Managing Large Image Collections

>>55779775
Keep the folder structure, use whatever you want on top of it. When that software breaks or you move to a new machine, you'll still have your folder structure.

Don't bother with automatic tagging, that never works 100%

Just edit the metadata manually. Arduous, but free from error

>>55779775
PS 40,000 images really isn't a lot.

>>55779887
But if I edit metadata, that will move with the images.

>>55779901
I was planning on tagging through metadata. Do you use any software to help with batch processing? Like selecting several images and giving them a tag/s?

>>55780073
Yeah I know it's not a lot compared to some here, but it's getting to the point now where I can't find something I'm looking for in a reasonable amount of time.

>>55779775
>0% market share
Approval of others is indeed important to attention whores like yourself - it is, in fact, what defines you.
>Slow
Yeah i bet those 300 milliseconds are very valuable to you, you're a busy man, it's not like you have time to spare.
>Retarded
>Homosexual
Fantastic arguments i cannot even refute.

>>55780628
I just picked an image that would trigger /g/ so I could get some replies.

>>55779775
https://hydrusnetwork.github.io/hydrus/
You're welcome.

i try to make decent filenames when downloading, so they are easier to find.

Then just throw them into folders every 1000 or something.

It really helps in the long run.

File: 1469624585135.jpg (115KB, 492x600px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 492x600px

No. The image you posted should be like this, you see. Your way, it spells BOSRH. You can't pronounce that. When you do it this way, it says BORSH. Now you can pronounce it.

File: alexander_nikolaevich_hell.jpg (92KB, 312x312px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 312x312px

>>55780889

Firefox is actually faster than Chrome on Android. Desktop I can't really tell the difference except Chrome is all rapey with ram and the addons suck.