How should I permanently store digital photographs?

From:

So what would you guys say is the best file type, media format and
media type to use if I want them to be easily accessible for decades?

Consensus among the digital wise men is that no CD or DVD is truly archival and
that it's best to rewrite the data periodically to the current "best storage
solution", preferably in duplicate or triplicate.

Most wise guys are using external hard drives now that base prices are around a
buck a gigabyte, with occasional sales down to 50 cents/GB. Be prepared to
rewrite to other technologies as things change.

On 22 Dec 2004 06:28:48 -0800, wrote:

Trolling babble removed

For images of VGA resolution, the best way to store them is in a
shredder.

--
Owamanga!

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:04:37 GMT, Owamanga wrote:

Trolling babble removed

For images of VGA resolution, the best way to store them is in a
shredder.

So they can sit next to your brain...

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:04:37 GMT, Owamanga wrote:

Trolling babble removed

For images of VGA resolution, the best way to store them is in a
shredder.

So they can sit next to your brain...

wrote in message
oups.com...

First concern is the availability of current file and data format.

So what would you guys say is the best file type, media format and
media type to use if I want them to be easily accessible for decades?


Welcome to the world of digital image preservation! Sorry that you were hit
so hard by your experience with your "ancient" 8-year-old image files.
Actually, you received a valuable lesson from the School of Hard Knocks, for
which you should be grateful. You learned while you were still able to
correct the problem. Others will not be so lucky.

The short answer to your question is to store files in UNCOMPRESSED TIF. It
is the format of choice for virtually all libraries. Do not compress the
TIF files, because the various compression schemes might become unreadable
by editing programs in the future. Already there are reports of old
compressed TIF files not being able to be opened by modern editing software.
Forget compression on your archived image files.

Use the "Master and Derivative" model for your storage media: in other
words, make TWO "Master Disks." Store one off-site (bank safe deposit box,
relative or friend's home, etc.) Store it in a jewel box, keep it in a dark
place and don't touch it. Store a duplicate "Master Disk" at home, under
the same dark/temperature/humidity optimum conditions.

These "Master Disks" are used only to make derivative copies. If you work
on your images, always work off the expendable Derivative Copy. If the
Derivative ever goes bad, use your on-site Master Disk to make a new
Derivative Copy, and then return the Master Disk back to hibernation. Never
use the Master Disk for any other purpose. If your on-site Master Disk goes
bad, or if it is lost in a fire, flood or theft, then make a NEW on-site
Master Disk from the one you stored off-site, in the Safe Deposit Box.

You might consider including an Index Print along with your Master and
Derivative Disks, just so you (or your descendants) can see what is
contained on them.

This is a far cry from storing negatives in archival plastic pages, and
storing prints in albums (or in shoeboxes).

Even after taking all these precautions, you will have to provide for
migrating the data to the latest file format and media type as time goes on.
Plan on doing this every 7-10 years. This is the Achilles Heel of digital
preservation: you cannot be assured that this migration effort will continue
after your demise. Just think about the proverbial shoebox full of photos
found in Grandma's attic: for one thing, people tend to move more often and
there is less chance that our historical images will be left undisturbed for
generations. And (more importantly) the photos Grandma stored were visible
without any special equipment or software. What if those Mac images that
you had were just a few years older? You might not have had the means to
decode them, and you would have probably discarded them, rather than pay to
have them converted onto a current medium.

Kodak, on their website, even recommends that you consider long-term storage
of your important images by making PRINTS of them, and storing them in
archival albums, in appropriate temperature/humidity/darkness conditions.
The fact is that, for the typical consumer, the lowly PRINT stands the
greatest chance of long-term survival, because it requires little long-term
maintenance.

If you are starting to have reservations about digital file longevity, you
are not alone. I recommend that you have a look at this article, that
discusses the issue better than I can. "Digital's Dirty Little Secret"

http://www.vividlight.com/articles/1513.htm

Even large digital libraries are affected by the need to periodically renew
their digital assets onto newer file formats and storage media. What makes
them different from us consumers is that they have planned for, and budgeted
for, this continual file maintenance and renewal. We ordinary folks must
rely upon our children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren to care for our
image files. There is no assurance that they will have any interest in
doing so. More likely, the piles of disks will gather dust until somebody
decides to throw them out, since they can't read them. At least prints have
a chance of surviving, because their historical value is apparent at first
glance. Not so with those CDs or DVDs.

More photos are being taken than ever before, and I believe that a large
number of them will survive. But the question of whether YOUR particular
photos will survive in digital format is uncertain.

My own solution is to do my important stuff on film. I use digital for
short-time-horizons of under 5 years. And on important digital images, I do
have OFOTO make prints on silver halide paper, and I keep them in archival
albums. I have tons of CDs, with digital images on them, and I have no
reason to think that they will survive long-term. It is a pity that this
problem has not been solved yet.

Jeremy wrote:
The short answer to your question is to store files in UNCOMPRESSED TIF. It
is the format of choice for virtually all libraries. Do not compress the
TIF files, because the various compression schemes might become unreadable
by editing programs in the future. Already there are reports of old
compressed TIF files not being able to be opened by modern editing software.
Forget compression on your archived image files.

IMHO jpeg (not jpeg 2000) is perfectly safe in that regard. Having
become one of the two formats universal on the Web, it is not going away
during your or my lifetime. Not a chance.


Even after taking all these precautions, you will have to provide for
migrating the data to the latest file format and media type as time goes on.
Plan on doing this every 7-10 years.

This is less and less the case. As computers become more widespread and
more adequate, evolution slows. People point out that (for instance)
there are only two drives on earth that can read the tapes on which the
1960(?) census were recorded. But how many of those drives were ever
manufactured in the first place? Writable CDs have already been the
norm for about 7 years, and all new drives are backwards compatible with
them, and will be for the forseeable future. 3.5" floppies have been
"dying" for almost 10 years now, yet drives are cheap and widely
available. And there are far more CDs in curculation than there ever
were 3.5" floppies, ensuring an even longer transition.

This is the Achilles Heel of digital
preservation: you cannot be assured that this migration effort will continue
after your demise.

But then you won't care.

Responding to the rest of your post, as well, I just don't think it's
important to worry about hundreds of years. I disagree with the fears
of a "digital dark age." If digital information is more easily
destroyed, it is also replicated and distributed. Many images will not
survive, but billions upon billions will. Given that, it's vanity to
imagine that anybody will mourn the loss of your (or my) photographs.

timeOday wrote:

IMHO jpeg (not jpeg 2000) is perfectly safe in that regard.
Having become one of the two formats universal on the Web,
it is not going away during your or my lifetime. Not a chance.

Hogwash. File formats come and go in a very short period.
There's nothing that guarantees the survival of a lossy format
like JPG during the course of the next ten years, much less
the next fifty.

As computers become more widespread and more adequate,
evolution slows.

More hogwash. You're swimming in it.

Writable CDs have already been the norm for about 7 years,
and all new drives are backwards compatible with them,
and will be for the forseeable future.

Utter baloney. DVD-R is standard now for most high-end
systems. CD is dying.

3.5" floppies have been "dying" for almost 10 years now,
yet drives are cheap and widely available.

Yeah right -- the last gasp of a moribund hardware item!

you cannot be assured that this migration effort will
continue after your demise.

But then you won't care.

Moronic interpretation of the topic. Ever heard of archival
preservation? Family records? The point is to preserve
images beyond one's demise. Maybe you don't care, but
most folks interested in this topic care deeply.

I just don't think it's important to worry about hundreds
of years.

Then why are you participating in this thread, which is
about exactly that?

If digital information is more easily destroyed, it is also
replicated and distributed. Many images will not
survive, but billions upon billions will. Given that,
it's vanity to imagine that anybody will mourn the loss
of your ... photographs.

Duh! Well, you don't have children or grandchildren then,
do you? If you don't mind substitution of documents, and
just rejoice that "billions" of irrelevant ones "survive," then
I guess you don't care if the picture of your mother hanging
on the wall is replaced with one of Phyllis Diller, eh? Hey,
one pidger's just like another, right? And quantity is important,
so we'll give you 100,000 pidgers of Phyllis Diller.

Farga Palenga Jengis wrote:

timeOday wrote:


IMHO jpeg (not jpeg 2000) is perfectly safe in that regard.
Having become one of the two formats universal on the Web,
it is not going away during your or my lifetime. Not a chance.


Hogwash. File formats come and go in a very short period.
There's nothing that guarantees the survival of a lossy format
like JPG during the course of the next ten years, much less
the next fifty.

My goodness; now you have me scared! Is it going to
disappear tonight? Next week? Do I have a month?

Come on, even IF it were to disappear over the next few
years or a decade, those of us who care would simply
create new copies in whatever format on whatever media
was then current. And even for those of us not smart
enough to do so, someone somewhere would provide us with
a convertor.

snip

Utter baloney. DVD-R is standard now for most high-end
systems. CD is dying.

Yeppers, a long long long slow death. Darn, I'm in
trouble again. Don't even have a CD player in my
machine. But wait! Somehow magically my DVD burner
seems to use them. Writes 'em too. Try it, maybe yours
will too.

snip again

Moronic interpretation of the topic. Ever heard of archival
preservation? Family records? The point is to preserve
images beyond one's demise. Maybe you don't care, but
most folks interested in this topic care deeply.

Nothing moronic about it. It's NOT our task to
preserve beyond our own lifetimes. I pass mine on
to my daughers, then THEY decide if and when they'll
maintain them. There's nothing more that can be asked
of me, or that I can do. Period.

snip again

Duh! Well, you don't have children or grandchildren then,
do you? If you don't mind substitution of documents, and
just rejoice that "billions" of irrelevant ones "survive," then
I guess you don't care if the picture of your mother hanging
on the wall is replaced with one of Phyllis Diller, eh? Hey,
one pidger's just like another, right? And quantity is important,
so we'll give you 100,000 pidgers of Phyllis Diller.

Sure do. The best in the world. And I hope the future
generations remember some of our history; both of us; all of
us. But if they're going to do it then they are going to
have to take on the responsibility of maintaining those
records. No matter how badly we want to, no matter how hard
we try, we just can't.

Take care.

Ken

Ken Weitzel wrote:
Farga Palenga Jengis wrote:
timeOday wrote:

IMHO jpeg (not jpeg 2000) is perfectly safe in that regard.
Having become one of the two formats universal on the Web,
it is not going away during your or my lifetime. Not a chance.

Hogwash. File formats come and go in a very short period.
There's nothing that guarantees the survival of a lossy format
like JPG during the course of the next ten years, much less
the next fifty.

My goodness; now you have me scared! Is it going to
disappear tonight? Next week? Do I have a month?

A little reductio ad absurdem, eh? tOd said JPG would
last beyond his lifetime. See on the one hand "tonight" and
on the other hand "my lifetime?"

Somehow magically my DVD burner seems to use
them. Writes 'em too. Try it, maybe yours will too.

Yes but that's not the point, is it? Yesterday the
standard for optical storage was CD, today it's
DVD, tomorrow it might not be optical at all.

It's NOT our task to preserve beyond our own lifetimes.
I pass mine on to my daughers ...

Still missing the point. tOd said that he didn't care if his
images were passed on to his daughters, since "billions"
of other images would survive.

Ken Weitzel wrote:
Farga Palenga Jengis wrote:
timeOday wrote:

IMHO jpeg (not jpeg 2000) is perfectly safe in that regard.
Having become one of the two formats universal on the Web,
it is not going away during your or my lifetime. Not a chance.

Hogwash. File formats come and go in a very short period.
There's nothing that guarantees the survival of a lossy format
like JPG during the course of the next ten years, much less
the next fifty.

My goodness; now you have me scared! Is it going to
disappear tonight? Next week? Do I have a month?

A little reductio ad absurdem, eh? tOd said JPG would
last beyond his lifetime. See on the one hand "tonight" and
on the other hand "my lifetime?"

Somehow magically my DVD burner seems to use
them. Writes 'em too. Try it, maybe yours will too.

Yes but that's not the point, is it? Yesterday the
standard for optical storage was CD, today it's
DVD, tomorrow it might not be optical at all.

It's NOT our task to preserve beyond our own lifetimes.
I pass mine on to my daughers ...

Still missing the point. tOd said that he didn't care if his
images were passed on to his daughters, since "billions"
of other images would survive.