I Gb compact flash vs 512Mb (or even 256) compact flash

Really? I can think of a lot of places where CD burning is a bit
of a mission. As you get outside Namerica (esp in rural areas),
the capabilities will drop drastically, and prices could be steep.

My wife is going to the Antarctic this December. Anyone
know of a place where she can burn a CD?

With all those penguins you'd think that some of them would
be running Linux...


I would imagine that those researchers would be the most computer literate
folks of any.

Really? I can think of a lot of places where CD burning is a bit
of a mission. As you get outside Namerica (esp in rural areas),
the capabilities will drop drastically, and prices could be steep.

My wife is going to the Antarctic this December. Anyone
know of a place where she can burn a CD?

With all those penguins you'd think that some of them would
be running Linux...


I would imagine that those researchers would be the most computer literate
folks of any.

Haven't read all the replies so this may have been mentioned. There are
probably a few concerns to your question. What format do you take your
pictures in and for what purpose do you shoot? Some photographers do work
where RAW files are necessary and more preferred and they take more room, as I
understand. Then there is, how big is your average shoot or project? If the
combination of these two answers leads you to large files or large quantities
of pictures, large cards could be convenient as they would minimize the time
transferring material or changing cards. Personally I don't take such
demanding pictures and jpgs are my preferred format. Also my largest batches
of photos are around 170 or 200 shots. Thus a couple 256s are handy. I do
have a 512 but for some of the concerns mentioned below, I prefer the 2-256s
over one 512. Unless I know I am going to take a large number of photos and
don't want to have to change cards. Something that I might anticipate will be
a fast action or long running event.

One example of where the small numerous cards was a nuissnace was a Hockey
Tournement that I shot last fall. This is really unusual for me to do such an
ambitious project but I shot 700 photos of 8 games in one afternoon and
evening. I had 4 256 and 1 512 cards. Mid way through the tournement I had to
miss about half of one game due to having to transfer all my photos onto my
notebook. Took over an hour to do all the cards I had used.

Also, the shots missed while fumbling and changing cards was an issue. However
for most of my average shoots, like this afternoon at a Preschool where I
photographed a Kindergarten class, I took about 20 shots. That was a little
light of normal but I can usually do with one or two of my 256 cards.

There are a couple advantages here with the 256s. First, by dividing up
projects on multiple cards, if you do have a failure or loose one of the cards
you don't loose your entire project. Second if you have multiple smaller
cards in your bag and one fails, you aren't stuck without a card. One instance
like this that I recall was when I was driving around and had my camera with
me. I came accross a fully involved car fire and the fire department hadn't
responded yet. I navigated my way to the other side of the expressway and when
I got there pulled out my camera to pop off a few shots of the firefighters
hitting the flames with their extinguishers and hoses. The steam and thick
black and white smoke was very dramatic. I went to take the shot and found I
didn't have a memory card in the camera. My stomach sunk to my ankles. I
couldn't imagine a similar situation where your only card is defective.

Lastly there is an issue of work efficiency and the time it takes to transfer
your materials. I suppose it is somewhat relative as a 512meg card with 256
meg would probably transfer in the same time as the 256 card but I find the
smaller batches of the smaller cards works a little better for me. Certainly, I
wouldn't think of the 1Gig or higher. Since I archive a lot on CD-R, a 1Gig
card can't be fit onto 1 CD. however 2 or 2+ 256 cards can be put on one CD.
A 512 card can also be put 1 for 1 on a CD. The Gig or higher cards would
require some dividing of contents which is something I prefer not to be
bothered with.

Then, just thinking of it. The thought of loosing a (just looking at BH Photo
right now. Wasn't aware that for about $2,300 you could get an 8gig card),
$500 or $700 card compared to a 1Gig or less card worth $125 or less might be a
consideration. I would be sick if I lost an $800 or $2300 card. Also, if you
accidently lost a 256 or 512 meg card you might be able to get another pretty
easilly at Target, Office Max. Walmart, Best Buy.... At $125 for a 1Gig card
you might find them easilly enough. However, for a 4 gig or 8 gig card you
might be more limited in your ability to find them in a pinch.

Haven't read all the replies so this may have been mentioned. There are
probably a few concerns to your question. What format do you take your
pictures in and for what purpose do you shoot? Some photographers do work
where RAW files are necessary and more preferred and they take more room, as I
understand. Then there is, how big is your average shoot or project? If the
combination of these two answers leads you to large files or large quantities
of pictures, large cards could be convenient as they would minimize the time
transferring material or changing cards. Personally I don't take such
demanding pictures and jpgs are my preferred format. Also my largest batches
of photos are around 170 or 200 shots. Thus a couple 256s are handy. I do
have a 512 but for some of the concerns mentioned below, I prefer the 2-256s
over one 512. Unless I know I am going to take a large number of photos and
don't want to have to change cards. Something that I might anticipate will be
a fast action or long running event.

One example of where the small numerous cards was a nuissnace was a Hockey
Tournement that I shot last fall. This is really unusual for me to do such an
ambitious project but I shot 700 photos of 8 games in one afternoon and
evening. I had 4 256 and 1 512 cards. Mid way through the tournement I had to
miss about half of one game due to having to transfer all my photos onto my
notebook. Took over an hour to do all the cards I had used.

Also, the shots missed while fumbling and changing cards was an issue. However
for most of my average shoots, like this afternoon at a Preschool where I
photographed a Kindergarten class, I took about 20 shots. That was a little
light of normal but I can usually do with one or two of my 256 cards.

There are a couple advantages here with the 256s. First, by dividing up
projects on multiple cards, if you do have a failure or loose one of the cards
you don't loose your entire project. Second if you have multiple smaller
cards in your bag and one fails, you aren't stuck without a card. One instance
like this that I recall was when I was driving around and had my camera with
me. I came accross a fully involved car fire and the fire department hadn't
responded yet. I navigated my way to the other side of the expressway and when
I got there pulled out my camera to pop off a few shots of the firefighters
hitting the flames with their extinguishers and hoses. The steam and thick
black and white smoke was very dramatic. I went to take the shot and found I
didn't have a memory card in the camera. My stomach sunk to my ankles. I
couldn't imagine a similar situation where your only card is defective.

Lastly there is an issue of work efficiency and the time it takes to transfer
your materials. I suppose it is somewhat relative as a 512meg card with 256
meg would probably transfer in the same time as the 256 card but I find the
smaller batches of the smaller cards works a little better for me. Certainly, I
wouldn't think of the 1Gig or higher. Since I archive a lot on CD-R, a 1Gig
card can't be fit onto 1 CD. however 2 or 2+ 256 cards can be put on one CD.
A 512 card can also be put 1 for 1 on a CD. The Gig or higher cards would
require some dividing of contents which is something I prefer not to be
bothered with.

Then, just thinking of it. The thought of loosing a (just looking at BH Photo
right now. Wasn't aware that for about $2,300 you could get an 8gig card),
$500 or $700 card compared to a 1Gig or less card worth $125 or less might be a
consideration. I would be sick if I lost an $800 or $2300 card. Also, if you
accidently lost a 256 or 512 meg card you might be able to get another pretty
easilly at Target, Office Max. Walmart, Best Buy.... At $125 for a 1Gig card
you might find them easilly enough. However, for a 4 gig or 8 gig card you
might be more limited in your ability to find them in a pinch.

But, mostly....you can get a CD burned anywhere.

_________________

I did that during a trip to Las Vegas. At the time I had my Coolpix 990 and
had accidentally forgotten to lower the resolution after shooting some stuff at
the full 3mpxls. Usually I would shoot my vacation stuff at 1024x768 to get
the most bang out of my cards. Well, I was surprised when I realized that I
was almost out of memory the second day in town. I had one card left and 3 and
a half more days to go. I went to a photo shop in The Venetian and had the
stuff on the used cards put on a CD so I COULD, if I had to, reuse the cards.
Every night I would go back to the hotel room and go through all my pictures.
I would make some serious value judgement of whether I wanted to save certain
pictures or not. It is a good thing I did this. As it turned out, I didn't
have to reuse the other cards. I made it through the trip by conserving the
cards I had. When I got home I put the CD into my computer and it wouldn't
read. Had I recylced those cards some of my best stuff would have been
history. There was obvuiously an incompatability with the software that they
used at the photo place and what I had on my computer. It cost me about 20
bucks too for a worthless disc.

I would suggest that one should NOT rely on those CD duplication services. It
might not be a bad idea to have it done as a backup but if you can, take as
much memory as you can afford to take. Actually the disc wasn't a total loss
because 2 years later when I bought a new computer the new machine could read
the disc. However, at the time I would have been sick.

But, mostly....you can get a CD burned anywhere.

_________________

I did that during a trip to Las Vegas. At the time I had my Coolpix 990 and
had accidentally forgotten to lower the resolution after shooting some stuff at
the full 3mpxls. Usually I would shoot my vacation stuff at 1024x768 to get
the most bang out of my cards. Well, I was surprised when I realized that I
was almost out of memory the second day in town. I had one card left and 3 and
a half more days to go. I went to a photo shop in The Venetian and had the
stuff on the used cards put on a CD so I COULD, if I had to, reuse the cards.
Every night I would go back to the hotel room and go through all my pictures.
I would make some serious value judgement of whether I wanted to save certain
pictures or not. It is a good thing I did this. As it turned out, I didn't
have to reuse the other cards. I made it through the trip by conserving the
cards I had. When I got home I put the CD into my computer and it wouldn't
read. Had I recylced those cards some of my best stuff would have been
history. There was obvuiously an incompatability with the software that they
used at the photo place and what I had on my computer. It cost me about 20
bucks too for a worthless disc.

I would suggest that one should NOT rely on those CD duplication services. It
might not be a bad idea to have it done as a backup but if you can, take as
much memory as you can afford to take. Actually the disc wasn't a total loss
because 2 years later when I bought a new computer the new machine could read
the disc. However, at the time I would have been sick.

Paul J Gans wrote:

Ken Tough wrote:
Really? I can think of a lot of places where CD burning is a bit
of a mission. As you get outside Namerica (esp in rural areas),
the capabilities will drop drastically, and prices could be steep.

My wife is going to the Antarctic this December. Anyone
know of a place where she can burn a CD?

Fantastic! Wow, lucky. I'd say she ought to bring a laptop
along and burn it herself.

With all those penguins you'd think that some of them would
be running Linux...

In the land of the midnight Sun? I doubt it!

--
Ken Tough

Paul J Gans wrote:

Ken Tough wrote:
Gene Palmiter wrote:

OK....where could a person go for a long trip where they could not empty
their card...but where they can recharge batteries and eat and all that
other stuff.

A long camping trip...might be....you can charge with solar panels.

But, mostly....you can get a CD burned anywhere.

Really? I can think of a lot of places where CD burning is a bit
of a mission. As you get outside Namerica (esp in rural areas),
the capabilities will drop drastically, and prices could be steep.

My wife is going to the Antarctic this December. Anyone
know of a place where she can burn a CD?

With all those penguins you'd think that some of them would
be running Linux...

----- Paul J. Gans

According to http://counter.li.org/reports/arearank.php , there
are (at least) 3 Linux users in Antartica, making it one of
the most Linux-friendly region in the world... (using density
to measure friendliness)

--
-------------------------------
Loris Renggli, CH-1024 Ecublens
e-mail: lrenggliatbluewindotch

Paul J Gans wrote:

Ken Tough wrote:
Gene Palmiter wrote:

OK....where could a person go for a long trip where they could not empty
their card...but where they can recharge batteries and eat and all that
other stuff.

A long camping trip...might be....you can charge with solar panels.

But, mostly....you can get a CD burned anywhere.

Really? I can think of a lot of places where CD burning is a bit
of a mission. As you get outside Namerica (esp in rural areas),
the capabilities will drop drastically, and prices could be steep.

My wife is going to the Antarctic this December. Anyone
know of a place where she can burn a CD?

With all those penguins you'd think that some of them would
be running Linux...

----- Paul J. Gans

According to http://counter.li.org/reports/arearank.php , there
are (at least) 3 Linux users in Antartica, making it one of
the most Linux-friendly region in the world... (using density
to measure friendliness)

--
-------------------------------
Loris Renggli, CH-1024 Ecublens
e-mail: lrenggliatbluewindotch

Paul J Gans wrote:

Ken Tough wrote:
Gene Palmiter wrote:

OK....where could a person go for a long trip where they could not empty
their card...but where they can recharge batteries and eat and all that
other stuff.

A long camping trip...might be....you can charge with solar panels.

But, mostly....you can get a CD burned anywhere.

Really? I can think of a lot of places where CD burning is a bit
of a mission. As you get outside Namerica (esp in rural areas),
the capabilities will drop drastically, and prices could be steep.

My wife is going to the Antarctic this December. Anyone
know of a place where she can burn a CD?

With all those penguins you'd think that some of them would
be running Linux...

----- Paul J. Gans

According to http://counter.li.org/reports/arearank.php , there
are (at least) 3 Linux users in Antartica, making it one of
the most Linux-friendly region in the world... (using density
to measure friendliness)

--
-------------------------------
Loris Renggli, CH-1024 Ecublens
e-mail: lrenggliatbluewindotch