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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How should I permanently store digital photographs?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
I am not a certified expert on this, just a normal user like anyone else.
But my advice to you frankly: relax. Now, by no means am I saying to be cavalier about the whole thing. In my case, I am blessed with a huge 160 gigabyte hard drive which enables me to store every last photo EVER taken on it, but of course I backup periodically. CDs for fine for me when all I had a 2 MP point & shoot, now that I have a D-SLR and a prosumer 5MP--both shoot RAW, and RAW files are large--I use DVD+Rs. I typically use Memorex or TDK or Philips, as opposed to whatever off-brand Office Max has for a low price after rebate. With CDs, I have used the cheap off-brands lately, but if you want to be extra cautious maybe use those for non-archival things (making an audio CD of MP3s which you have backed up) and use TDK, Fuji, Kodak, Sony etc brands of CD-R for the crucial things. As for format compatibility--I could be totally naive to say this, but frankly I don't see JPEG going anywhere anytime soon. The only real format compatibility issues I saw are for RAW files, which are exclusive to the brand--and even that is somewhat mitigated by Photoshop's growing tendencies towards reading RAW files and being able to convert them to JPEG. Getting back to JPEG--people said much the same thing about MP3s becoming obselete with iTunes using its own propreitary format, and WMA, and AAC files, et al--but last time I checked, MP3 was still THE dominant format for downloaded music. Heck, they even make software (if I'm not mistaken) to convert the iTunes files back to MP3 format. I've seen software which I can use to convert WMA files to MP3. Meanwhile, I mean, look at the newest versions of Word & WordPerfect--they have converters to convert anyfile from old formats to the new. But if you keep it simple, you can play it safe--that's why many such files are saved as TXT files rather than DOC or WPD files, because almost any program can read them. But anyway, I've seen how Word files can take really old files from previous formats and bring them in cleanly. You may lose some bold-facing and italicizing etc, but it can be cleaned up often-times--and again, if you save in a simple format (and I'd think that equivalent to shooting JPEG in the digital imaging world), you can often-times import totally cleanly. I am not saying be cavalier about the whole thing--by all means, backup often, and consider a fire-proof safe to store the most "archival" intended CDs and DVDs in. Label them very well so you know what's on them--and every now & then, load them up to ensure that they work, and then while you're at it make a copy of THAT CD/DVD--and label it as such (so you don't get them mixed up), with the date you backed it up. Have the software verify the files after burning to ensure the CD burned fine. LRH |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Man, everytime today I've had to reply to my own posting because I forgot
something. I was talking about labeling the CD to what's on there so you can find the file easily. What I often do is, when I print out a photo--whether I do it or the lab does--I write the filename on a label & stick on the back of the photo, so I can track it down on CD/DVD easily. (Or, if the photo is not borderless, I write this info in the border-area I have.) I also put the exact date it was taken (sometimes that IS the filename); between those two things, I can EASILY track the file down to the CD/DVD it's burned onto. Then, I can backup that particular CD/DVD often, to double-triple-quadruple insure such highly coveted images have been covered very well in terms of being backed up. Also--consider making a "best of" CD so that the best ones have a CD all to their own (in addition to the date-organized backups I more commonly do), and that also ensures your favorites are getting backed up more often--and are easily tracked down. Store the 4x6s in a shoe-box--I have one that's actually made for index cards and has a device to keep the photos from sliding around a half-full box (an annoyance more than anything else). I hope this helps. LRH |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Larry R Harrison Jr wrote:
Man, everytime today I've had to reply to my own posting because I forgot something. I was talking about labeling the CD to what's on there so you can find the file easily. What I often do is, when I print out a photo--whether I do it or the lab does--I write the filename on a label & stick on the back of the photo, so I can track it down on CD/DVD easily. (Or, if the photo is not borderless, I write this info in the border-area I have.) I also put the exact date it was taken (sometimes that IS the filename); between those two things, I can EASILY track the file down to the CD/DVD it's burned onto. Then, I can backup that particular CD/DVD often, to double-triple-quadruple insure such highly coveted images have been covered very well in terms of being backed up. Also--consider making a "best of" CD so that the best ones have a CD all to their own (in addition to the date-organized backups I more commonly do), and that also ensures your favorites are getting backed up more often--and are easily tracked down. Store the 4x6s in a shoe-box--I have one that's actually made for index cards and has a device to keep the photos from sliding around a half-full box (an annoyance more than anything else). I hope this helps. LRH There is a wonderful consumer product that can accommodate 100 DVDs or CDs or a combination of both. It will fit on a desk as the disks are stored by order without the cases It has software support in the form of a database (althou I expect this will be a bit inferior to what image handlers require. Now why should I post this? Is it spam? Nope - just an idea that's all. Have you seen the desk space / storage 100 disks take up? Aerticeus |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NYT article - GPS tagging of digital photos | Alan Browne | Digital Photography | 4 | December 22nd 04 07:36 AM |
Top photographers condemn digital age | DM | In The Darkroom | 111 | October 10th 04 04:08 AM |
Photo Preservation for Chemical & Digital Photographs (Product Info) | Steven S. | In The Darkroom | 7 | February 5th 04 11:30 PM |
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? | Michael Weinstein, M.D. | In The Darkroom | 13 | January 24th 04 09:51 PM |