|
|
Good news for high volume data backup
http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html
Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD). This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale). Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and Gigabytes of images :-) -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
Good news for high volume data backup
"Alfred Molon" wrote
... http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD). This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale). Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and Gigabytes of images :-) Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site Gave up on optical media when 500GB hard disks dropped to 100EURO or less. Now I back up nearly instantly to removable drives. If you install a RAID array, it's even simpler. |
Good news for high volume data backup
Alfred Molon wrote:
[] Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and Gigabytes of images :-) I'm considering whether I really want wallets and wallets of DVDs for backup - DVDs which may not be readable in a few years time. Instead, I'm thinking of a couple of portable 250GB 2.5-inch HDs...... David |
Good news for high volume data backup
In article 1199532306.114264@athprx04, says...
Gave up on optical media when 500GB hard disks dropped to 100EURO or less. Now I back up nearly instantly to removable drives. If you install a RAID array, it's even simpler. But they are by far not as safe as DVD-Rs. I use a RAID array and in addition keep backup copies on DVDs. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
Good news for high volume data backup
In article ,
Alfred Molon wrote: http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD). This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale). Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and Gigabytes of images :-) Hmm. You might be right, but considering that HD DVD has some powerful supporters, don't knock it out yet. I also am not sure optical disks would make good backup media only because writing to them would be a heck of a lot slower than mechanical disk drives or solid state devices. |
Good news for high volume data backup
Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , david- says... I'm considering whether I really want wallets and wallets of DVDs for backup - DVDs which may not be readable in a few years time. Instead, I'm thinking of a couple of portable 250GB 2.5-inch HDs...... A highly risky approach. One head crash and you lose everything. Er, no. (a) it's a backup and the originals may still be available (I tend to keep all my processed stuff on disk, but not the unprocessed "master"), and (b) the whole point of the two HDs is in case one fails (portable to that one can be kept off-site). Besides it's sufficient if DVDs last until the next generation of media becomes available. You then just need to copy all your disks to the next media generation. ... and I think I would prefer to copy one 250GB disk to the next 2TB (or whatever) rather than have to copy 60 DVDs. Cheers, David |
Good news for high volume data backup
"Shawn Hirn" wrote in message ... Hmm. You might be right, but considering that HD DVD has some powerful supporters, don't knock it out yet. I also am not sure optical disks would make good backup media only because writing to them would be a heck of a lot slower than mechanical disk drives or solid state devices. I too assumed that the recent announcement that Warner had chosen BluRay might mean the end of HD-DVD, but an article today says that consumers have bought about 60% more HD-DVD machines than BluRay (something like 500,000+ to 300,000+). One of the reasons for those numbers may be that WalMart sells HD-DVD machines exclusively. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Good news for high volume data backup
[A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
Alfred Molon ], who wrote in article : http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD). This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale). Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and Gigabytes of images :-) In fact, this MIGHT be a very bad news to (smarter? ;-) consumers. I happened to investigate the difference between two formats last week; ignoring the size difference (which may come and go due to possibility of multi-layer variants), the MAJOR difference between the formats is the encryption. Apparently, Blu-ray MANDATES the AACS encryption. To add AACS, you need to set up an account with AACS (about $3K - $10K, depending on nobody knows what), and, after this, pay AACS about $1500 for each master disk. Currently, the state of debugging is that you need about 3 "try" masters before you get a satisfactory result. This gives the minimum overhead price of AACS of $9K or more. This is nothing for major releases; thus people who see HD contents only via major movies, this overhead does not matter at all. But for "independent" video producers, this makes releasing Blu-ray prohibitive. Thus, a Blu-ray-only world would be skewed much more to the side of big corporations. [Today, to release a few thousand run costs about $3.5 per HD disk, and $7 per disk on Blu-ray; AFAIK, this difference is due NOT to the technical matters, but entirely to AACS fees (it is with a producer who takes video content, and returns already printed stuff). It won't go down due to volume economy. The printing price is practically the same - both per layer, or per gigabyte...] Hope this helps, Ilya P.S. I could not find out on which step the AACS-requirement is enforced. Is it the player, the Sony printing facilities, or ALL printint facilities? If somebody knows, please answer... Thanks... |
Good news for high volume data backup
In article , david-
says... .. and I think I would prefer to copy one 250GB disk to the next 2TB (or whatever) rather than have to copy 60 DVDs. You can still do that. But you should keep backups on DVD just in case. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
Good news for high volume data backup
In article ,
wrote: I gave up on that a while ago. I prefer to use two usb drives which I rotate, keeping one in my desk at work. Prior to this I kept DVDs at work. But given how inexpensive these disks are these days and how much quicker they are than burning DVDs, it's not a hard choice to make. i used to do the cd/dvd route too. what a royal pain in the butt that was. now, i have all my images on a single drive (backed up of course) and any image is easily accessible at any time, even when i travel. that would be impossible with dvds. |
Good news for high volume data backup
"Alfred Molon" wrote in message ... http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD). This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale). Of course on the downside for Blue Ray is that Sony is on their side. How can one argue with a company whose line of "successes" include: 1) Betamax 2) MD 3) 8mm video 4) Hi-8 video 5) Digital-8 video 6) Memory Stick and Memory Stick Pro 7) SACD 8) Li-Ion batteries used in Dell and other PCs (you remember, that enormous recall...) I've probably even missed some! Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and Gigabytes of images :-) -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
Good news for high volume data backup
Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , david- says... .. and I think I would prefer to copy one 250GB disk to the next 2TB (or whatever) rather than have to copy 60 DVDs. You can still do that. But you should keep backups on DVD just in case. I do agree with you, but then I ask, why? What is to say that a cheap-and-nasty DVD-R (the sort you can buy in the local shops) written on the cheapest DVD writer (the sort fitted to most PCs), is going to be more reliable? I'm proposing that my processed photos will be on 4 HDs, two 3.5-inch "live" disks, and two 2.5-inch portable backup HDs, one kept off-site. Cheers, David |
Good news for high volume data backup
In article , david-
says... I do agree with you, but then I ask, why? What is to say that a cheap-and-nasty DVD-R (the sort you can buy in the local shops) written on the cheapest DVD writer (the sort fitted to most PCs), is going to be more reliable? Obviously you would use quality DVDs, wouldn't you? As for the writers they seem to cost all the same. In any case, so far I have experienced perhaps 1-2% bad DVDs which could not be read anymore and to be on the safe side I burn two copies of each DVD (and I also have a HD backup, see below). I'm proposing that my processed photos will be on 4 HDs, two 3.5-inch "live" disks, and two 2.5-inch portable backup HDs, one kept off-site. I burn each file on two DVDs and keep a copy on a RAID array. I also keep an additional copy on an external hard disk. I use the DVDs in case something is wrong with the hard disks. In any case, at the moment I have a huge and growing stack of DVDs, which is why a disk which has the capacity of 11 DVDs sounds so appealing. Would reduce my DVD stack size by a factor 11. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
Good news for high volume data backup
In article ,
Alfred Molon wrote: In article , david- says... I'm considering whether I really want wallets and wallets of DVDs for backup - DVDs which may not be readable in a few years time. Instead, I'm thinking of a couple of portable 250GB 2.5-inch HDs...... A highly risky approach. One head crash and you lose everything. You need multiple backup copies no matter what the backup media is. |
Good news for high volume data backup
On 5 Jan, 11:35, Alfred Molon wrote:
http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD). This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale). Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and Gigabytes of images :-) -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum athttp://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/http://myolympus.org/photo sharing site did you ever consider compressing the files first ?? |
Good news for high volume data backup
Alfred Molon wrote:
http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD). This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale). Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and Gigabytes of images :-) Well, it will sell more players... I am still not convinced that optical media is reliable enough for my backups. I have rented entirely too many unplayable DVDs. |
Good news for high volume data backup
Bolshoi wrote:
On 5 Jan, 11:35, Alfred Molon wrote: http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD). This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale). Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and Gigabytes of images :-) -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum athttp://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/http://myolympus.org/photo sharing site did you ever consider compressing the files first ?? Did you every try compressing JPEGs? |
Good news for high volume data backup
Bolshoi wrote:
did you ever consider compressing the files first ?? JPEG is already a compressed format. Even much more elaborate (read: much more expensive) compression algorithms won't be able to squeeze them more than a very few percentage points tighter. If you are talking about RAW then that's a different animal, of course. jue -- "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein |
Good news for high volume data backup
In article , says...
did you ever consider compressing the files first ?? JPEGs are already compressed. Compressing the RAW files would reduce their size to a bit over half, but it's not that practical (you have to decompress the files to be able to use them and this takes time). Besides, should there be some data damage to individual bytes, with an uncompressed file only one pixel or also its neighbours are affected, while if it's a compressed file the damage is much greater. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
Good news for high volume data backup
In article , says...
You need multiple backup copies no matter what the backup media is. Yes, that is what I am suggesting. The DVDs are the backup of the RAID array. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
Good news for high volume data backup
Alfred Molon wrote:
[] JPEGs are already compressed. Compressing the RAW files would reduce their size to a bit over half, but it's not that practical (you have to decompress the files to be able to use them and this takes time). Actually, some operating systems include optional compression at the file level - for example NTFS. Has anyone measured how much extra time this would add to opening a RAW file? I haven't seen any significant extra time to using comressed files in NTFS, but I don't use RAW. Cheers, David |
Good news for high volume data backup
On Jan 6, 7:58*am, "David J Taylor" -this-
bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk wrote: Alfred Molon wrote: [] JPEGs are already compressed. Compressing the RAW files would reduce their size to a bit over half, but it's not that practical (you have to decompress the files to be able to use them and this takes time). Actually, some operating systems include optional compression at the file level - for example NTFS. *Has anyone measured how much extra time this would add to opening a RAW file? *I haven't seen any significant extra time to using comressed files in NTFS, but I don't use RAW. Raw files are compressed already. A non-compressed raw file on a 8MP camera with 12 bits/color would take 12 MBytes of space, but the normal size for a raw file from a 8MP camera is closer to 8MBytes. Scott Scott |
Good news for high volume data backup
On Jan 6, 9:59 pm, Scott W wrote:
Raw files are compressed already. Not all, my d200 offers either lossy compression or no compression. No lossless compression. |
Good news for high volume data backup
In article
, acl wrote: On Jan 6, 9:59 pm, Scott W wrote: Raw files are compressed already. Not all, my d200 offers either lossy compression or no compression. No lossless compression. the pentax k100d has uncompressed raw - 10 meg file from a 6mp sensor. |
Good news for high volume data backup
In article cee743f0-3371-4e7a-ad4f-ae667f92be21
@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com, says... Raw files are compressed already. A non-compressed raw file on a 8MP camera with 12 bits/color would take 12 MBytes of space, but the normal size for a raw file from a 8MP camera is closer to 8MBytes. That depends on the camera. Not all cameras compress the RAW files. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
Good news for high volume data backup
On 6 Jan, 18:26, Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , says... did you ever consider compressing the files first ?? JPEGs are already compressed. Compressing the RAW files would reduce their size to a bit over half, but it's not that practical (you have to decompress the files to be able to use them and this takes time). Besides, should there be some data damage to individual bytes, with an uncompressed file only one pixel or also its neighbours are affected, while if it's a compressed file the damage is much greater. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum athttp://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/http://myolympus.org/photo sharing site I am going to buy a 500mb hdd shortly after thinking about putting data on DVD etc.. but a quick google shows JPG compression software.....whether it is useful or not I have yet to find out |
Good news for high volume data backup
On 6 Jan, 21:21, Bolshoi wrote:
On 6 Jan, 18:26, Alfred Molon wrote: In article , says... did you ever consider compressing the files first ?? JPEGs are already compressed. Compressing the RAW files would reduce their size to a bit over half, but it's not that practical (you have to decompress the files to be able to use them and this takes time). Besides, should there be some data damage to individual bytes, with an uncompressed file only one pixel or also its neighbours are affected, while if it's a compressed file the damage is much greater. -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum athttp://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/http://myolympus.org/photosharing site I am going to buy a 500mb hdd shortly after thinking about putting data on DVD etc.. but a quick google shows JPG compression software.....whether it is useful or not I have yet to find out .....500gb.....about 99 euro's in Carrefour |
Good news for high volume data backup
On 1/5/08 9:57 PM, "george" wrote:
Of course on the downside for Blue Ray is that Sony is on their side. How can one argue with a company whose line of "successes" include: 1) Betamax 2) MD 3) 8mm video 4) Hi-8 video 5) Digital-8 video 6) Memory Stick and Memory Stick Pro 7) SACD 8) Li-Ion batteries used in Dell and other PCs (you remember, that enormous recall...) I've probably even missed some! Don't forget the Windows root kit that was on Sony BMG audio CDs until public outcry (and some lawsuits) made them change. |
Good news for high volume data backup
Bolshoi wrote:
....500gb.....about 99 euro's in Carrefour Fry's in the US just had a special: Seagate 500GB PATA for 99$ US. At the current exchange rate that's just 67 Euro. BTW: I'm pretty sure you didn't mean gramm bit (that would be gb) but giga byte (that's GB) ;-)) jue |
Good news for high volume data backup
PossumTrot wrote: "Shawn Hirn" wrote in message ... Hmm. You might be right, but considering that HD DVD has some powerful supporters, don't knock it out yet. I also am not sure optical disks would make good backup media only because writing to them would be a heck of a lot slower than mechanical disk drives or solid state devices. I too assumed that the recent announcement that Warner had chosen BluRay might mean the end of HD-DVD, but an article today says that consumers have bought about 60% more HD-DVD machines than BluRay (something like 500,000+ to 300,000+). One of the reasons for those numbers may be that WalMart sells HD-DVD machines exclusively. "For my part, my images are not worth backing up." Who do you suppose said that? Or should have? OT: Wasn't that long ago I saw a possum trotting. By the time I got my camera, he was in a tree, hissing like a pointy-face cat. My little companion animal, ET the Xoloitzquintli, did hold a skunk at bay long enough that I could whip out my CP995: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/28/48...258b7404_o.jpg -- Frank ess |
Good news for high volume data backup
On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 16:51:11 -0800, "Frank ess"
wrote: OT: Wasn't that long ago I saw a possum trotting. I think I've been through there. It's near Pigeon Forge, isn't it? Seems like there was a good restaurant on the town square. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
Good news for high volume data backup
On 6 Jan, 22:10, Jürgen Exner wrote:
Bolshoi wrote: ....500gb.....about 99 euro's in Carrefour Fry's in the US just had a special: Seagate 500GB PATA for 99$ US. At the current exchange rate that's just 67 Euro. BTW: I'm pretty sure you didn't mean gramm bit (that would be gb) but giga byte (that's GB) ;-)) jue damn that Belgian beer ;-) |
Good news for high volume data backup
Alfred Molon wrote:
http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD). This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale). Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and Gigabytes of images :-) That is good news indeed. Hopefully those disks will last longer than average CDs. -- artix http://www.abstractart.ws _Abstract Art Directory_ |
OT:Possum Trot was the original name for what is now Kansas City
"Frank ess" wrote in message ... PossumTrot wrote: I too assumed that the recent announcement that Warner had chosen BluRay might mean the end of HD-DVD, but an article today says that consumers have bought about 60% more HD-DVD machines than BluRay (something like 500,000+ to 300,000+). One of the reasons for those numbers may be that WalMart sells HD-DVD machines exclusively. ... OT: Wasn't that long ago I saw a possum trotting. By the time I got my camera, he was in a tree, hissing like a pointy-face cat. ... Frank ess Frank, As a former denizen of Kansas City, Mo. I chose the moniker Possum Trot to celebrate its history. The original settlers also considered Rabbitville and Port Fonda, eventually chosing the name based on the Kansa tribe which lived in the area.. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
OT:Possum Trot was the original name for what is now Kansas City
PossumTrot wrote: "Frank ess" wrote in message ... PossumTrot wrote: I too assumed that the recent announcement that Warner had chosen BluRay might mean the end of HD-DVD, but an article today says that consumers have bought about 60% more HD-DVD machines than BluRay (something like 500,000+ to 300,000+). One of the reasons for those numbers may be that WalMart sells HD-DVD machines exclusively. ... OT: Wasn't that long ago I saw a possum trotting. By the time I got my camera, he was in a tree, hissing like a pointy-face cat. ... Frank ess Frank, As a former denizen of Kansas City, Mo. I chose the moniker Possum Trot to celebrate its history. The original settlers also considered Rabbitville and Port Fonda, eventually chosing the name based on the Kansa tribe which lived in the area.. Very interesting. Thank you. It's going to get dark in KC come October: the Black Mustang Club will be holding its national five-day meeting there. blackmustangclub.com. -- Frank ess |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:03 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
PhotoBanter.com