3 ms·

My 10+ year old photo management system [1] relies on the file system and EXIF as the source of truth for my entire photo library. It’s proven several times ov

by jmathai 7mo ago

My 10+ year old photo management system [1] relies on the file system and EXIF as the source of truth for my entire photo library. It’s proven several times over that it’s the correct approach. Abstractions (formerly Google photos, currently Immich) should just be built on top - but these proprietary databases are only for convenience. For work, I’m having the same experience as the author and everything is just markdown and csv files for Claude Code (for research and document writing). [1] https://github.com/jmathai/elodie https://github.com/jmathai/elodie

alanbernstein 7mo ago
Thanks for sharing, I might have too much NIH syndrome to use it but I'd love to check it out.
- jmathai 7mo ago
  Ha! I totally get it. Use it for inspiration though!
whartung 7mo ago
I know some systems leverage the modern file meta data (extended attributes), but it's clearly not successful enough that folks can use them for an application like this. Ostensibly, things like MacOS Spotlight can bring real utility and value to the file system, and extended attributes through the sidecar indexing, etc. But Spotlight is infamous for its unreliability. The other issue with file systems is simply that the user (potentially) has "direct access" to them, in that they can readily move files in and up and around whimsically. The "structure" is laid bare for them to potentially interfere with, or, such as the case with the extended attributes, drag a file to a USB fob, and then copy it back -- inadvertently removing those attributes. And thats how we end up with everything being stuffed into a SQLite DB.
- packetlost 7mo ago
  Yeah, IMO extended metadata attributes are fine for caching data that can be recovered via other means but generally violate the principal of least surprise. For them to be successful a standardized transparent container format or something would be necessary, but at that point the FS abstraction is leaking.
  - prmph 7mo ago
    What about using the file name itself as the metadata storage?
    - packetlost 7mo ago
      That works but has strict length limits and is visibly ugly. Fine for very limited cases I guess
    - jmathai 7mo ago
      I have used this approach with exiftool to add custom tags for “album”. https://stackoverflow.com/a/68284922 https://stackoverflow.com/a/68284922 Here is my source file for it. It was so long ago I don’t recall all the details but you can retrieve this information using exif commands. https://github.com/jmathai/elodie/blob/master/configs/ExifTool_config https://github.com/jmathai/elodie/blob/master/configs/ExifTo...
zenoprax 7mo ago
I have your repo starred from a post/comment you made a few weeks ago but haven't had time to actually use/integrate it with my own stuff. What are your thoughts on XMP sidecar files? I'm torn right now between digital negative + external metadata versus all-in-one image with mutable properties. Portability vs. Durability etc.
- jmathai 7mo ago
  I've avoided using XMP sidecars. Mostly because I don't want to have to worry about two files for every photo. And I don't think they're ubiquitously supported like EXIF. Thanks for starring the repo and let me know if you need any help.

by jmathai 7mo ago

alanbernstein 7mo ago

Thanks for sharing, I might have too much NIH syndrome to use it but I'd love to check it out.

jmathai 7mo ago
Ha! I totally get it. Use it for inspiration though!

whartung 7mo ago

I know some systems leverage the modern file meta data (extended attributes), but it's clearly not successful enough that folks can use them for an application like this. Ostensibly, things like MacOS Spotlight can bring real utility and value to the file system, and extended attributes through the sidecar indexing, etc. But Spotlight is infamous for its unreliability. The other issue with file systems is simply that the user (potentially) has "direct access" to them, in that they can readily move files in and up and around whimsically. The "structure" is laid bare for them to potentially interfere with, or, such as the case with the extended attributes, drag a file to a USB fob, and then copy it back -- inadvertently removing those attributes. And thats how we end up with everything being stuffed into a SQLite DB.

packetlost 7mo ago
Yeah, IMO extended metadata attributes are fine for caching data that can be recovered via other means but generally violate the principal of least surprise. For them to be successful a standardized transparent container format or something would be necessary, but at that point the FS abstraction is leaking.
- prmph 7mo ago
  What about using the file name itself as the metadata storage?
  - packetlost 7mo ago
    That works but has strict length limits and is visibly ugly. Fine for very limited cases I guess
  - jmathai 7mo ago
    I have used this approach with exiftool to add custom tags for “album”. https://stackoverflow.com/a/68284922 https://stackoverflow.com/a/68284922 Here is my source file for it. It was so long ago I don’t recall all the details but you can retrieve this information using exif commands. https://github.com/jmathai/elodie/blob/master/configs/ExifTool_config https://github.com/jmathai/elodie/blob/master/configs/ExifTo...

zenoprax 7mo ago

I have your repo starred from a post/comment you made a few weeks ago but haven't had time to actually use/integrate it with my own stuff. What are your thoughts on XMP sidecar files? I'm torn right now between digital negative + external metadata versus all-in-one image with mutable properties. Portability vs. Durability etc.

jmathai 7mo ago
I've avoided using XMP sidecars. Mostly because I don't want to have to worry about two files for every photo. And I don't think they're ubiquitously supported like EXIF. Thanks for starring the repo and let me know if you need any help.