which picture gallery script do you use?

Hello,

My gallery is growing bigger and bigger ( about 7K images) and recently a few friend complained how slow it is. I have full accel. enabled and all unessesary modules are disabled and removed. Also the speed to my site is about 650k/s ( same with the same friends that complained ) which is fine, but there is a big lag before an image starts to display ( because of the NFS mounts ).

So I was wondering what other software you guys use for your image galleries? I've looked at plogger, zenphoto, singapore, coppermine etc. I think I like singapore best so far and with 1 album in it it works faster than my gallery ( same album )
http://joro.geodar.com/pics/v/bthday07/ -> Gallery2
vs
http://testing.geodar.com/pics/bthday07/ -> Singapore

I would like to know what is your experiance with any online image gallery in terms of speed and ease of management of thousands of images 7-8MB each

Thanks

Hmmm... Maybe the first question is why 7 to 8 mb each for a gallery? Using jpg the images should be about 130-200 KB each. Reducing file size would dramatically speed up your gallery.
As for the speed of your site, 650kb/s is about normal, unless they have a faster connection than cable.
As for a gallery normally the more overhead the slower the program, this you will probably have to test out on your own.
Silk

My website

The answer to your first question is that I shoot with an 8MP camera and if I use my camera's RAW format they are big, in JPEG they are 2-4MB still too much for procwatch on dreamhost's servers...

My problem is not the transfer speed, but the response time from my gallery. Once it start loading it is fine, but untill it starts it may take 10 seconds ( on averate 2-3 seconds delay )

THz

The top levels look fast enough:

http://joro.geodar.com/
and
http://testing.geodar.com/

Individual 200+KB pictures also display fast.

So, if you're making the gallery software re-size MB size pictures on the fly, then that's probably the problem. You could pre-process to smaller starting pictures, using imagemagick on the server, or locally before upload.

tor.eff.org
Promos: MaxTOR: Save Maximum TOR: Save Maximum and give $1 to TOR

Yes, top levels are OK, but they are simple static pages.

Galleries however are a different story. All thumbnails and small sizes are generated already. A full regeneration of thumbs and resizes is impossible to finish on the server, because the process gets killed by procwatch.

Why are you processing files of that size on the server? Wouldn't it make more sense to batch process them to a more manageable size *before* uploading them? Just a thought...

--rlparker

>> impossible to finish on the server, because the process gets killed by procwatch.

If one image can finish at command line, there should be a different way to batch a large number so they can finish.

> Wouldn't it make more sense to batch process them to a more manageable size *before* uploading them?

If uploads are limiting, but it depends. If it's easier to process on the server because they already have what's needed, and the upload isn't difficult, and the process killer doesn't mind, then that makes more sense.

tor.eff.org
Promos: MaxTOR: Save Maximum TOR: Save Maximum and give $1 to TOR

In reply to:

---

If it's easier to process on the server because they already have what's needed, and the upload isn't difficult, and the process killer doesn't mind, then that makes more sense.

---

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. It just never dawned on me to do it on the server, as I have always batch processed the stuff before upload.

I got used to doing it that way when I was stuck with a dial-up connection and the uploads were killing me; now with my aDSL connection that is probably not as necessary as it was before.

--rlparker

> I have always batch processed the stuff before upload.

Good neighbors always do, or use high nice. :-)

tor.eff.org
Promos: MaxTOR: Save Maximum TOR: Save Maximum and give $1 to TOR

I don't know how you generate all thumbnails and versions of the image and still manage to keep gallery2 running. Don't you need to update the database when you generate the images? Plus gallery does make on the fly watermarking if it is not cached, but I don't think I can generate the cache and upload it.
If any of you has a script that can generate all sizes/caches for gallery2 on their local machine please share it with me. I will never bother the server to convert a single image.

A single image conversion does complete on the server, but the parent process that starts the batch gets killed ( php.cgi )