A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Good news for high volume data backup



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #22  
Old January 6th 08, 05:58 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
David J Taylor[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,151
Default 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


  #23  
Old January 6th 08, 06:59 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Scott W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,131
Default 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
  #24  
Old January 6th 08, 07:11 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
acl
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,389
Default 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.

  #25  
Old January 6th 08, 07:14 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default 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.
  #27  
Old January 6th 08, 08:21 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Bolshoi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default 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
  #28  
Old January 6th 08, 08:22 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Bolshoi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default 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
  #29  
Old January 6th 08, 08:34 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Robert Haar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 55
Default 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.

  #30  
Old January 6th 08, 09:10 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Jürgen Exner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,579
Default 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
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Good news jolitani Digital Photography 0 December 24th 07 08:19 PM
CHDK NEWS: High-Speed Photography Breaks New Records! Dave G Digital Photography 3 December 3rd 07 10:18 AM
CHDK NEWS: High-Speed Photography Breaks New Records! Dave G Digital ZLR Cameras 0 December 2nd 07 12:19 AM
Good backup camera? jmc Digital Photography 12 February 18th 07 05:42 PM
More on Canon Rebel XT noise at high ISO - 2 main new data points All Things Mopar Digital SLR Cameras 139 January 16th 06 08:10 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.