[sf-lug] Fwd: What do you people use to organize your photos both locally and on the web?

Brian Morris cymraegish at gmail.com
Sat Feb 5 21:02:05 PST 2011

 I recently learned a little about neural net image classification methods.

there is a test / training data set consisting of thumbnails of animals, and
they got pretty good result asking "which animal is it" (at least 50 kinds
to choose from, maybe more).

one guy in the ML Noisbridge group tried a little facial recognition, says
its hard,

so I am not sure you could distinguish Bill as such but you could place him
in the category "human" and your dog in the dog category OK

to run the training might take a long time but if you have a decent GPU (say
from the last couple of years) it could run 20 times faster. The example I
saw it was like 30 days vs 24hours, was probably high end GPU; but people
with 2008 MacBookPro have gotten 15x speedups almost as good.

So for this method we presume you already have a folder structure which you
are adding to or picking from.

If you want to play,

for unsupervised clustering the SOM toolkit which will produce  a 2-d
visualization of fuzzy boundaried many-dimension clustered groups from
unclustered data.  Given some starting point there are refinement and
extension methods for that. This is not neural net but well studied
algorithm that's been around a long time.

In many clustering methods supervised or not, you specify how many clusters
you want, you do not have to separate out everything in the world. You
choose how finely grained you want it, so you can expand the categories as
your  collection grows.

If you do heirarchical clustering then you can have the file system tree
structure. Honestly I haven't thought too much about the higher dimensions
or the cross-linking references, however I believe that these are

The problem for me with flat files is it gets messy, or at least hard to
find things. Honestly though that old program I use is flat (sequential)
except you are allowed labels and you can sort by date, name, type, etc.;
unless otherwise you start adding keyword tags. However it uses its own
internal db so you are free to do a file system folder system of your own as
well independently, which it scans *and* includes in its db.  The catalog
files are not large, and the program is fast on old computer. At least you
have those options and flexibility although you do most of the organizing by
hand I find it fairly useful, but it is definitely 1990s (production, not
research) technology - not 'smart' in any real sense. If you want to
cross-file you can have multiple catalogs of the same stuff and you can drag
and drop item selections between catalog windows.

On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 7:58 PM, jim <jim at systemateka.com> wrote:

>    assume some way of working directly with images
> rather than with tags. what would be the difference
> between bill and dog?

They don't look the same.

> assume some distinctions. to
> use them, you're gonna have to learn them, a whole
> vocabulary that will distinguish between red balls
> and plaid blankets and will describe every kind of
> rock, pebble, leaf, scraps of paper and plastic....

You can tell them apart easily enough, but fine distinctions usually mean
you have some special interest.  They don't always require names, I can
distinguish many colors and sort them without needing names for them all,
nor do I need descriptions only relative comparisons, some way of organizing
or structuring the items themselves.

>    i'd rather use tags, but i like mid-twentieth
> century technology such as flat files, which are
> simple and take little storage.
> On Sat, 2011-02-05 at 18:02 -0800, Brian Morris wrote:
> > [whoops forgot the list]
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Brian Morris <cymraegish at gmail.com>
> > Date: Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 6:01 PM
> > Subject: Re: [sf-lug] What do you people use to organize your photos
> > both locally and on the web?
> > To: Akkana Peck <akkana at shallowsky.com>
> >
> >
> > Keywords created flat files which I don't like much, seems like a
> > (mid) 20th century technology.
> >
> > I have an "Asset Management" program in Mac that is ageing / ailing
> > but really helps a lot, I do wish there was an open source replacement
> > (the newer versions of this program I don't like expensive bloatware).
> >
> > Even with the program I stilll use file/folder system, I like to
> > experiment with organizational schemes, but I only use a few aliases
> > here and there. I have found that most people are challenged to think
> > clearly in two dimensions never mind three -- we mostly live in two
> > dimensions unless we are pilots.
> >
> > I would like to have some running software that assists me in
> > classifying / reclassifying things. I have some toolkits but barely
> > prototypes. I'd be interested in working with others on a hacking
> > project maybe. My desire here at this point not to gui but to have
> > graphical presentation of results and some command line features. This
> > should be scriptable / hackable. Given a current representation of
> > some kind, the program could perhaps present the user with some
> > feedback or assist in further filing.
> >
> > Certainly if I had some better tools my life in Linux would be
> > expanded, I would want the tools to be cross platform though still and
> > cloud solutions for me are out of the question.
> >
> > What I would really like (dream) is software that could work directly
> > with images rather than relying (exclusively) on textual tags. This is
> > not impossible, but for practical purposes I think it requires some
> > (General Purpose) GPU programming ie OpenCL, which is an emerging
> > technology I hope to become involved with.
> >
> > Long story short -- getting real tired of twentieth century (soft)
> > technology.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Akkana Peck <akkana at shallowsky.com>
> > wrote:
> >         Mikki McGee writes:
> >         >    After looking at what was available, I decided to do it
> >         all "my way."
> >         > I collect art pictures from museums, and pictures of
> >         specimens of a
> >         > diverse group of living things; and so I upload into a
> >         directory called
> >         > /CAMERA, and sort and edit and same into, for example,
> >         > /Art/Legion/Statuary.    Or
> >         into /Arthropoda/Insecta/Lepidoptera,
> >         >    or into /Pictures/Friends.
> >
> >
> >         I tried that, but it got complicated and I gave up -- if I
> >         have a
> >         photo that has my friend Bill and his dog, do I put duplicate
> >         copies
> >         in Images/People/Bill and Images/Animals/Dogs? Put the pic in
> >         one
> >         place and symlink to the other place?
> >
> >         I organize photos in directories by year, and within each year
> >         I
> >         just make descriptive names for upload directories, like
> >         Images/2011/RSA-baby-quail if I went on a hike at Rancho San
> >         Antonio where I saw a lot of baby quail.
> >
> >         Then each of these directories has a Keywords file (just a
> >         text file,
> >         keyword: file1.jpg file2.jpg ...) and I have a script that can
> >         search recursively for keywords.
> >
> >         I know, you're probably thinking, "What a lot of wasted
> >         effort!
> >         [insert favorite big bloated Gnome app or proprietary app] can
> >         do
> >         all that and has a GUI too!" And probably you're right. But
> >         with
> >         my way, I can change my filing scheme or the way I access
> >         keywords
> >         at any time, I can copy any subset of my images to another
> >         machine
> >         (any platform) at any time, and I never have to worry about
> >         how
> >         to migrate a database if the program ever stops being
> >         maintained or
> >         changes its UI in a way I don't like. There are some
> >         advantages to
> >         the old-school text file approach.
> >
> >                ...Akkana
> >
> >         _______________________________________________
> >
> >         sf-lug mailing list
> >         sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> >         http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
> >         Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > sf-lug mailing list
> > sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> > http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
> > Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/attachments/20110205/628a5c65/attachment.html>

More information about the sf-lug mailing list