🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <NhUtc.15831$L.11711@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "
Wilder_4_awhile" <Wilder_4_awhile@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>How odd is it that a person who pays out bucks for the gear to take tens of
>thousands of photos and makes the comment that the software to manage the
>collection actually has to be paid for! Maybe I am getting too old for this
>group.

Yeah, my fault for adding aus.photo to the original post's 
distribution.  I was looking for *answers* so thought a photo group 
might have some useful guidance to offer too, given the subject. :-)

I should have warned the denizens of aus.photo that some folk in a.c.f 
would take exception if a suggested solution costs money; so I 
probably should have set followups to aus.photo -- but then there is 
another group of USENET folk who take exception to "censoring" 
distributions like that, so you can't win anyway.  8-)

Anyway, thanks to all who have responded positively.  I'll check out 
the suggestions you've offered, though I suspect it may well come down 
to either (1) giving up on the idea altogether; or (2) developing a DB 
application in Access for the purpose, which would be quite a project 
in itself as I currently don't speak Access.

diskXplorer Professional looks interesting, but in some ways it 
appears to go beyond what's needed; and in others it's probably not 
all that useful for the purpose.  But at only USD29 I guess you can't 
expect everything. :)

Being very democratically inclined, I'll affront as many as possible 
by (a) adding a crosspost to aus.computers; and (b) omitting a.c.f 
from the followups as it seems unlikely that any freeware solution 
will cut the mustard in this case.  Thanks again for your various 
contributions so far.

[For those who came in late, this concerns a search for an image 
database application to index a collection ranging into several tens 
of thousands of photos in various styles -- b&w, colour, slides, and 
digital.]


Cheers, Phred.

-- 
ppnerkDELETE@THISyahoo.com.INVALID