Auto-compare pictures?

[Dex]

I don't know -- it says it requires 32 MB of RAM.

That's the recommended amount, you *might* get away with 24 MB. What I'm
worried about is the 3 MB it will need on my 1 TB drive, gonna need to
free up some space somehow.

 

[Yousuf Khan]

Hmm, looks interesting, I'm trying it out now. Sometimes free software
can be a diamond in the rough, and it might work better than paid software.

I'll give it a test and let you know.

Yousuf Khan

Looks like we have ourselves a winner here, folks! This is a truly
amazing piece of software, made especially more so by the fact that it's
completely free! I compared it against the trialware Image Comparer
program. Image Comparer has a much better user-friendly interface than
DupDetector, but DD walks all over IC when it comes to the actual image
comparisons.

Both programs have a percentage certainty rating system, i.e. from
0-100%. DD goes one step further than IC, by having increments going up
by 0.1% vs. only 1% increments. This was one of my main complaints about
IC, its put too many pictures in the 98 or 99% rating category which
were off hugely. This finer-grain percentage is much more useful for
your own decision making process. Also the DD wasn't making laughably
silly mistakes like IC did, where it couldn't tell the difference
between totally different landscape pictures.

With DD, once you started getting into the 99.0% certainty range, and
especially by the point you got to the 99.9% certainty, it was even
challenging my own ability to tell the difference. Even at 98%
certainty, DD was picking out pictures with just slightly different
posing of the same subject (much like the slight differences between
different consecutive frames of a video). Both programs are equally fine
when they figure out something with 100% certainty, but the real
characters of these programs are displayed in the 99% and below mark.

Also DD is a much less resource hungry program. IC was fast when there
were fewer than 5000 pictures to compare, but once I fed it over 65,000
pictures to compare it started eating up over 600MB of RAM, and took
over an entire processor core for several hours (viewed through Task
Manager)! DD also took over an entire processor core, but for just a few
minutes at a time; also I didn't see its RAM usage go much over 100MB.
Both IC and DD are 32-bit programs, but I think IC would benefit from
going to 64-bit, it's so resource hungry; DD, on the other hand, doesn't
require 64-bit at all as far as I can see, it's just amazing with 32-bit.

There are a few niggles with DD. For example, I have not figured out
what the difference is between its Manual Deletion, Semi-Automatic
Deletion, and Automatic Deletion modes. There's no information about
what they each do, so I only was brave enough to try Manual mode so far,
just in case they deleted something I didn't want them to. I'll keep
looking into this, though.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Char Jackson]

Looks like we have ourselves a winner here, folks! This is a truly
amazing piece of software, made especially more so by the fact that it's
completely free! I compared it against the trialware Image Comparer
program. Image Comparer has a much better user-friendly interface than
DupDetector, but DD walks all over IC when it comes to the actual image
comparisons.

Both programs have a percentage certainty rating system, i.e. from
0-100%. DD goes one step further than IC, by having increments going up
by 0.1% vs. only 1% increments. This was one of my main complaints about
IC, its put too many pictures in the 98 or 99% rating category which
were off hugely. This finer-grain percentage is much more useful for
your own decision making process. Also the DD wasn't making laughably
silly mistakes like IC did, where it couldn't tell the difference
between totally different landscape pictures.

With DD, once you started getting into the 99.0% certainty range, and
especially by the point you got to the 99.9% certainty, it was even
challenging my own ability to tell the difference. Even at 98%
certainty, DD was picking out pictures with just slightly different
posing of the same subject (much like the slight differences between
different consecutive frames of a video). Both programs are equally fine
when they figure out something with 100% certainty, but the real
characters of these programs are displayed in the 99% and below mark.

Also DD is a much less resource hungry program. IC was fast when there
were fewer than 5000 pictures to compare, but once I fed it over 65,000
pictures to compare it started eating up over 600MB of RAM, and took
over an entire processor core for several hours (viewed through Task
Manager)! DD also took over an entire processor core, but for just a few
minutes at a time; also I didn't see its RAM usage go much over 100MB.
Both IC and DD are 32-bit programs, but I think IC would benefit from
going to 64-bit, it's so resource hungry; DD, on the other hand, doesn't
require 64-bit at all as far as I can see, it's just amazing with 32-bit.

There are a few niggles with DD. For example, I have not figured out
what the difference is between its Manual Deletion, Semi-Automatic
Deletion, and Automatic Deletion modes. There's no information about
what they each do, so I only was brave enough to try Manual mode so far,
just in case they deleted something I didn't want them to. I'll keep
looking into this, though.

I'm playing with this, as well. On a digital photo library of about
52,000 items, including numerous known dupes, DD found nearly 9000
dupes of 99% certainty and above. Spot checking the results, I have to
agree, they are essentially dupes. Some are higher resolution and
therefore larger filesize, while others are double or triple shots
taken in a very short timespan in order to make sure everyone had
their eyes open. I didn't let the program do any automatic deleting,
but I thought I noticed that it can move the dupes to a different
folder rather than deleting, so that might be a safe option. It took
nearly an hour to churn through the entire image library, but that was
expected.

 

[Stan Brown]

Looks like we have ourselves a winner here, folks! This is a truly
amazing piece of software, made especially more so by the fact that it's
completely free! I compared it against the trialware Image Comparer
program. Image Comparer has a much better user-friendly interface than
DupDetector, but DD walks all over IC when it comes to the actual image
comparisons.

Yousuf, thanks so much for reporting this. I have been following this
thread with interest because I have upward of 11,000 downloaded
images. I didn't even realize there *were* image comparison tools
till this thread, and it's a bonus to know that this one is worth
installing and I don't have to mess with others.

 

[Yousuf Khan]

Yousuf, thanks so much for reporting this. I have been following this
thread with interest because I have upward of 11,000 downloaded
images. I didn't even realize there *were* image comparison tools
till this thread, and it's a bonus to know that this one is worth
installing and I don't have to mess with others.

Yeah, I guess we have to thank Dex for bringing this program to our
attention.

I had a similar situation, where I had to start optimizing my downloaded
image collection. Main concern was getting rid of exact duplicates. When
I ran through it with DD, I hadn't even realized I had so many images
that were double shots or triple shots, with just barely a moved face or
a closed eye as their sole differences. It was almost a like fun game to
spot the differences with my own eyes, like Where's Waldo.

Yousuf Khan