If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
A free online image host service that lets me organize?
Hello.
I have hundreds of image files all over in many of their own deep (folder/directorie)s since I specifically organized them on my drives. I tried Flickr and Google Photos, but they do not organize them in multiple folders deep with albums. Also, uploading from many drive's locations is a pain and tedious. It would be nice to upload all at once in their original locations to the server as well. Does anyone know if there is a free online image host service can meet my requirements? Thank you in advance. -- Quote of the Week: "What, like I had to live with all those ants? Do you know what I did to those ants? HoooHooo! No more ants!" --unknown Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly. /\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site) / /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net | |o o| | \ _ / Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit- ( ) ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
A free online image host service that lets me organize?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
A free online image host service that lets me organize?
In article , Ant
wrote: Hello. I have hundreds of image files all over in many of their own deep (folder/directorie)s since I specifically organized them on my drives. I tried Flickr and Google Photos, but they do not organize them in multiple folders deep with albums. because a file/folder hierarchy is horribly inflexible. Also, uploading from many drive's locations is a pain and tedious. yet another reason why file/folders is a bad idea. It would be nice to upload all at once in their original locations to the server as well. the original locations on your hard drive are meaningless in the cloud as well as on your local storage. it's *far* more flexible and efficient to search based on *content*, which works rather well with google photos. for instance, search for photos of dogs and you see photos of dogs. search for photos of paris in winter and you see photos of paris in winter. it's not 100% perfect (nothing is, not even any human-based filing system) but it's way the hell more efficient than trying to remember which photo is in what folder, especially when photos fit into multiple categories and in your case, when the photos are scattered. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
A free online image host service that lets me organize?
"nospam" wrote
| for instance, search for photos of dogs and you see photos of dogs. | search for photos of paris in winter and you see photos of paris in | winter. "photo of aunt whose name I can't remember" Oh, yeah. Works great. Or at least it's better than nothing if you don't know how to use a computer file system. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
A free online image host service that lets me organize?
"Ant" wrote
| Does anyone know if there is a free online image host service can meet | my requirements? | Have you considered setting up your own website? It's not very expensive. You can then arrange your images any way you like and don't have to accept the "terms" or limitations of hosting services. Disadvantages: It would require some effort and learning to get it set up. Also, you won't get easy settings to limit who can see your images or download them. You can set up private connections and you can try to limit anonymous downloads, but you'd have to handle all of that yourself. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
A free online image host service that lets me organize?
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote: Hello. I have hundreds of image files all over in many of their own deep (folder/directorie)s since I specifically organized them on my drives. I tried Flickr and Google Photos, but they do not organize them in multiple folders deep with albums. because a file/folder hierarchy is horribly inflexible. Also, uploading from many drive's locations is a pain and tedious. yet another reason why file/folders is a bad idea. This is the type of statement that makes nospam such a poor source of advice. facts are always good advice. There are many reasons that file/folder system can be a good idea. How good depends largely on how the user expects to be able to locate a particular file and what other tools (ie: keywording, date-based file names, etc) the user employs. wrong. it's *far* more flexible and efficient to search based on *content*, which works rather well with google photos. Unless, of course, you are searching for images taken in Kenya and you want to find images of people, not gorillas. wrong on that too. for instance, search for photos of dogs and you see photos of dogs. search for photos of paris in winter and you see photos of paris in winter. it's not 100% perfect The number is far, far less that 100% perfect. it's not far less. once again you have no clue. it's rather accurate and getting better every day, as more people upload images and they get analyzed. for those who are privacy conscious, apple does the content recognition locally on the device. Search terms work when the desired image is easily identifiable by a term. Like "dog". Trying to find a particular image you took three years ago of a street scene in, say, Barcelona, you would have to remember what distinguishing thing was in that scene. wrong yet again. search for photos taken in barcelona 3 years ago. very simple. Was there a dog in it? A lamp post? Is it clearly a street scene or is it a scene of buildings that face on a street? You could spend far too much time using the wrong terms. you could also spend far too much time trying to find something in a maze of files of folders. A folder (Barcelona2013) system would produce the image with less effort. A keyword system (Barcelona2013) would work faster, especially with multiple keywords (streetscene, etc) but a system with a large number of keywords can get out of hand. And, importantly, you have to use an app that uses keywords. you're ignoring the effort to set up and maintain the folder system and nobody said anything about keywords. A file/folder system is not inherently "horribly inflexible". yes it absolutely is, which is why various software developers are moving beyond the limitations of the file system, including adobe, microsoft, apple and google. perhaps you've heard of them. It can be if poorly designed, but it is as good as the user makes. subject to the limitations of the file system, and also requires a lot of effort to set up and maintain. I can't tell how good Ant's system is. On the surface, I wonder about a system that is a "deep system". That implies (but does not mean) that the structure could be overly-complicated. But, Ant is evidently working with a system that works for him and I wouldn't tell him he's using a system that is a "bad idea". apparently it doesn't work for him, otherwise he wouldn't have asked. (nothing is, not even any human-based filing system) but it's way the hell more efficient than trying to remember which photo is in what folder, especially when photos fit into multiple categories and in your case, when the photos are scattered. Well, that depends. If you want to find a photograph of La Sagrada Familia, a file/folder system can produce it quickly if you have a folder of photographs taken on a trip to Barcelona and have Barcelona2013 folder. If you've taken several trips to Barcelona, it may take a little longer. If you break up those photographs into subject folders (ie: churches), you can find it quickly. It depends on how you've set up the system. A search term of "churches" may not produce the photograph because La Sagrada Familia doesn't resemble a church all that much in every shot. search for barcelona 2013. very easy. or search la sagrada familia, which will almost certainly work since it's a well known landmark. nospam's advice is - as usual - based on what works for nospam, not what will work for other people. In that case, it's better to offer suggestions and not declare - as he has done - that a different system is a "bad idea" and "horribly inflexible". For someone like Davoud, for example, a file/folder system that puts types of insects in folders may be a good idea. wrong again. adobe, microsoft, apple and google are all moving beyond the limitations of the file system, which means a whole ****load of people agree with me, not you. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
A free online image host service that lets me organize?
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | Does anyone know if there is a free online image host service can meet | my requirements? | Have you considered setting up your own website? It's not very expensive. You can then arrange your images any way you like and don't have to accept the "terms" or limitations of hosting services. Disadvantages: It would require some effort and learning to get it set up. Also, you won't get easy settings to limit who can see your images or download them. You can set up private connections and you can try to limit anonymous downloads, but you'd have to handle all of that yourself. quite a bit of effort. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
A free online image host service that lets me organize?
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | for instance, search for photos of dogs and you see photos of dogs. | search for photos of paris in winter and you see photos of paris in | winter. "photo of aunt whose name I can't remember" how would you find that if you organized it using a file/folder hierarchy? you wouldn't even know which folder to look for! Oh, yeah. Works great. Or at least it's better than nothing if you don't know how to use a computer file system. you sure don't. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
A free online image host service that lets me organize?
On 1/24/2017 12:45 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Tony Cooper wrote: Hello. I have hundreds of image files all over in many of their own deep (folder/directorie)s since I specifically organized them on my drives. I tried Flickr and Google Photos, but they do not organize them in multiple folders deep with albums. because a file/folder hierarchy is horribly inflexible. Also, uploading from many drive's locations is a pain and tedious. yet another reason why file/folders is a bad idea. This is the type of statement that makes nospam such a poor source of advice. facts are always good advice. Especially the alternative facts, even though they may not be applicable. For some reason, my doctor "listens," and asks questions before giving me advice. -- PeterN |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
A free online image host service that lets me organize?
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote: Top posting for a change because interleaving comments between all those line is too much hassle. there is no hassle. you could have posted everything at the bottom and snipped what is not relevant. This is pretty much a standard nospam reply. He's here to argue, but presents no argument. Simply writing "wrong" is not an argument or statement of any valid disagreement. It's just a petty response and what is ridiculed in the Python sketch as "contradiction". if something is obviously wrong, then saying wrong is sufficient. stick to the topic instead of bashing me. Saying that using a folder/file system is a lot of effort is laughable hyperbole. Creating a folder is a few keystrokes, and folder/file systems are usually created on an as-needed bases. Folders are not usually created for files not yet obtained. It's a few seconds each time and over time. The same, or less, than the time to enter search phrases. that's effort that's not otherwise required and what you also ignore is that there's ongoing maintenance to keep a file/folder hierarchy organized, both of which are tasks a computer can do faster and better than humans can. I've yet to figure out what nospam considers to be a lot of effort. It seems to be doing anything that he doesn't do or approve of. wrong again. i don't give a flying **** what you or anyone else does. i am simply pointing out the limitations of primitive and outdated methods so that people can make an *informed* decision on how to solve their problem rather than stick with doing the same old **** because it's all they know. it's called learning new things, which you don't want people to do. nospam has incorrectly said that Ant's file/folder system doesn't work for him. It does, and has, but he's now embarking on something different in seeking cloud storage. He may have to modify his system for this purpose. it doesn't, or he wouldn't have asked. Evidently, nospam was whooshed on the gorilla reference. He must have missed this: http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2...after-photos-i dentify-black-people-as-gorillas/29567465/ i didn't miss that at all. that's nothing more than a bug that was fixed long ago. nothing is perfect. i'm sure you've misfiled photos many times. google currently reports a 94% accuracy rate in scene recognition, which is exceptionally impressive for doing little more than uploading images to google photos and that gets better every day as more photos are uploaded and analyzed. quite a few samples of what can be identified in the link below. https://research.googleblog.com/2016...ge-captioning- open.html Todayıs code release initializes the image encoder using the*Inception V3 model, which achieves 93.9% accuracy on the ImageNet classification task. Initializing the image encoder with a better vision model gives the image captioning system a better ability to recognize different objects in the images, allowing it to generate more detailed and accurate descriptions. This gives an additional 2 points of improvement in the BLEU-4 metric over the system used in the captioning challenge. .... So does it really understand the objects and their interactions in each image? Or does it always regurgitate descriptions from the training data? Excitingly, our model does indeed develop the ability to generate accurate new captions when presented with completely new scenes, indicating a deeper understanding of the objects and context in the images. Moreover, it learns how to express that knowledge in natural-sounding English phrases despite receiving no additional language training other than reading the human captions. One would hope, but not expect, that nospam would offer suggestions for alternative methods without resorting to demeaning what others - and, evidently, Ant - find to be a practical and working system. It's not his style, though. i did offer suggestions. My personal system is to use Lightroom to import images directed to a folder/file structure with two main divisions: family photos and hobby photos. In each main folder, the images are directed to a year folder. Files are named by date (2017-01-24-03) so they fall sequentially in the folder. In Lightroom, keywords (ie: vehicle or baseball) are added. My system is set up to function for my needs. I don't feel I need additional sub-folders. The keywords assigned are search feature enough beyond year. nobody is interested in your particular system. i'm talking about *concepts*, which are apparently beyond your abilities to understand. I don't particularly recommend my system because it is designed specifically for my needs. As such, it works smoothly and efficiently. I wouldn't criticize Ant's system because I know nothing of his needs. It's unfortunate that nospam doesn't extend the same courtesy to others. it's unfortunate that all you do is insult and bash. you're a hypocrite. nospam likes to make statements, like he has here, "software developers are moving beyond (folder/file systems)" that implies that he's some sort of top-drawer software insider. If he was, he'd be so busy he wouldn't have time to post here. it implies no such thing, other than i understand the technology and you do not nor are you interested in learning about it. Even the statement lacks informational content. What are these developers doing differently now? Managing their own images? Developing apps that manage other people's images? What? What examples can be cited? As stated, it's a meaningless statement. only because you haven't a clue, and instead of wanting to learn something new, you choose to argue and insult. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Free Image Host with unlimited Storage | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 0 | November 24th 06 06:24 PM |
Browse and organize image/video/audio with free 3D Photo Browser Light 8.31 | News | Digital Photography | 0 | November 1st 05 07:13 AM |
Browse and organize image/video/audio with free 3D Photo Browser Light 8.31 | News | Other Photographic Equipment | 0 | November 1st 05 07:13 AM |
Browse and organize image/video/audio with free 3D Photo Browser Light 8.31 | News | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | November 1st 05 07:13 AM |
Free Image Host? | Carlo Eugster | Digital Photography | 6 | January 19th 05 04:28 AM |