Open-source photo gallery with cloud backup and end-to-end encryption(stingle.org)
stingle.org
Open-source photo gallery with cloud backup and end-to-end encryption
http://stingle.org/
164 comments
You can't really compare Stingle to Google, Apple, or any other cloud photo services. Stingle's whole value proposition is encryption. Google and Apple don't offer encryption-at-rest, and Google in particular is using the photos you upload to learn about you and market to you. If you're looking for cheap cloud hosting and don't care about privacy, last I checked, Google offered unlimited photo storage (with restrictions on individual photo size that are perfectly fine for non-professional viewing and use).
What is the need for encrypting photos?
It depends on your paranoia about attack vectors. From photo EXIF data you can figure out what phones and cameras you use, where you took the pictures, and dates and times you've traveled. With AI or looking at the photos you can ID people and other personal details. I sometimes take photos of personal documents that can be OCRed.
Sure, techies tend to be more paranoid than the average person, but I do think people undervalue the long tail of data. Years ago I was talking to my wife about avoiding sensitive info in email with our tax preparer. I mentioned that we could send an email and a decade later he could get compromised and it would be trivial to scan old emails for specific data like w2s, social security numbers, or bank accounts.
Sure, techies tend to be more paranoid than the average person, but I do think people undervalue the long tail of data. Years ago I was talking to my wife about avoiding sensitive info in email with our tax preparer. I mentioned that we could send an email and a decade later he could get compromised and it would be trivial to scan old emails for specific data like w2s, social security numbers, or bank accounts.
I’m not sure about Google however last time I checked Apple had both encryption at rest and E2EE.
https://support.apple.com/en-ie/HT202303
https://support.apple.com/en-ie/HT202303
No E2EE for photos saved in iCloud, but they're encrypted in transit (SSL/TLS) and at rest (they get encrypted on the servers and not your device so not using E2EE).
You have to scroll a bit further down to see “End-to-end encrypted data” on the page you linked :)
You have to scroll a bit further down to see “End-to-end encrypted data” on the page you linked :)
With Google photos are encrypted in transit and at rest, but not E2E
> - It does not say anywhere that this is open source and I can host it myself, plugged in with a storage such as AWS S3 or Wasabi or any other cloud that I can backup/store etc.
It doesn't, which sucks. I was hoping for the exact same thing. It only says that the client is open source, so you can verify that your photos are actually encrypted.
It doesn't, which sucks. I was hoping for the exact same thing. It only says that the client is open source, so you can verify that your photos are actually encrypted.
Looks like just the clients are OSS: https://github.com/stingle
Apple's photo album sharing is so stupid. I can make albums, but then to share those photos I have to make a shared album in which I cannot rearrange nor change the photos once “posted”. If they would just implement sharing of regular albums …. Anyone with an idea why they have not?
NextCloud is generally slow, but with photos - it's unbearable slow. It has multiply layers of cache, which make everything slower(?!), it's slow to show thumbnails, it's slow to go from one photo to another. Basically it's unusable for sharing photos.
If you want to self-host your photos, and you don't mind non-free software, you're welcome to try out https://photostructure.com (disclaimer: I'm the author). The beta is available for free in exchange for your feedback.
PhotoStructure is especially applicable if you want a cross-platform solution (mac, windows, linux, docker), and don't want to be tied to a specific NAS or cloud vendor[1].
Every time you open the home page you see something new, as PhotoStructure picks out random "samples" by year, or by camera, or by keyword. It's fun to see photos you haven't seen in a while!
[1] https://photostructure.com/faq/why-photostructure/
PhotoStructure is especially applicable if you want a cross-platform solution (mac, windows, linux, docker), and don't want to be tied to a specific NAS or cloud vendor[1].
Every time you open the home page you see something new, as PhotoStructure picks out random "samples" by year, or by camera, or by keyword. It's fun to see photos you haven't seen in a while!
[1] https://photostructure.com/faq/why-photostructure/
My experience with photos in Nextcloud was vastly improved when I setup the Preview Generator app [1]. Still not blazing fast, but makes the Files app usable again when browsing folders with lots of photos. Significantly better than before.
1. https://apps.nextcloud.com/apps/previewgenerator
1. https://apps.nextcloud.com/apps/previewgenerator
It's slow indeed, in my experience, as well, but not unusable.
Is there a solution that would mirror the iCloud Photos collection; where deleting or modifying a photo on iCloud would be reflected on the server?
I like to use iCloud primarily, but I'm looking for a solution to sync the collection to take an offline regular versioned backup. So far all the options I've tried kept all photos, including the deleted ones, and duplicate the modified ones.
I like to use iCloud primarily, but I'm looking for a solution to sync the collection to take an offline regular versioned backup. So far all the options I've tried kept all photos, including the deleted ones, and duplicate the modified ones.
It's not 100% comparable, but I'm using my Synology NAS with a few TB of space, and the Photostation app. DS Photo automatically syncs pictures from our phones and i manually upload the camera ones. I also use Synology C2 for offsite backup of my whole NAS. Works pretty well.
How do you test backups? (I have the same setup but with some extra paranoia layers that I'm looking to relax.)
The two services that I've found give E2EE photo syncing on just your local devices / cloud services AND have mobile & desktop apps are mylio & photostructure.
Unfortunately not open source, but it is what it is.
Unfortunately not open source, but it is what it is.
> It does not say anywhere that this is open source and I can host it myself, plugged in with a storage such as AWS S3 or Wasabi or any other cloud that I can backup/store etc.
Ask yourself why would an open-source tool provide "cloud storage"? To bring more customers to the respective cloud provider? It's also not particularly altruistic in a FOSS sense to lock your photos into cloud plans.
Ask yourself why would an open-source tool provide "cloud storage"? To bring more customers to the respective cloud provider? It's also not particularly altruistic in a FOSS sense to lock your photos into cloud plans.
[deleted]
NextCloud already offers photo sync and gallery functionality that you can self-host. 100% free and open source.
Out of all the 1s and 0s that I want backed up in the cloud for an indefinite period of time, nothing is as irreplaceable as a photo/video that will make me smile 2/5/10/20+ years from now. I'd argue that the threat of "X is shutting down" or worse, "X has shut down" but it landed in my spam 3 months ago is worse than any benefits that a non-FAANG co can offer me. At least with keeping backups on icloud/Gphotos, I know that both co's would kill those services abrubtly as their last dying wish.
I ended up simply printing my photos. This also had a positive effect on the quality - you tend to select the better ones when you are limited.
It's not just about third-party storage - I have a picture of my great-grandmother and her parents from 1898 when she was 3 in my photo album. It survived several wars, regimes, and revolutions. No current digital tech in general can provide this kind of longevity, you have to actively watch the media yourself and transfer it when it's about to expire. (which I also do for the rest, of course)
It's not just about third-party storage - I have a picture of my great-grandmother and her parents from 1898 when she was 3 in my photo album. It survived several wars, regimes, and revolutions. No current digital tech in general can provide this kind of longevity, you have to actively watch the media yourself and transfer it when it's about to expire. (which I also do for the rest, of course)
> I ended up simply printing my photos.
Your house burns down, now what?
> I have a picture of my great-grandmother and her parents from 1898 when she was 3 in my photo album. It survived several wars, regimes, and revolutions. No current digital tech in general can provide this kind of longevity
That's because digital storage didn't exist then... Now it's easier and cheaper to store media than ever before
Maybe I'm missing something in your argument, but to me it sounds naive?
Or maybe you're just in a nostalgic mood!
Your house burns down, now what?
> I have a picture of my great-grandmother and her parents from 1898 when she was 3 in my photo album. It survived several wars, regimes, and revolutions. No current digital tech in general can provide this kind of longevity
That's because digital storage didn't exist then... Now it's easier and cheaper to store media than ever before
Maybe I'm missing something in your argument, but to me it sounds naive?
Or maybe you're just in a nostalgic mood!
>Your house burns down, now what?
Nothing stops you from having redundancy in printed media. In fact, I have that photo reproduced in another album of my relatives.
>That's because digital storage didn't exist then...
What can you realistically do to keep the digital photo through 120 years or more? Imagine you stored it on the most durable media you have, M-Disc perhaps, or whatever they advertise today. Let's assume it even survived 120 years with its data intact. Are you sure your descendants will have the means to read that M-Disc in the year 2140? How about the file system on it? JPEG or DNG format? With a printed photo, you don't have to be sure.
Online storage is much more complex and thus inherently volatile. You depend on other people and on the assumption that business and legal frameworks will remain the same throughout the archival period.
Digital tech heavily depends on an unbroken chain of content transfer, which is a pretty big assumption for archival-grade storage, considering that companies, encodings and formats come and go, and there are also things like censorship and AI "enhancement" to worry about. (and who knows what else it will be many years into future) Digital media is not static by nature. Admittedly, any media depends on content refreshing, but the traditional media has much longer life between transfers - for an extreme example we still can read Sumerian clay tablets.
>Now it's easier and cheaper to store media than ever before
Storage cost was never a problem. The problem is the separation of the archival-worthy content from the info noise. Now, when the noise is multiplied, selecting is much harder than before. For my case, I only have a few photos worthy of putting into a 120-year photo album for my descendants, because I'm just an ordinary person.
Nothing stops you from having redundancy in printed media. In fact, I have that photo reproduced in another album of my relatives.
>That's because digital storage didn't exist then...
What can you realistically do to keep the digital photo through 120 years or more? Imagine you stored it on the most durable media you have, M-Disc perhaps, or whatever they advertise today. Let's assume it even survived 120 years with its data intact. Are you sure your descendants will have the means to read that M-Disc in the year 2140? How about the file system on it? JPEG or DNG format? With a printed photo, you don't have to be sure.
Online storage is much more complex and thus inherently volatile. You depend on other people and on the assumption that business and legal frameworks will remain the same throughout the archival period.
Digital tech heavily depends on an unbroken chain of content transfer, which is a pretty big assumption for archival-grade storage, considering that companies, encodings and formats come and go, and there are also things like censorship and AI "enhancement" to worry about. (and who knows what else it will be many years into future) Digital media is not static by nature. Admittedly, any media depends on content refreshing, but the traditional media has much longer life between transfers - for an extreme example we still can read Sumerian clay tablets.
>Now it's easier and cheaper to store media than ever before
Storage cost was never a problem. The problem is the separation of the archival-worthy content from the info noise. Now, when the noise is multiplied, selecting is much harder than before. For my case, I only have a few photos worthy of putting into a 120-year photo album for my descendants, because I'm just an ordinary person.
It just becomes an ongoing project. You digitize, and eventually you’re spending days converting media.
It’s like the post about digitizing VHS the other day. It gets put off until the project is overwhelming.
It’s like the post about digitizing VHS the other day. It gets put off until the project is overwhelming.
> That's because digital storage didn't exist then... Now it's easier and cheaper to store media than ever before
It may seem that way, but it's not as simple. A digitized history project in the UK made this assumption, and later worked really hard to get back at the data, [0] is a long description, the Wikipedia entry on the BBC Domesday book doesn't go into all the details. You might believe we've learned a lesson since then, but I don't.
DRM formats are creeping into everything. Right now it seems JPEGs will be usable forever, and that may be; But cultural artificats - games and videos - are already becoming hard to preserve; People only care about convenience, and I suspect a popular 3D-or-lightfield-or-something-format in the future will be similarly hard to preserve 20 years later.
Print media has two main advantages: It requires no equipment/software/license/electricity to use; and treated properly, it has been shown to last hundreds of years.
I have a couple of 20-year-old hard drives that are still mostly readable (12 bad sectors so far), and that's considered a miracle. Usenet history is disappearing, even though it doesn't take a lot of space - because it isn't in anyone's economic interest to keep it - and the same will happen to free cloud storage sooner or later.
[0] http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue/36/tna/
It may seem that way, but it's not as simple. A digitized history project in the UK made this assumption, and later worked really hard to get back at the data, [0] is a long description, the Wikipedia entry on the BBC Domesday book doesn't go into all the details. You might believe we've learned a lesson since then, but I don't.
DRM formats are creeping into everything. Right now it seems JPEGs will be usable forever, and that may be; But cultural artificats - games and videos - are already becoming hard to preserve; People only care about convenience, and I suspect a popular 3D-or-lightfield-or-something-format in the future will be similarly hard to preserve 20 years later.
Print media has two main advantages: It requires no equipment/software/license/electricity to use; and treated properly, it has been shown to last hundreds of years.
I have a couple of 20-year-old hard drives that are still mostly readable (12 bad sectors so far), and that's considered a miracle. Usenet history is disappearing, even though it doesn't take a lot of space - because it isn't in anyone's economic interest to keep it - and the same will happen to free cloud storage sooner or later.
[0] http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue/36/tna/
Just make sure archive.org keeps a copy for you and give them a donation every month! :)
[deleted]
>> I ended up simply printing my photos.
> Your house burns down, now what?
He still has the digital copy. And perhaps physical copies that were sent to relatives.
If one has both digital and physical, then either can disappear and be recreated from the other.
> Your house burns down, now what?
He still has the digital copy. And perhaps physical copies that were sent to relatives.
If one has both digital and physical, then either can disappear and be recreated from the other.
forever.com promises 100 years+.
Cool. What track record do they have, through financial crisis, world wars and natural disasters, that makes you believe this 100 year claim? And if they fail to deliver, what recourse do you have?
Personally, if Lloyd's of London offered an insured storage service, I might believe them, but I can't think of any other organization I would trust with a 100 year promise.
Personally, if Lloyd's of London offered an insured storage service, I might believe them, but I can't think of any other organization I would trust with a 100 year promise.
Depends on the level of trust you require. Family wealth or family photos - big difference. At least they state this as their objective, Dropbox does not. They also list on their website the kind of measures they have taken to try and achieve that objective.
I'm sure Lloyd would happily insure your photos 100 years. I'm not sure you have the kind of money that Lloyd would ask for that service.
permanent.org promises forever.
> Your house burns down, now what?
I am in the process of scanning paper photos and photos on glass plates, dating from 120 years ago or so. Some of them survived two world wars, and mind you surviving WWII in Poland is no small feat for a piece of paper.
So while I do agree with the general sentiment of having multiple copies and backups, our digital world is woefully short-lived when compared to physical media.
On a related note, I am working on gallery/archive software, where the main assumption is longevity: whatever the UI du jour is, actual data must be kept in the simplest and most long-term file formats possible. Which means well-established and documented "traditional" image formats, text files with metadata, etc.
I am in the process of scanning paper photos and photos on glass plates, dating from 120 years ago or so. Some of them survived two world wars, and mind you surviving WWII in Poland is no small feat for a piece of paper.
So while I do agree with the general sentiment of having multiple copies and backups, our digital world is woefully short-lived when compared to physical media.
On a related note, I am working on gallery/archive software, where the main assumption is longevity: whatever the UI du jour is, actual data must be kept in the simplest and most long-term file formats possible. Which means well-established and documented "traditional" image formats, text files with metadata, etc.
Of course you are only processing the photos that survived. Preserved artifacts are not an argument that storage technology was better back then. It is just selection bias.
Your house burns down, now what?
The odds of physical photos destroyed in a fire is far lower than a photo hosting service going out of business. There's no money in it because monitoring it for legal compliance is expensive and time consuming. Apple and Google and Facebook can do it because the monitoring has a business upside in terms of training ML models.
Physical reality is a useful abstraction.
The odds of physical photos destroyed in a fire is far lower than a photo hosting service going out of business. There's no money in it because monitoring it for legal compliance is expensive and time consuming. Apple and Google and Facebook can do it because the monitoring has a business upside in terms of training ML models.
Physical reality is a useful abstraction.
I wish I could agree, but its more likely that Google et al will either phase out the service or replace it with an inferior one. For example, a while ago Google stopped the ability to download full quality originals from the Google Photos service. Since then I have to plug in my phone every once in a while to download the originals to my computer and back them up manually.
I also remember when I left Facebook and asked for an archive of my photos, I got 800x600 images when I had uploaded much higher resolution ones. Service degradation is actually more common in FAANG because they have a massive moat and rely on the fact that 90% of their customers don't know their 1's from their 0's.
I also remember when I left Facebook and asked for an archive of my photos, I got 800x600 images when I had uploaded much higher resolution ones. Service degradation is actually more common in FAANG because they have a massive moat and rely on the fact that 90% of their customers don't know their 1's from their 0's.
What's up with this meme that Google stopped full quality downloads? I've seen it mentioned in several places, but it doesn't seem true?
I compared checksums of (recently uploaded)
1) original source images
2) result of clicking "Download" in the Web UI
3) what was contained in my most recent Takeout
And they all match. There might be issues with the API (didn't check), but that API is VERY limited anyway.
I compared checksums of (recently uploaded)
1) original source images
2) result of clicking "Download" in the Web UI
3) what was contained in my most recent Takeout
And they all match. There might be issues with the API (didn't check), but that API is VERY limited anyway.
Takeout no longer includes actual image files. Either that or it broke for me.
Someone recommended the github project called Timeliner to help me get the photos though. I just haven’t tried it yet.
Someone recommended the github project called Timeliner to help me get the photos though. I just haven’t tried it yet.
I've never heard of Timeliner. It doesn't have good Google ranking, so it was a bit buried. I think this is it:
https://github.com/mholt/timeliner
https://github.com/mholt/timeliner
Timeliner is a personal data aggregation utility.
It collects all your digital things from pretty much
anywhere and stores them on your own computer, indexes
them, and projects them onto a single, unified timeline.
Supported data sources
* Google Location History
* Google PhotosIt does. I just used it to reupload my pics to Amazon last week.
However, it has tons of metadata files, empty folders, etc. I highly suggest unticking 'preserve directory structure' when unpacking.
However, it has tons of metadata files, empty folders, etc. I highly suggest unticking 'preserve directory structure' when unpacking.
Did you use a specific guide? I’d like to try again and follow the exact same steps as you.
actually yeah, I didn't know takeout was a thing initially. Here is the site I found that sent me there -
https://www.groovypost.com/howto/migrate-google-photos-amazo...
Now, when I was just browsing the zips, it was folder after folder of junk I didn't even recognize, I guess metadata files of some sort. Rather than do all that, at least in Gnome, when I unzip it has an option of 'preserve directory structure' that I unchecked, which basically gets rid of all the folders. From there I was easily able to mass remove all the json and other non-photo files, leaving only the photos behind. Good luck.
Now, when I was just browsing the zips, it was folder after folder of junk I didn't even recognize, I guess metadata files of some sort. Rather than do all that, at least in Gnome, when I unzip it has an option of 'preserve directory structure' that I unchecked, which basically gets rid of all the folders. From there I was easily able to mass remove all the json and other non-photo files, leaving only the photos behind. Good luck.
Did you try again? Takeout is pretty flaky sometimes... especially with large libraries.
Yeah the files were like html files that had image links inside them if I remember correctly. But even those links didn’t work right.
This is because of a change they made.
I was absolutely distraught tbh. The feeling of being at the mercy of google is a horrible feeling. Especially when there is zero support or assistance.
This is because of a change they made.
I was absolutely distraught tbh. The feeling of being at the mercy of google is a horrible feeling. Especially when there is zero support or assistance.
I just did a take-out today based on your comment here.
I received links to over 100 tgz files (4GB each), and checked a couple. Each had JPG files and JSON files with extra metadata ("geoDataExif", "geoData" (inferred from my location history?), "title", "description", etc).
I can't tell if the actual images are the originals I uploaded, but I can confirm the images were archived as actual images, and in a serviceable format/structure.
I received links to over 100 tgz files (4GB each), and checked a couple. Each had JPG files and JSON files with extra metadata ("geoDataExif", "geoData" (inferred from my location history?), "title", "description", etc).
I can't tell if the actual images are the originals I uploaded, but I can confirm the images were archived as actual images, and in a serviceable format/structure.
For any iOS users that want a self hosted photo backup I can very much recommend https://www.photosync-app.com/. I set it up once years ago, never open it and still it silently backups any photo and video (original and edited) I take to WebDAV and a B2 bucket in the background, sorted in subfolders for every month.
Does it Live Photo? That’s generally the sticking point I’ve run into on any service but iCloud to do it right.
another +1 for photosync. bought it a few years ago now and it just works in the background reliably ever since. (backing up mine and my wife’s iphone photos to a synology NAS)
It’s only good for backups though. There’s no way to browse/share memories so we reluctantly still also use Amazon photos...
It’s only good for backups though. There’s no way to browse/share memories so we reluctantly still also use Amazon photos...
True, PhotoSync is definitely a back-up solution, to be used alongside a browsing solution.
Why don't you use DS Photo from Synology? It's a bit dated but you can have auto upload of pictures and browse PhotoStation. We do, at home
Thanks. Yeah I might give it a try, but...
1. It’s still a kind of vendor lock-in that I’m not crazy about
2. I’m generally underwhelmed by the synology apps (eg music) and prefer docker based foss alternatives when available
3. I was reading somewhere about DS moments (after another mention on this post) and I think they require a special folder structure?
1. It’s still a kind of vendor lock-in that I’m not crazy about
2. I’m generally underwhelmed by the synology apps (eg music) and prefer docker based foss alternatives when available
3. I was reading somewhere about DS moments (after another mention on this post) and I think they require a special folder structure?
1. Yeah i understand. Something more free/libre would have been a better choice. On the other hand I also like that it's quite "complete" so i don't have a lot of chances of screwing it up
2. Yeah, I only use DS Photo for backup / browsing on my phone. And Drive to replace Dropbox.
3. Not entirely sure about DS moments, as i use Photostation. In there it's basically each folder is an album (or sub/album).
2. Yeah, I only use DS Photo for backup / browsing on my phone. And Drive to replace Dropbox.
3. Not entirely sure about DS moments, as i use Photostation. In there it's basically each folder is an album (or sub/album).
How do you talk to webdav ? what client ?
PhotoSync talks to WebDAV natively. When I want to access those backups from my Mac I use Forklift (https://binarynights.com/) but even Finder and Windows Explorer can browse WebDAV storage natively.
Yes and no. Backups that you control (physically, technically, and legally) are the only complete mitigation against someone else losing your digital memories. That applies to a FAANG as well as a startup, although startups are far more likely to just flame out as you say.
I didn't mean to imply that FAANG cloud storage completely mitigates the risk of memories being lost or debate about how to minimize the likelihood through means such as owning the hard drive or inscribing the data on titanium disks stored in vacuum-sealed cannisters.
This is just about choosing a cloud storage provider that I can feel reasonably confident will still have my photos backed up on any given day for the foreseeable future.
This is just about choosing a cloud storage provider that I can feel reasonably confident will still have my photos backed up on any given day for the foreseeable future.
Yes, I agree with you that given the choice between some random company and a FAANG for cloud storage, choose the FAANG.
I dont know, I wouldn't recommend using Facebook or Instagram as backup, and even services like Microsofts One drive have been known to dissapear files. A 'dumb' WebDAV service makes it easy to move data in and out, enabling hedging. Or a company like Backblaze, which has no other monetisation scheme and thus no interest other than keeping your bits safe.
I think you can make much better choices than FAANG or a random company, and I advise anyone to go with that better choice.
I think you can make much better choices than FAANG or a random company, and I advise anyone to go with that better choice.
Indeed. This is my fear. Let's see where Stingle is in 5 years time, but I'm not going to rely on and be inconvenienced by a shutdown of another startup in this space. Photos/Videos are priceless.
I remember storing photos on fotki.com some years ago based on a recommendation. From a colleague. Functionally it was a good platform. After some years I wanted to download and they wanted to charge me $500 for access to my files. I ended up relying on local backup but the experience gave me chills that my photos were being held hostage.
Did you report them? Seems quite illegal, at least definitly against eu customer rights iirc to not list that charge anywhere and deny you your personal data.
No I did not. This was some years back before gdpr . They did not deny data, simply asked premium for my originals. I deleted account and moved on, since I had local copies, which took some time to locate among all the hard drives, but I did locate eventually.
I agree with your sentiment, but this actually highlights just how necessary it is to not solely trust the large players with our personal memories; by relying on a single, walled garden to play host for our memories, we're increasing our dependence on the larger players. Data privacy concerns aside, what happens if they decide to change the terms of service in a way thats unappealing, or the product itself? Or even lock us out of their service?
Far better IMO to not rely on a single provider, especially in the case of backups.
Far better IMO to not rely on a single provider, especially in the case of backups.
Same here, but what is the best way to backup my GPhotos Library for the inevitable google account closure?
I'd recommend you check out rclone. It's a command line tool, so you'd need to be comfortable in the terminal.
https://rclone.org/
It comes with an adapter for Google Photos, so you can use it to download / backup photos and videos in your library.
Note: there are some limitations to this approach – namely that rclone won't be able to download your original image files, even if you uploaded with 'original' quality. These limitations are documented on the rclone website: https://rclone.org/googlephotos/
https://rclone.org/
It comes with an adapter for Google Photos, so you can use it to download / backup photos and videos in your library.
Note: there are some limitations to this approach – namely that rclone won't be able to download your original image files, even if you uploaded with 'original' quality. These limitations are documented on the rclone website: https://rclone.org/googlephotos/
I use this for photos:
https://github.com/dtylman/gitmoo-goog
I have it run via a cron job and backup files to a local folder.
I also use this to backup my gmail account: https://github.com/jay0lee/got-your-back
I store these on a local OpenSuse box I use as a NAS. It has a local drive, with a 2nd drive that is mounted and synced to weekly. Then the important stuff is rsynced offsite to a cloud server, rsync for pictures and other various "family" stuff. Borg for home drives with more private information.
That internal drive I backup to, runs btrfs. After backup is complete. I take a snapshot and keep a monthly one going back at least a year.
I have it run via a cron job and backup files to a local folder.
I also use this to backup my gmail account: https://github.com/jay0lee/got-your-back
I store these on a local OpenSuse box I use as a NAS. It has a local drive, with a 2nd drive that is mounted and synced to weekly. Then the important stuff is rsynced offsite to a cloud server, rsync for pictures and other various "family" stuff. Borg for home drives with more private information.
That internal drive I backup to, runs btrfs. After backup is complete. I take a snapshot and keep a monthly one going back at least a year.
I've tried gitmoo-goog now. It's downloaded only compressed or even resolution reduced versions of all my photos and videos.
Does not really seem fit for purpose. I'll be looking into it if I can update it.
Does not really seem fit for purpose. I'll be looking into it if I can update it.
I use Syncthing to copy from my phone to my ZFS NAS. The phone also backs up to Google Photos (Pixel phone). From there I import them into a Lightroom catalog (looking at DigiKam though) and move the photos to a ZFS dataset that has auto snapshots enabled (accidental deletions, malware protection, etc) and is on a RAIDZ2 pool (survives two drive failures).
From there RClone encrypts and copies them to AWS Glacier Deep Archive (11 9s, etc). I'll also start coping them to Google Workspace (was GSuite).
This removes a lot of product change risks such as Google APIs not returning the original files, etc. AWS Glacier is secure and cheap unless I have to restore. If I'm doing a full restore it's likely that's the cheapest option so then I don't care.
Glacier Deep Archive works out to about $1/TB/month and because it's paid per GB it removes the risks of a company changing plans or some "unlimited but not really" problem.
One piece of advice, think about your local disaster risks. I'm in an earthquake risk area. I ruled out most off-site backup options that involved moving drives around due to those all being in my same disaster area and costs of bank boxes etc.
From there RClone encrypts and copies them to AWS Glacier Deep Archive (11 9s, etc). I'll also start coping them to Google Workspace (was GSuite).
This removes a lot of product change risks such as Google APIs not returning the original files, etc. AWS Glacier is secure and cheap unless I have to restore. If I'm doing a full restore it's likely that's the cheapest option so then I don't care.
Glacier Deep Archive works out to about $1/TB/month and because it's paid per GB it removes the risks of a company changing plans or some "unlimited but not really" problem.
One piece of advice, think about your local disaster risks. I'm in an earthquake risk area. I ruled out most off-site backup options that involved moving drives around due to those all being in my same disaster area and costs of bank boxes etc.
After spending too much time on it now, the Google Photos API Limitations (only compressed files via the API, EXIF Data not complete) are what really rubs me the wrong way. I've turned on Takeout Backup Creation every 2 months now and expect to just flatout pump these files into Glacier, while retaining a local copy of the latest version on a NAS here, but this is really a sad state of affairs.
Is iCloud better for this?
As Google Photos is my main usecase for being stuck in the Google Ecosystem, is this situation better with the iCloud?
Is iCloud better for this?
As Google Photos is my main usecase for being stuck in the Google Ecosystem, is this situation better with the iCloud?
[deleted]
I was recommended the github project “timeliner”. I’m open to other ideas though!
Both timeliner and rclone (which are both great projects) are at the mercy of the Google photos api, which removes GPS metadata and elides the majority of other tags. Even something as critical as the captured-at time can get modified from the original.
(Source: my personal experience with Google Pixel "original quality" backups, and providing customer support to several hundred PhotoStructure beta testers).
(Source: my personal experience with Google Pixel "original quality" backups, and providing customer support to several hundred PhotoStructure beta testers).
This is exactly the reason I recently chose to move all my photos to Adobe Creative Cloud and also keep them backed up to multiple separate locations. Almost all other data I can recreate (even if it took years) but the memories I have through photos and videos are irreplaceable.
How do you back them up to separate locations? Do you use some kind of adobe application or script to sync?
If you delete something from the Adobe cloud, is it deleted from your backups too?
What do you use for sharing albums with friends?
What do you use for displaying photos on a TV?
If you delete something from the Adobe cloud, is it deleted from your backups too?
What do you use for sharing albums with friends?
What do you use for displaying photos on a TV?
I have one computer which always has all originals locally available. That computer is backed up with borg to three separate borg repos (1 local, 2 remote).
I use iCloud photos for sharing with friends and family.
I use iCloud photos for sharing with friends and family.
Exporting photos from GPhotos is quite a pain.
A takeout request can take "a few weeks", during which you just can't download them.
Google has also had too many cases of banning accounts with no recourse. I'd be scared for it to be my only backup of something so treasured.
A takeout request can take "a few weeks", during which you just can't download them.
Google has also had too many cases of banning accounts with no recourse. I'd be scared for it to be my only backup of something so treasured.
This looks great, they have some nice properties. If you're interested in this you'll probably also be interested in Peergos [1][2] (disclaimer: I'm a co-founder), which has stronger privacy properties.
Peergos is an E2EE P2P global filesystem built on top of IPFS, and we have a built in photo/video/audio gallery/player (and other apps too). We don't expose the social graph (who is sharing with who) to the server, and we also obscure things like the number of files, number of directories, size of individual files, even whether something is a directory or file. We are also designed to be resistant to exposure by a quantum computer (mainly we don't rely on asymmetric encryption for privacy, only for sharing, and even for sharing we take measures to protect against a future quantum computer). We also don't rely on DNS or the TLS certificate authorities for security (unless you choose to use the web interface to a public server). We do fine-grained server-less access control using a structure called cryptree [3].
It's P2P so you can mirror your data as many times as you like or just self-host. It's also 100% open source, both client side and server side.
[1] https://peergos.org
[2] https://github.com/peergos/peergos
[3] https://book.peergos.org/security/cryptree.html
Peergos is an E2EE P2P global filesystem built on top of IPFS, and we have a built in photo/video/audio gallery/player (and other apps too). We don't expose the social graph (who is sharing with who) to the server, and we also obscure things like the number of files, number of directories, size of individual files, even whether something is a directory or file. We are also designed to be resistant to exposure by a quantum computer (mainly we don't rely on asymmetric encryption for privacy, only for sharing, and even for sharing we take measures to protect against a future quantum computer). We also don't rely on DNS or the TLS certificate authorities for security (unless you choose to use the web interface to a public server). We do fine-grained server-less access control using a structure called cryptree [3].
It's P2P so you can mirror your data as many times as you like or just self-host. It's also 100% open source, both client side and server side.
[1] https://peergos.org
[2] https://github.com/peergos/peergos
[3] https://book.peergos.org/security/cryptree.html
What's your alternative for DNS/CAs? Let's say someone wanted to host the source code for youtube-dl. How would that look on Peergos, and would it be an improvement over the current system?
It is effectively routing by public key - similar to how a Tor hidden service doesn't require DNS or TLS CAs for you to connect securely to it. The underlying tech we use is p2p streams in libp2p (part of IPFS) which allow you to dial a public key. The actual IPs of the node are looked up in a DHT, and then the connection can be authenticated without a CA because you already have the public key (the stream itself is TLS1.3). Any file/dir chunk in Peergos has an address which has 3 parts (owner public key, writer public key, and a random 32 byte label). Most data is content addressed, so no need for location based addressing at all. Modifications need to be routed to the owners storage server, which is done using the p2p stream method just described.
Thanks for the reply. That answers the technical side of it, but I'm more interested in whether you could use Peergos to build a censorship-resistant system that still allows easy collaboration. It's a problem I have yet to see solved.
It depends what kind of censorship you're trying to fight against, but we can already do that to a certain degree. You can grant other users read or write access to individual files/folders, and as long as you can reach them (their storage server) over a p2p stream (which could be over the LAN for example, or any protocol that libp2p supports) you can collaborate.
Is there something like this but self-hosted? Data encrypted on the client with a good client for Android (and maybe Linux), simple sharing feature for selected items.
Free/Libre Google Photos, basically.
Free/Libre Google Photos, basically.
It's not quite free/libre, but I was positively surprised by Synology Moments.
It's basically a software package on the Synology NAS which creates a locally hosted version of Google Photos (including sharing and gallery capability). It comes with Android/iOS apps that can automatically backups all photos directly to your NAS and thus stay in your own ownership.
There is a cost of entrance though - you need to buy the NAS and harddrives... but IMO there's nothing quite like owning your own data.
It's basically a software package on the Synology NAS which creates a locally hosted version of Google Photos (including sharing and gallery capability). It comes with Android/iOS apps that can automatically backups all photos directly to your NAS and thus stay in your own ownership.
There is a cost of entrance though - you need to buy the NAS and harddrives... but IMO there's nothing quite like owning your own data.
I absolutely love my Synology NAS. The photos function and the Video one especially. Being able to access all the videos on my NAS from any computer/phone/tablet in the house and have them transcode in real-time to suit the device, and/or cast them to our TVs. It’s great.
Synology has built in sharing over the public web, right? How have ya'll found that functionality to work? Can you just share files and folders with any email address, or does the person you're sharing with have to have a Synology account?
there's nothing quite like owning your own data
Sure, but I already have servers and terabytes of storage. Also, I don't want to keep a server/NAS at home. I want it sitting on a big, fat pipe in some DC with professionals maintaining it.
Sure, but I already have servers and terabytes of storage. Also, I don't want to keep a server/NAS at home. I want it sitting on a big, fat pipe in some DC with professionals maintaining it.
100% agree. But I'm using the "old" PhotoStation instead of Moments. It feels too much like Google Photos where all pictures are bundled, and I like to have "Albums" or folders that are separate. But i use it also for just regular camera photography, not just phone where it makes more sense to have a timeline. Hard to have a useful timeline when I take 1000 pictures in a weekend with my Fuji
Maybe something listed here?
https://github.com/awesome-selfhosted/awesome-selfhosted#pho...
https://github.com/awesome-selfhosted/awesome-selfhosted#pho...
I've been following OwnPhotos' (sporadic) development for a while: https://github.com/hooram/ownphotos
Woah via 'project abandoned' issue there, where some contributors have been discussing forking and continuing (but nothing happening yet in nearly a year of that), I just came across https://github.com/photoprism/photoprism - seems great, further along, and more used (as measured by GitHub stars..).
https://github.com/photoprism/photoprism
Best google photos clone I've come across so far.
Best google photos clone I've come across so far.
Yes this team is great. They also plan to offer their own hosting services.
I started using Photostructure[0] which is still in Beta and rough around the edges but its sole creator seem really dedicated and committed to it. No affiliation apart from using it and giving feedback.
EDIT: no E2EE or mobile support, it’s web based. It is self hosted with a privacy focus.
[0] https://photostructure.com/
EDIT: no E2EE or mobile support, it’s web based. It is self hosted with a privacy focus.
[0] https://photostructure.com/
Howdy! Have you had a chance to update to version 0.9 yet? Sync was reworked and mobile support was improved: https://photostructure.com/about/v-0-9/
If you ever find anything odd, confusing, or buggy, please tell me, I'll try to get it addressed asap.
If you ever find anything odd, confusing, or buggy, please tell me, I'll try to get it addressed asap.
I recently installed and started using this:
https://github.com/LycheeOrg/Lychee
It doesn't have a load of features, but I expect to be using this for my own pictures from now on. You can create albums and select which users have access to which albums.
I use a non-free self hosted app called PhotoStructure https://photostructure.com/. It is currently in beta and I hope to see it grow in features in the future, mainly sharing. It feels a lot like Google Photos or Apple Photos. What I like is it presents all of my photos (which I took with my mirrorless camera) in a neat presentation with a random sample––I’ve re-discovered so many memories this way.
OwnCloud / NextCloud? I haven't used either but would be interested to hear from any folks who have.
Nextcloud works well. The web-based gallery UI isn't great, and the phone UI isn't great, but if you're looking for a way to self-host everything, share with family, etc. it's a good solution. You can always run a better self-hosted gallery on the web side, and mount the Nextcloud storage right into it. Nextcloud's Android client, while minimalist, has some surprising and useful features. It integrates well with the rest of Android, so you can browse and select photos from Nextcloud to e.g. upload to Facebook, and most-surprisingly, you can have your phone automatically upload photos and videos to Nextcloud when you take them, so that you don't have to do anything manually. Overall, Nextcloud is surprisingly good for photos.
I use Nextcloud, run it on a dedicated server at home running FreeBSD.
My wife and I use it exclusively to auto-backup our mobile photos.
With that in mind, I'd say that yes it works, but is it the right tool? Not really.
First, we don't use the web stuff at all, the app isn't great when it comes to choosing what, how and to which folders things should be synced. It is however useful that I can share my auto-upload folder with my wife's account so she can print the photos I take of our baby daughter, she's almost exclusively the subject of our mobile photographs these days.
Finally, you're almost guaranteed to break it every few updates. I've spent several evening over the past couple of years recovering from updates. Much of this is likely down to my lack of knowledge of FreeBSD, but honestly, it shouldn't be breaking in the first place.
I began writing something in something in Golang, that would use microservices to read out exit data, generate thumbnails and provide APIs to give family members custom photo frames we could push photos to. Unfortunately I haven't had the motivation to continue working on it.
I'll keep looking for something else with good Android apps, preferably written in Golang so it's lean and easy to update that'll do the backup/sharing.
My wife and I use it exclusively to auto-backup our mobile photos.
With that in mind, I'd say that yes it works, but is it the right tool? Not really.
First, we don't use the web stuff at all, the app isn't great when it comes to choosing what, how and to which folders things should be synced. It is however useful that I can share my auto-upload folder with my wife's account so she can print the photos I take of our baby daughter, she's almost exclusively the subject of our mobile photographs these days.
Finally, you're almost guaranteed to break it every few updates. I've spent several evening over the past couple of years recovering from updates. Much of this is likely down to my lack of knowledge of FreeBSD, but honestly, it shouldn't be breaking in the first place.
I began writing something in something in Golang, that would use microservices to read out exit data, generate thumbnails and provide APIs to give family members custom photo frames we could push photos to. Unfortunately I haven't had the motivation to continue working on it.
I'll keep looking for something else with good Android apps, preferably written in Golang so it's lean and easy to update that'll do the backup/sharing.
Adding my 2 cents on how I approach storing important family photos:
1. Minimize footprint. Keep only the photos that matter; this usually ends up being the ones with you or a loved one in the picture. I spent a weekend consolidating and reduced all my photos for the last 20 years down to 15GB.
2. Use 1 consumer-grade service like Google Photos for easy day-to-day access and sharing; just makes life easier for you and your loved ones to access memories on-demand. This can be substituted with any privacy-friendly alternative or young service like Stingle.
3. Use 1 business-grade storage solution for an off-site backup. Business-grade is critical b/c it enhances the relationship and SLA the provider gives you. I use AWS S3 Glacier Deep Archive; it's free to upload, cheap to store ($0.00099/GB/month), and a bit pricey to retrieve ($0.09/GB for egress). This is my last-resort/lifeline if everything else goes wrong and I need to get my data again. To save on per-file upload fees, I zip up pictures by album or year and use 7Zip or Keka to encrypt the zip with a password using AES-256 for added privacy. Also remember, AWS is creating at least 3 copies of your data across 3 AZs in one region!
4. Keep a copy of the pictures at home on an NAS, hard drive, or better yet your computer if you have the space. I already use Time Machine to auto backup my entire Mac on an external drive so this gives me in total 2 copies of my pictures (one on laptop and one on time machine backup).
In total this gives me 6 total copies of my pictures:
- 1x Off-site Google Photos
- 3x Off-site AWS S3 Glacier Deep Archive
- 1x On-site Laptop
- 1x On-site Laptop's Time Machine Backup
I'm not too concerned if one service provider loses my pics or revokes my access; plenty more copies!
Please remember this only works if you religiously follow step 1. This will be an expensive and almost impractical setup if you enjoy holding onto 5TB+ worth of photos.
1. Minimize footprint. Keep only the photos that matter; this usually ends up being the ones with you or a loved one in the picture. I spent a weekend consolidating and reduced all my photos for the last 20 years down to 15GB.
2. Use 1 consumer-grade service like Google Photos for easy day-to-day access and sharing; just makes life easier for you and your loved ones to access memories on-demand. This can be substituted with any privacy-friendly alternative or young service like Stingle.
3. Use 1 business-grade storage solution for an off-site backup. Business-grade is critical b/c it enhances the relationship and SLA the provider gives you. I use AWS S3 Glacier Deep Archive; it's free to upload, cheap to store ($0.00099/GB/month), and a bit pricey to retrieve ($0.09/GB for egress). This is my last-resort/lifeline if everything else goes wrong and I need to get my data again. To save on per-file upload fees, I zip up pictures by album or year and use 7Zip or Keka to encrypt the zip with a password using AES-256 for added privacy. Also remember, AWS is creating at least 3 copies of your data across 3 AZs in one region!
4. Keep a copy of the pictures at home on an NAS, hard drive, or better yet your computer if you have the space. I already use Time Machine to auto backup my entire Mac on an external drive so this gives me in total 2 copies of my pictures (one on laptop and one on time machine backup).
In total this gives me 6 total copies of my pictures:
- 1x Off-site Google Photos
- 3x Off-site AWS S3 Glacier Deep Archive
- 1x On-site Laptop
- 1x On-site Laptop's Time Machine Backup
I'm not too concerned if one service provider loses my pics or revokes my access; plenty more copies!
Please remember this only works if you religiously follow step 1. This will be an expensive and almost impractical setup if you enjoy holding onto 5TB+ worth of photos.
Okay but how does this relate to the topic? Could you swap this product for the one you currently use for the second point, is that what you're saying? You seem to be advertising for a Google alternative in a thread about encrypted open source photo storage? I'm confused.
If you care about backing up your photos (and other media), for an indefinite period of time, the Perkeep (https://perkeep.org/) (earlier Camlistore) is very relevant.
> Perkeep (née Camlistore) is a set of open source formats, protocols, and software for modeling, storing, searching, sharing and synchronizing data in the post-PC era. Data may be files or objects, tweets or 5TB videos, and you can access it via a phone, browser or FUSE filesystem.
Edit Downvoted? I don't understand. Perkeep contains the same functionality as the post, but much more, is much more mature, and is totally open source (not like the posted software, where the important core, the server, is closed source).
> Perkeep (née Camlistore) is a set of open source formats, protocols, and software for modeling, storing, searching, sharing and synchronizing data in the post-PC era. Data may be files or objects, tweets or 5TB videos, and you can access it via a phone, browser or FUSE filesystem.
Edit Downvoted? I don't understand. Perkeep contains the same functionality as the post, but much more, is much more mature, and is totally open source (not like the posted software, where the important core, the server, is closed source).
I didn’t downvote, but I checked it out and see that it’s at version 0.10 and the last update was more than two years ago. The combination of these two don’t inspire much confidence for me.
There’s a psychological barrier for pre 1.0 releases that must be handled in any serious project.
There’s a psychological barrier for pre 1.0 releases that must be handled in any serious project.
Ok, that's maybe fair, if you have not heard of it before. You might have heard of the main developer, Brad Fitzpatrick (https://github.com/bradfitz).
Anyway, your argument was discussed very recently here: https://github.com/perkeep/perkeep/issues/1307
Perkeep was also a couple of times on HN before, e.g.: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18008240
This is an interesting overview/comparison to maybe understand a bit better about the goals: https://perkeep.org/doc/compare
And this: https://github.com/perkeep/perkeep/blob/master/doc/overview....
Anyway, your argument was discussed very recently here: https://github.com/perkeep/perkeep/issues/1307
Perkeep was also a couple of times on HN before, e.g.: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18008240
This is an interesting overview/comparison to maybe understand a bit better about the goals: https://perkeep.org/doc/compare
And this: https://github.com/perkeep/perkeep/blob/master/doc/overview....
The server side doesn't seem to be free software, am I missing something?
It isn't no. In their telegram group they said they want to keep it closed for now to make it easier to monetize.
Their argument is that all the relevant cryptography happens client-side.
Looks like the server component is not open source? It doesn't look like it would be hard to write an open source backend.
I use Dropbox and a second copy backend up to my personal server (via Dropbox cli) for photos. Owning that data is too important for me to use a random service accessable only via a phone app.
I use Dropbox and a second copy backend up to my personal server (via Dropbox cli) for photos. Owning that data is too important for me to use a random service accessable only via a phone app.
I cannot find a real postal contact address anywhere.
Not even on their github, blog or privacy policy you can find any names or addresses..
What conclusion do you draw from this?
I'm curious because it's pretty easy to find a postal address for any giant company, however what will you gain from it?
I'm curious because it's pretty easy to find a postal address for any giant company, however what will you gain from it?
You'd at least know what jurisdiction the service is located in. If you run a company like that that wants to take care of people's private and most valuable data you should put as much information of you out there to gain trust.
This seems to be their founder/CEO: https://www.amiryan.org/ (at least, says so on his GH profile: https://github.com/alexamiryan )
try finding any type of contact information, a name, an email, a company name. There is nothing.
What I gain is trust, without it, I have suspicion.
What I gain is trust, without it, I have suspicion.
Looks nice. I spent ages trying to find a solution that does a nice mix of cross platform, own hard drive, cloud. I eventually found it in the shape of https://mylio.com/
Along lines of other comments here, none of my other material has even like the same value as my family photos, so I'm stupendously careful with redundancy / multi location backup.
In case anyone cares: local HDD attached to Mac, Synology on local network, folder on there synced to Dropbox and finally Synology C2. Too far I know, but it's worth it.
Mylio is fast, clever (has a nice P2P model for in-network syncing), doesn't have to hit any cloud service if you don't want it to, good search, great management tools. I rate it highly.
Along lines of other comments here, none of my other material has even like the same value as my family photos, so I'm stupendously careful with redundancy / multi location backup.
In case anyone cares: local HDD attached to Mac, Synology on local network, folder on there synced to Dropbox and finally Synology C2. Too far I know, but it's worth it.
Mylio is fast, clever (has a nice P2P model for in-network syncing), doesn't have to hit any cloud service if you don't want it to, good search, great management tools. I rate it highly.
Great, but client's not opensource...
I'm missing a desktop application so I can also browse my pictures from my desktop. Which also has the added benifit that it syncs to local disk which creates an additional backup (plus one more if you include the desktop backup itself).
I am in the market for exactly something like this (aka a cloud based photo gallery.) I currently use Flickr, but they have a mountain of issues and they're also closed source/not encrypted. Unfortunately the pricing does turn me off a bit. For up to 300gb of photos, you'd pay the same as Flickr, but I happen to have slightly north of 300gb and so I'd pay more than double the price of Flickr. And Flickr offers unlimited storage...
What I'd really love is something I can self host. OwnPhotos seems super cool, but apparently it's not stable yet. Are there any alternatives that can be run today?
What I'd really love is something I can self host. OwnPhotos seems super cool, but apparently it's not stable yet. Are there any alternatives that can be run today?
This looks amazing. I'm so grateful for these alternatives popping up.
All we need is to have it be interoperable with something like http://CoBox.cloud (a distributed, encrypted, offline-enabled data hosting cloud platform) and we can set up our own fully encrypted, NSA-impenetrable/surveillance-less cooperative community servers/'cloud'.
In other words, we would benefit from the same economies of scale and low maintance costs that the existing FAANG server farms benefit from, without the invasive privacy transgressions from big corps.
All we need is to have it be interoperable with something like http://CoBox.cloud (a distributed, encrypted, offline-enabled data hosting cloud platform) and we can set up our own fully encrypted, NSA-impenetrable/surveillance-less cooperative community servers/'cloud'.
In other words, we would benefit from the same economies of scale and low maintance costs that the existing FAANG server farms benefit from, without the invasive privacy transgressions from big corps.
Yeah cobox rules. Especially the functionality to seed data that you don’t have access to.
Their documentation is super nice too.
Their documentation is super nice too.
This doesn't look to be effectively end to end encrypted for album sharing. There is no way to verify the identity of the people you are sharing with so the provider can trivially MITM the keys.
Mobile Apps are open source, this is not an self hosted solution.
I wonder if the iOS app is really "coming soon" as the last commit is from July
Take back control of your photos and videos privacy. Available in Google Play and App Store.
It would be easier to believe if F-Droid was also listed.
It would be easier to believe if F-Droid was also listed.
It's just added to IzzyOnDroid repo[0]. But that's not a real thing...
...which is work in progress[1]
0: https://android.izzysoft.de/repo/apk/org.stingle.photos
1: https://gitlab.com/fdroid/rfp/-/issues/1191
...which is work in progress[1]
0: https://android.izzysoft.de/repo/apk/org.stingle.photos
1: https://gitlab.com/fdroid/rfp/-/issues/1191
Shameless plug: I found Stingle to lack a few basic features (multi device sync, memories, location search, effortless sharing etc) and have been building an alternative[1]. If this is a problem you’d like to see solved, please sign up for the beta program, I’d be grateful!
[1]: https://ente.io
[1]: https://ente.io
I find the design / visual style an unusual choice: it's the same theme/style use by Google ("Material"?).
Styling the app to look like a Google-app is an unusual choice. I've developed a rejection of thing that use this style, mostly since they're always apps actually made by Google.
If you tailor to people trying to move away from google, trying to look like google might not transmit the best impression.
Styling the app to look like a Google-app is an unusual choice. I've developed a rejection of thing that use this style, mostly since they're always apps actually made by Google.
If you tailor to people trying to move away from google, trying to look like google might not transmit the best impression.
The MVP was built using the default widgets, hence the Material-istic interface on the Android demo. I will eventually get a design overhaul done. Thanks for the feedback!
Hm, neither of these appear to support self-hosting the server/data component? That's what I'd be most interested in as an alternative to eg: Google photos.
I had started ente.io as a self-hosted project, but soon realized that to appeal to a larger audience, and to pay rent while working on this full time, I’ve to ship a cloud based solution first.
Maintaining a self hosted alternative in parallel requires bandwidth which I currently lack.
Once the product is mature and has sufficient traction, it would be in my best interest to open source the server.
Maintaining a self hosted alternative in parallel requires bandwidth which I currently lack.
Once the product is mature and has sufficient traction, it would be in my best interest to open source the server.
Fair enough - I couldn't tell from looking that the server might end up open sourced - maybe I didn't look carefully enough?
I'd love set of protocols, client and server that combined self-host with cloud - ie: I could self host a shard/mirror for my data, while paying someone for a service too. That way supporting development and have an option in case the project shuts down.
I'll look into https://github.com/photoprism/photoprism for now, I think. Looks like it provides the minimum I need (self host, à way to upload dslr photos, an Android client for mobile pictures).
I'd love set of protocols, client and server that combined self-host with cloud - ie: I could self host a shard/mirror for my data, while paying someone for a service too. That way supporting development and have an option in case the project shuts down.
I'll look into https://github.com/photoprism/photoprism for now, I think. Looks like it provides the minimum I need (self host, à way to upload dslr photos, an Android client for mobile pictures).
In the unfortunate scenario where in I’ve to shut down ente.io, I’d definitely open source every bit of code I’ve written so that my efforts wouldn’t be in vain. But I’d understand your skepticism.
If you are keen on self hosting, I’d also recommend checking out Piwigo[1] which is actively maintained.
[1]: https://piwigo.org
If you are keen on self hosting, I’d also recommend checking out Piwigo[1] which is actively maintained.
[1]: https://piwigo.org
Thanks, it looks like a mature project. But given the choice, I'd rather go with golang (photoprism) on the back-end rather than php.
The E2E syncing is something I'm really looking for.
But bundling a photo viewer/gallery just seems like a bit of bloat to me. I'm love to see an app that does syncing and only syncing.
But bundling a photo viewer/gallery just seems like a bit of bloat to me. I'm love to see an app that does syncing and only syncing.
Does any one know of a solution like this that also supports face detection and automatic scene/object recognition? That are the killer features that are currently keeping me at Google Photos but I really don't like the privacy implications of using it.
I just do a regular adb pull, sort pictures in folders by date using exif, then review them and add mnemonic suffixes to folders, then backup to local storage and to cloud with encrypted restic. Yes, it is a bit of a hassle, but I feel like I own these photos.
Great alternatives, but without selfhosting it's just the other bad alternative.
> We are strong proponents of open source software and we believe that trust comes from transparency and openness, that’s why Stingle Photos is an open source software released under GPLv3 license. Everyone is free to review, audit, and contribute to the Stingle Photos codebase. Source code transparency is an absolute requirement for security and privacy oriented software solutions like Stingle Photos.
Only the client software is Free Software, the server component has not been released, in source or object form.
That sort of calls this whole paragraph into question.
Only the client software is Free Software, the server component has not been released, in source or object form.
That sort of calls this whole paragraph into question.
I use NAS for my photos since I wouldn't trust any cloud even if the photos are encrypted.
As for an organizer, nothing has replaced Picasa and it's a shame Google didn't open source it.
As for an organizer, nothing has replaced Picasa and it's a shame Google didn't open source it.
Why wouldn't you trust it if you encrypted them yourself? Are you afraid they'll break the encryption, lose the data, or collect other data such as when you upload?
I have an unhealthy mistrust of online storage, especially with something as personal as photographs. I started taking digital photos in 2000 and have digital video as well.
Would this Google Archive storage class be a good place to backup photos/videos to? it costs $1.23 per TB per month!
https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/storage-data-transfer...
https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/storage-data-transfer...
Looks quite good to me - Are there any european/general alternatives?
I have a Mac and I have Office 365 with its free 1TB storage.
My photo library location is on OneDrive and my phone stream is synced to the Mac.
My Mac is also backed up to NAS.
So my pics are in two different physical locations and one offsite. I guess I should have an external drive that I make regular backups to and then take offsite somewhere as well.
My photo library location is on OneDrive and my phone stream is synced to the Mac.
My Mac is also backed up to NAS.
So my pics are in two different physical locations and one offsite. I guess I should have an external drive that I make regular backups to and then take offsite somewhere as well.
Nice to see xchacha20poly1305 and x25519.
You are in time to add native support for Android TV, there is not even a native Google Photo app for Android TV and this could be a great addition.
*Some people would suggest side load it but your app needs to be compatible with remote control and TV layout.
*Some people would suggest side load it but your app needs to be compatible with remote control and TV layout.
Sadly the mobile app I use (Cryptomator) isn't open source but the encryption system used is, and it allows doing an automatic backup to an encrypted volume that can be synced in the cloud.
I want Picasa + Web Gallery
I miss the excellent facial tagging that Picasa offered and none of these solutions offers any facial tags.
I miss the excellent facial tagging that Picasa offered and none of these solutions offers any facial tags.
Surprised that nobody is mentioning MediaMonkey. What are your experiences?
I see .org and I assume there’s some element of Libre software at play here in terms of the spirit of what you’ve developed.
By that I mean to say that I looked at this and thought “great, an O/S backup solution for a NAS” as opposed to a paid-only service akin to a multitude of others.
By that I mean to say that I looked at this and thought “great, an O/S backup solution for a NAS” as opposed to a paid-only service akin to a multitude of others.
Open-source, but Android or iPhone only?
Very grateful for this work, will be checking it out ASAP. Pricing is on the high side, I would say, but the openness could make up for it.
Not on F-Droid? https://f-droid.org/
There is an open issue on GitHub tracking this: https://github.com/stingle/stingle-photos-android/issues/16
Mega.nz also does this, 50GB for free.
I use Apple's iCloud with a 2TB plan as my primary. I back it up with Google One's 2TB family plan where we have a common family photos (wife, and I)and my 11-year old daughter learning to shoot. The Google Photos is more because Apple has no correct implementation of sharing/collaborating between the family members.
- Stingle is costlier than Apple or Google's plan.
- It does not say anywhere that this is open source and I can host it myself, plugged in with a storage such as AWS S3 or Wasabi or any other cloud that I can backup/store etc.
So far, NextCloud[1] seems to be the best bet with PhotoSync[2] keeping a local/cloud backup. I need the ability to share photos with an expansive network of families/relatives on different platforms such as Android, Windows, Mac, Linux.
I haven't found any other services and am beginning to believe I have a weird and different needs than most.
1. https://nextcloud.com
2. https://www.photosync-app.com/