nanogallery2 vs Sigal
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted photo management options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
| Feature | nanogallery2 | Sigal |
|---|---|---|
| Deploy effort | Read-the-docs project | Read-the-docs project |
| Health score | 12 · At risk | 78 · Good |
| Category | Photo Management | Photo Management |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | JavaScript | JavaScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, source | bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 791 | ★ 945 |
| First released | 2017 | 2012 |
| Replaces | Flickr, SmugMug | Flickr |
What are nanogallery2 and Sigal?
nanogallery2
nanogallery2 is an open-source JavaScript photo and video gallery library that builds responsive, touch-enabled galleries from images stored on your own server. It runs fully client-side and is self-hosted on any static web host.
- Responsive image galleries
- Touch and swipe support
- Lightbox display
- Multiple data sources
Sigal
Sigal is a simple static gallery generator that builds a browsable photo and video website from a folder of images. The output is plain HTML and works with several themes.
- Static gallery generation
- Multiple themes
- Plugin system
- Video thumbnail support
nanogallery2 vs Sigal: key differences
Both projects are written in JavaScript. Licensing differs — GPL-3.0 for nanogallery2 versus MIT for Sigal. Nanogallery2 is the lighter option, starting around 64 MB of RAM against 128 MB for Sigal. Sigal is the more established project (first released 2012), while nanogallery2 arrived in 2017.
Why pick each one
Choose nanogallery2 if…
- Fully client-side
- Easy to embed
Watch out for
- Library, not a full app
- No upload management
Choose Sigal if…
- Very lightweight
- Easy to host
Watch out for
- No uploads or editing
- Static output only
Frequently asked questions
Is nanogallery2 or Sigal better?
Neither is universally better. Sigal has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are nanogallery2 and Sigal free and open-source?
Yes. nanogallery2 is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Sigal under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run nanogallery2 and Sigal with Docker?
nanogallery2: check the project docs for container support. Sigal: check the project docs for container support.
Which is lighter on resources, nanogallery2 or Sigal?
nanogallery2 has the smaller minimum footprint at 64 MB of RAM, compared to about 128 MB for Sigal. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.