[fobside]

Does anyone have any suggestions or preferences on which of these two to use for an online gallery?

Thanks in advance for suggestions.

[mduell]

Gallery (version 2).
I run a fairly large gallery site (pic count is in the 5 figures) and it's a great piece of software.

[clam2000]

One advantage I see of coppermine is that it has album specific themes, i haven't seen that in gallery yet. I ended up hacking it into my gallery, because i have a single installation serving albums to multiple places.

It really comes down to personal preference

--Will

[tomrock]

From a user standpoint, Coppermine seems to be a simpler, cleaner interface for showing pictures. Gallery seems more technical.

But clam2000 is right -- it's really personal preference.

[Demonhood]

my personal preference: gallery (1 if you still require voting or 2 otherwise).
it's what i use (and have even made customizations for. see sig).
very strong community base too.

[inkhead]

neither, they both equally suck.

use 4images.

[PurpleGiant]

4images?

[besson3c]

Gallery 2 will allow embedding into your existing website. Very slick. I can show you some example URLs of sites of mine with embedded galleries if you'd like...

[tomrock]

I think any of them will work with an existing site.

Here's one of my sites using Coppermine http://eyelandart.com Just click the Galleries button at the top.

My wife (a graphic designer) changed the theme to support the color scheme of the rest of the site.

I'm sure the same thing cold be done with Gallery or others.

[krove]

What I use : PhotoStack

I was on the fence for soooo long. As odd as it sounds, finding a web gallery program that is flexible, easy, and good-looking (via proper use of CSS and XHTML) was extremely difficult. When I discovered PhotoStack, though, I had found my match.

PhotoStack was originally coded by hand to be a simple and elegant alternative to the burgeoning competition, but the author found his original code to be a bit out of control and did a complete re-write using open source web gallery Singapore as a code base to reimplement PhotoStack's no-nonsense, simple interface. The new PhotoStack is even better than the original, and I have found the templates extremely flexible to use/modify in practice.

For those with Safari/Firefox/Opera, take a look at my re-done PhotoStack web gallery with my own custom template. I set this up pretty quickly one evening (created my own template), but I have not had the opportunity to rectify the CSS for use with IE. (Should I even try?)

I highly recommend PhotoStack. If you try out the demo on the PhotoStack web site, just note that you have to upload your own pictures in the admin interface in order to see how things work. A script erases the demo pictures every 15 minutes or something. FYI.

[krove]

BTW, the *new* PhotoStack is still in beta, but it is very close to being finished and ready for mass consumption.