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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
long-term storage for digital photos, videos etc
"nospam" wrote
| Sure. That's a good idea if your answer to the | questions about losing your computer, backup | and cloud backup is "I couldn't care less". | | the chances of *all* of those happening *at* *the* *same* *time is | *far* less likely than winning the lottery jackpot. You missed the point. The 3 questions are useful to assess one's backup in a practical rather than theoretical way. If your answer to the 3 questions is adequate for you then you're OK. I'm not making an assumption about anyone's backup. Most do not have all 3. People who do usually don't have it up to date. That's why those 3 questions are useful: Maybe you have all sorts of backup, but imagine losing your computer an hour from now. If that would leave you with problematic losses then you don't have adequate backup. ..... But I don't mean you personally. I mean everyone else who's not as brilliant as you and doesn't know they should do their backup by buying lottery tickets. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
long-term storage for digital photos, videos etc
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | Sure. That's a good idea if your answer to the | questions about losing your computer, backup | and cloud backup is "I couldn't care less". | | the chances of *all* of those happening *at* *the* *same* *time is | *far* less likely than winning the lottery jackpot. You missed the point. it ain't me who is missing the point. The 3 questions are useful to assess one's backup in a practical rather than theoretical way. they're different failure modes, each requiring a different type of backup. a good backup strategy covers all possible scenarios. you're still at risk if all three occur at the same time, but that's extremely unlikely, and if that does happen, something *very* major is going on. If your answer to the 3 questions is adequate for you then you're OK. I'm not making an assumption about anyone's backup. Most do not have all 3. People who do usually don't have it up to date. anyone who doesn't cover all possible scenarios *and* keeping the backups up to date is at risk. nothing surprising about that. a good strategy includes multiple hard drives (from different batches) with at least one off site and a cloud service. you said you back up to cd/dvds and 'old hard drives'. you didn't say you keep any of them off site and also have previously criticized cloud services, so i assume you don't use one. unless you burn cd/dvds on a continual basis, they're out of date. if your house burns down, you will lose your computer *and* your backups. old hard drives are more likely to fail, so if your house doesn't burn down, the drives might fail when you try to restore. That's why those 3 questions are useful: Maybe you have all sorts of backup, but imagine losing your computer an hour from now. If that would leave you with problematic losses then you don't have adequate backup. snapshots are automatically taken every hour, so worst case i lose one hour of work and best case, less than a minute. .... But I don't mean you personally. I mean everyone else who's not as brilliant as you and doesn't know they should do their backup by buying lottery tickets. missing the point yet again. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
long-term storage for digital photos, videos etc
On 2018-01-05 06:15, nospam wrote:
In article , J.Albert wrote: Are CDs/DVDs the best option for long-term storage? Or is there something better today? Most important is permanence, but with several hundred photos per batch, one DVD is not big enough if the RAW files are included as well. For optical media, you might consider M-DISC's. They're claimed to have a life of hundreds of years, because they don't use "dyes" in the recording process, but rather some inorganic compound. optical discs of any type are a pain in the ass and obsolete. Maybe. But these M discs claim to last 1000 years, and hard disks do not. If you needed more space than a DVD offers, get Bluray which offers 25gb and 50gb capacities. Also available in M-DISC. 50 gb is tiny. today's hard drives are 100x bigger. nases are 1000x bigger. for example, you'd need 160 50 gb discs to back up an 8tb drive, and that's assuming each disc is filled to capacity, which is unlikely. Then use 100 GB discs :-) I think they are enough to store photos. I would use archival tapes if I had the money... -- Cheers, Carlos. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
long-term storage for digital photos, videos etc
On 2018-01-04 17:16, nospam wrote:
In article , (PeteCresswell) wrote: File copy backups have the problem that if a file quietly disappears or becomes corrupted, you will never know.... modern file systems can detect and correct bitrot, without any additional software. No, I don't know any that does. Only metadata is protected, not data. However, the disk firmware does have some data checksums and recovery. Not at the filesystem level, but below. On day one of each month, I take the oldest drive, format it, and have Macrium to a full data backup to it. Then, on each succeeding day, I have Macrium do an incremental backup to it - so I have my data as of the beginning of the month plus any changes as of any given day of the month. no need to reformat it each time. Right. A modern format tool only erases and recreates the "indexes", it leaves most of the disk intact. -- Cheers, Carlos. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
long-term storage for digital photos, videos etc
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote: optical discs of any type are a pain in the ass and obsolete. Maybe. But these M discs claim to last 1000 years, and hard disks do not. so what? it's still a pain in the ass to burn them, so few people will bother. plus, as i said, they're too tiny to back up a modern hard drive. If you needed more space than a DVD offers, get Bluray which offers 25gb and 50gb capacities. Also available in M-DISC. 50 gb is tiny. today's hard drives are 100x bigger. nases are 1000x bigger. for example, you'd need 160 50 gb discs to back up an 8tb drive, and that's assuming each disc is filled to capacity, which is unlikely. Then use 100 GB discs :-) still too tiny. all that would do is reduce the total to 80 discs (best case) or more likely ~100 discs. I think they are enough to store photos. maybe if all you do is store photos. it's horribly impractical to back up multi-terabyte hard drives. even 500 gig drives would be at least 5 discs. by the time you're done burning the 100th disc (for an 8tb drive), you'd have to start over again because of all the changes that occurred during the time you've been burning the discs. I would use archival tapes if I had the money... tapes aren't archival and they're a pain in the ass too. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
long-term storage for digital photos, videos etc
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote: File copy backups have the problem that if a file quietly disappears or becomes corrupted, you will never know.... modern file systems can detect and correct bitrot, without any additional software. No, I don't know any that does. i do. Only metadata is protected, not data. data too. However, the disk firmware does have some data checksums and recovery. Not at the filesystem level, but below. true, but that won't detect bitrot. it also doesn't detect writing data that has already been corrupted somewhere along the way. On day one of each month, I take the oldest drive, format it, and have Macrium to a full data backup to it. Then, on each succeeding day, I have Macrium do an incremental backup to it - so I have my data as of the beginning of the month plus any changes as of any given day of the month. no need to reformat it each time. Right. A modern format tool only erases and recreates the "indexes", it leaves most of the disk intact. true, but there's no need to do anything. just do another clone, which will copy new files and delete old files as needed such that the clone is the same as the source. the computer is there to do work *for* you. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
long-term storage for digital photos, videos etc
"nospam" wrote | if your house burns down, you will lose your computer *and* your | backups. | Yes. If I only have backups in the house. Maybe you should worry about your own backups and stop trying to find fault with everyone elses. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
long-term storage for digital photos, videos etc
On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 6:40:31 AM UTC-5, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
In the old days, I used film. I had my first SLR in 1983 (Ricoh KR5). Around 2002, I started getting a CD of the pictures along with the prints. The JPEG files are around 500 kB. When I have time, I plan to scan the old negatives in higher resolution. Presumably this will result in TIFF files, which I should then convert to JPEGs for viewing on a webserver etc. What resolution is recommended for ISO 200 35-mm film? How large would the resulting TIFF be? What size JPEG should result from this (such that viewing at 20×30 cm, say, shows no obvious lack of quality)? In 2007, I bought a Pentax K10D and in 2015 a Ricoh GR. I tend to take more pictures with the digital cameras, for a variety of reasons, and appreciably more with the GR, since I almost always have it with me. With the K10D, the procedure was similar to film: get prints made and get the photos on CD as well. However, there are three differences. First, I get both the JPEGs (produced by the camera) and the RAW files on the disk. Second, these days it is usually a DVD. Third, the JPEG files are bigger, around 3 MB. (This is fine as far as quality goes for my purposes.) The JPEGs from the GR about 6 MB. Up until now, I have copied all the JPEG files to web pages (I run my own server). Even if I continue at the present rate (on average a photo per day) for the rest of my life, disk space shouldn't be a problem; we're looking at around 100 GB. Apart from the disk (RAID, but still), I like to have robust backup copies. However, several questions arise: o Are CDs/DVDs the best option for long-term storage? Or is there something better today? Most important is permanence, but with several hundred photos per batch, one DVD is not big enough if the RAW files are included as well. Of course, I could process smaller batches, or split big batches among several DVDs, but with other storage media being reasonably inexpensive now, the question is whether it would be good to move to something else. o Some people just buy a new SD card when the one in use is full, and use the old one as a backup. This might not be the cheapest option, but is not too expensive. How robust is this medium for long-term storage? o What about other storage media, such as USB sticks? Are all of these essentially the same under the hood, essentially SSDs, though with varying speeds? (In the old days, at least, a limitation of SSDs was how often they could be rewritten, but I don't think that this is a problem today, especially in this case where it is rewritten at most a few times before becoming static as long-term storage.) o A problem with SD cards in some case, such as on my wife's camera, a Pentax Optio, is that there are several directories, each with a few files. This is not easy to use, especially if restoring files from backup. I suppose that I could mount it as a disk, though, create a new directory, and copy all the files into that. o My wife has a video camera which writes directly to (small) CDs. What is the best way to secure long-term copies of such media? o These days, SD cards are large enough for videos, and we have various cameras with SD cards which can take videos (the Pentax Optio, the KR5, the GR, iPhone, iPad). We haven't done much with videos yet, in the past because it was too much trouble because storage was small and expensive, these days because it is not clear what the best path forward is. What do people suggest here? I don't think that putting the videos on a hard disk for viewing with a web browser would be a good idea---probably too much disk space, and might take too long to load. Perhaps better would be some sort of USB device which one could attach locally when one wants to see the videos. Relatively quickly, I'd like to come up with a good strategy, and stick too it. I use Japanese-made T.Y. (Taiyo Yuden) CD-Rs, with a cyan colored dye. They are supposedly stable for 100 years,and the recorded areas are clearly visible to the naked eye. Bought in 100-packs, they cost about USD $0.60 each. They are apparently discontinued by the manufacturer, but many on-line sources still have them in stock. Mort Linder |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
long-term storage for digital photos, videos etc
In article ,
wrote: I use Japanese-made T.Y. (Taiyo Yuden) CD-Rs, with a cyan colored dye. They are supposedly stable for 100 years,and the recorded areas are clearly visible to the naked eye. Bought in 100-packs, they cost about USD $0.60 each. They are apparently discontinued by the manufacturer, but many on-line sources still have them in stock. tys were very good discs in their day. the problem is that they don't hold much and far too expensive for the space they offer. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Where can I find results of long term tests on digital cameras? | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 3 | October 14th 07 05:52 PM |
Where can I find results of long term tests on digital cameras? | [email protected] | Other Photographic Equipment | 3 | October 14th 07 05:52 PM |
Long term camera storage. | Joseph Chamberlain, DDS | Digital SLR Cameras | 8 | November 17th 05 08:06 AM |
Long term camera storage. | Joseph Chamberlain, DDS | Digital Photography | 6 | November 15th 05 12:14 PM |
Need Advice - Long term storage of Digital camera | zxcvar | Digital Photography | 2 | July 5th 04 07:01 PM |