FutureQuest, Inc. FutureQuest, Inc. FutureQuest, Inc.

FutureQuest, Inc.
Go Back   FutureQuest Community > General Site Owner Support (All may read/respond) > Utilities / Scripts / Software
User Name
Password  Lost PW

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-13-2002, 07:05 AM   Postid: 70756
Brakkar
Visitor

Forum Notability:
0 pts:
[Post Feedback]
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5
PHP image gallery software

Hi,
do you know a good PHP (mysql OR NOT) image gallery software ?

Thanks,
Brak'
Brakkar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2002, 09:03 AM   Postid: 70935
jeep
Site Owner
 
jeep's Avatar

Forum Notability:
34 pts: User-friendly
[Post Feedback]
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brighton, United Kingdom
Posts: 229
There are so many out there it's hard to know where to start. I normally roll my own, but that's me.

A good place to start is http://www.hotscripts.com/

Webmonkey have tutorials on this at http://www.webmonkey.com as do many other places.

Jason
__________________
Swing Digital - online community consultancy
jeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2002, 11:22 AM   Postid: 70944
hobbes
Have you hugged a tiger today?
 
hobbes's Avatar

Forum Notability:
1238 pts: A True Crowd-pleaser!
[Post Feedback]
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Third Sol Planet Posts: Far too many. Oh ok -
Posts: 2,705
Here are a couple of specific URLs:

http://www.hotscripts.com/PHP/Script...age_Galleries/

http://php.resourceindex.com/Complet...mage_Indexing/
hobbes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2002, 01:46 PM   Postid: 70954
Jeff
Site Owner
 
Jeff's Avatar

Forum Notability:
872 pts: Dignified Competence!
[Post Feedback]
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Great Lakes
Posts: 4,221
I just installed photopost on my site: http://gallery.boatdesign.net/ which integrates fairly nicely with vBulletin.

I have the perl version installed but they just came out with a php version of the same which has been stable for a week or so now.

One disadvantage to many php image galleries vs. their perl counterparts is that they often require phpsafemode to be off to properly upload/move/delete images

Last edited by Jeff : 07-18-2002 at 02:04 PM.
Jeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2002, 02:14 PM   Postid: 70958
dank
Registered User

Forum Notability:
410 pts: Community Guru
[Post Feedback]
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: MWV
Posts: 3,986
How about Janderk's (sp?) Aryles (sp?) image gallery program? It's been mentioned in the forums several times and I believe was used by Deb for pictures of the big NOC move.

Dan
dank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2002, 02:31 PM   Postid: 70962
Jeff
Site Owner
 
Jeff's Avatar

Forum Notability:
872 pts: Dignified Competence!
[Post Feedback]
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Great Lakes
Posts: 4,221
http://www.digitaldutch.com/arles/

I didn't think of that because when the question asked for a php image gallery software I thought Brakkar needs something which runs on the server because other people need to be able to add to it (this was my need above) rather than something that runs locally (which arles seems to, like thumbsplus). But maybe Brakkar could give us some more details on what specifically he needs his gallery to do - can it run locally to generate the thumbnails or must they be generated on the server? Will visitors need to upload images, or just the webmaster?
Jeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2002, 03:17 PM   Postid: 70965
janderk
Visitor
 
janderk's Avatar

Forum Notability:
0 pts:
[Post Feedback]
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 362
Jeff said it right. The dynamic server side scripts is another market. If you want to search, add comments, allow uploads on your server then you need a server side database/scripting solution.

Arles creates static galleries on your home computer, which you can upload to your server, CDROM, whatever. This has the advantage that you don't need to know any server scripting stuff.

Arles is also better at producing top quality thumbnails/images, watermark type logos and many other image editing stuff.

Jan Derk
janderk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2002, 05:16 PM   Postid: 70972
Jeff
Site Owner
 
Jeff's Avatar

Forum Notability:
872 pts: Dignified Competence!
[Post Feedback]
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Great Lakes
Posts: 4,221
Quote:
Arles is also better at producing top quality thumbnails/images, watermark type logos and many other image editing stuff.
Can you expand on this a bit? (Or if it's a trade secret, that's ok too since theres a demo available so when I have more time I will take a closer look for my own needs)

With the dynamic gallery scripts we are most commonly talking about the quality of ImageMagick for the thumbnailing/overlays. I know for the overlays there have been a lot of problems with quality, and the thumbnails look good, but not quite as good as photoshop/corel photopaint generated thumbnails. Also I notice photopost handles jpegs very well, but gifs are not handled well (too large a filesize on the thumbnails.) I'm not a windows programmer at all - does Arles use some kind of shared graphics library for thumbnailing, or is it built from the ground up? As a graphics guy, I should know what commonalties these programs have (speaking very broadly). How would you compare the quality of the thumbnails which Arles creates to those generated by ThumbsPlus, ImageReady, PhotoShop, or Corel in batch mode? Does each of these programs use their own processing routines entirely, or are there commonalties/shared libraries involved?

Arles looks pretty good if you don't need the gallery dynamic. It is priced a little lower than ThumbsPlus (which I've used a couple versions back and which worked very well, except that the html/templates were difficult to use and when you click on an image you get the image in the browser (filename.jpg) rather than the image on a nicely formatted html page with navigation - in that respect Arles looks distinctly better.
Jeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2002, 06:22 PM   Postid: 70976
janderk
Visitor
 
janderk's Avatar

Forum Notability:
0 pts:
[Post Feedback]
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 362
Resizing images can be done in a thousand ways. The easiest way is dropping pixels. It's fast and ugly. This is generally what browsers do.

The best results are produced using resampling instead of resizing. It creates a new pixel in the thumbnail as a function of a range of pixels in the original image. After that you generally want to sharpen the thumbnail a bit.

The best resample algorithms are Lanczos3 and Mitchell. Those are generally not available in image editors like photoshop (at least not in 6.x) and paintshop pro who only offer bilinear and nearest neighbor. Not bad at all, but not the best you can get.

But enough said. Images say more than words. I took the liberty to borrow a boat picture from your forum and create a thumbnail with Arles' default setting. So you can compare Arles thumbnails with the one from your forum.


This is the thumbnail from your forum (size 3.23 KB).


This is the default thumbnail created by Arles (A one button click operation). It uses Lanczos3 with a sharpen filter (size 4.46 KB).


This is an alternative filter in Arles named Mitchell. Some people like this one a little better as the Lanczos sometimes borders on artifacts (size 4.15 KB).

Image quality is a subjective matter so it's probably best that everybody looks at the thumbnails themselves and decide what they like best. Some people won't even notice the difference.

Oh and here's an image with a watermark logo.

To do this I copied the logo from your site selected it in Arles and checked the watermark box. A two second job for the user, but hours of programming for me.

That's enough for todays trade secrets (and shameless self promotion)

[edit: added the watermark example; thumbnail sizes added]

Last edited by janderk : 07-19-2002 at 03:30 AM.
janderk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2002, 09:41 PM   Postid: 70985
dank
Registered User

Forum Notability:
410 pts: Community Guru
[Post Feedback]
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: MWV
Posts: 3,986
In all fairness, your sample images appear to be roughly 1/3 larger in file size than Jeff's. That might be by intent for clarity, but it partially defeats the purpose of using thumbnails to present a large number of photos at once with minimal download time.

Dan
dank is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 visitors)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:25 PM.


Running on vBulletin®
Copyright © 2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Hosted & Administrated by FutureQuest, Inc.
Images & content copyright © 1998-2013 FutureQuest, Inc.
FutureQuest, Inc.