DeepFace vs Mediagoblin
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted photo management options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
DeepFace
Face recognition and facial attribute analysis framework
VS
Mediagoblin
Media publishing platform that anyone can run (alternative to Flickr,
| Feature | DeepFace | Mediagoblin |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Photo Management | Photo Management |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Python | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 2,048 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 23,222 | — |
| First released | 2020 | 2020 |
| Replaces | AWS Rekognition, Azure Face API | — |
Why pick each one
Choose DeepFace if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 23.2k GitHub stars
- Written in Python
Choose Mediagoblin if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- Written in Python
- Lightweight — runs in 512 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepFace or Mediagoblin better?
Neither is universally better. DeepFace has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are DeepFace and Mediagoblin free and open-source?
Yes. DeepFace is licensed under MIT and Mediagoblin under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run DeepFace and Mediagoblin with Docker?
DeepFace: yes. Mediagoblin: check the project docs for container support.