Photofield vs Photonix
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?
Photofield
Fast experimental photo viewer for huge libraries
VS
Photonix
Self-hosted photo gallery with face and location detection
| Feature | Photofield | Photonix |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Photo Management | Photo Management |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Go | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 598 | ★ 1,954 |
| First released | 2022 | 2019 |
| Replaces | Google Photos | Google Photos |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Photofield or Photonix better?
Neither is universally better. Photonix has the larger community, while Photofield is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Photofield and Photonix free and open-source?
Yes. Photofield is licensed under MIT and Photonix under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Photofield and Photonix with Docker?
Photofield: yes. Photonix: yes.