolic links from cp -s, but you're out of luck on Windows then...but here we are on LQ, so nevermind)