Damselfly Web vs nanogallery2
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?
Damselfly Web
Server-based digital asset manager for large photo libraries
VS
nanogallery2
JavaScript photo and video gallery library you host yourself
| Feature | Damselfly Web | nanogallery2 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Photo Management | Photo Management |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Python | JavaScript |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 700 | ★ 791 |
| First released | 2011 | 2017 |
| Replaces | Flickr, YouTube | Flickr, SmugMug |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Damselfly Web or nanogallery2 better?
nanogallery2 is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Damselfly Web if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Damselfly Web and nanogallery2 free and open-source?
Yes. Damselfly Web is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and nanogallery2 under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Damselfly Web and nanogallery2 with Docker?
Damselfly Web: yes. nanogallery2: check the project docs for container support.