Some reasons why I like (and use) liveframe:
1. It has very spiffy viewing modes, and produces
very nice pages. It uses templates for all pages,
so it is easy to customize.
2. It is a single, well-written Perl script, easy to understand, to check for security problems, and to modify. I wanted to store the images on another site (where running cgi programs is not possible), and
modifying liveframe for this was child's play.
3. It does not autogenerate thumbnails. I have many images, some in 'portrait', some in 'landscape' mode, some need to be rotated, and some need to be thrown away ... preprocessing them with a little
script is much easier than e.g. fumbling around with some interactive gallery app.
1. Lack of input validation (easy to fix).
2. The templates include a stylesheet, but don't make much use of it, therefore
modifications must always be done in several places.
3. The navigation looks spiffy, but is actually difficult to use for computer illiterates (default images too small, resize option requires two actions - choose size and click 'resize' -, and the start page for a gallery forces users to read which options are provided - gosh!).
i've been using liveframe for a while now, and i love it.
it's the nicest looking photo album app that i've been able to find.
An open, cross-platform journaling program.
A scientific plotting package.