ChronoFramevsurl-to-png
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| ChronoFrame | url-to-png | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 49/100 |
| Rank in category | #8 of 41 in Photo Management | #13 of 16 in Web Scraping |
| GitHub stars | 1 964 | 256 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +32 | — |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 | 2 |
| Latest release | v1.0.2 · 21 Oct 2026 | v2.1.4 · 18 Apr 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Typescript | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
ChronoFrame scores 63/100 against 49/100 for url-to-png, so it is the safer default.
ChronoFrame ships more often: 3 stable releases in the past year, against 2 for url-to-png.
ChronoFrame is growing faster right now (+32 stars in 30 days).
ChronoFrame details →url-to-png details →
Swap a project
Keep ChronoFrame, compare it with
Keep url-to-png, compare it with