Comment by phoronixrly
1 year ago
Terrible search without AI is a bit of a stretch. Also Google does not have a monopoly on object/face recognition in photos. There are self-hosted solutions that readily provide you with that without feeding a faceless AI with your photos while boiling the ocean.
> Terrible search without AI is a bit of a stretch.
How so? I was looking for a photo of a grave I took some years ago. In Google photos I just searched for "grave" and if found 2 photos, including the one I wanted.
Without AI I would have to search all my photos. Maybe I could narrow it down by date and location but it would take a lot longer.
I've been playing with LLama 3.2 Vision 8B for such a use-case, and found it does a good job at providing image descriptions which could be indexed, along with transcription of any text in the image, such as the name on the grave in this case.
So should be possible to have a similar capability locally now.
> LLama 3.2 Vision 8B
Brainfart, that should of course be LLama 3.2 Vision 11B. Keep mixing up the model sizes.
I have 100s of grave photos. Browsing by location would be way simpler
Same, albums/rough location + time is more than enough for me with 20 years worth of photos... It is far from terrible.
Could you please tell some? I am about to switch to a self-hosted solution.
Syncthing, python face_recognition [1], a static gallery (sigal [2]), and a few lines of bash and its fully automatic. I can even share links with family.
[1] https://github.com/ageitgey/face_recognition
[2] https://github.com/saimn/sigal
https://github.com/meichthys/foss_photo_libraries
I am very very happy with immich. See the other commenter's response for many more.
Immich is really good. They have AI semantic search, face grouping, etc. Really similar to Google Photos. Only the mobile app is still not that good.
https://immich.app/