Chuck Albertson
Well-known
That's pretty much the system I use for my digital files, Bill. I just installed a new Lenovo desktop and ordered it with three hard drives in a JBOD configuration, not RAID. The current year's Lightroom catalog and image files go onto the second hard drive, previous years' onto the third HD. The lot get backed up daily to to an external hard drive that is more or less permanently plugged into the computer. Once a week, the same files are backed up to two other external HDs, one of which is supposed to be fire-resistant and the other goes off-site. Fortunately, external HDs are dropping in price and size (I really like the WD Passport drives, $100 for 2TB of storage is almost reasonable), so I can buy several and keep them in the rotation as insurance against the inevitable failure of one or more. Print and distribute the ones I like.
presspass
filmshooter
If you are trying to preserve digital, you have to be ready to make copies every few years. The magnetic media breaks down - tape, disc, hard drive, etc. You also have to be ready to update the media when technology changes; a photo stored on a Sysquest (sp?) cartridge may be there, but it's nearly impossible to get to. When we worry about prints or negs - properly processed - we worry about fire, flood, and theft. Digital ads to those worries with impermanent media and the technology fluctuations. I take digital for work, back it up, and forget it. Film, however, stays with me.
pluton
Well-known
In the days of film, I had the slides/negatives in my apartment. If the building burned down(without me being there, and having time to carry everything outside), everything would be wiped out.
Now, with digital, all the HDDs are in the apartment.
If the building burns down, everything is wiped out.
Except: There is one HDD that stays in a Pelican case. It's got all the raw files on it and can be grabbed in a few seconds.
I'd probably save cameras before the files anyway.
Now, with digital, all the HDDs are in the apartment.
If the building burns down, everything is wiped out.
Except: There is one HDD that stays in a Pelican case. It's got all the raw files on it and can be grabbed in a few seconds.
I'd probably save cameras before the files anyway.
Pioneer
Veteran
I really do believe that my analogue negatives and prints will be more likely to be useable than any of my digital files.
Whether or not they will be worth using in a couple hundred years is a completely different topic.
Whether or not they will be worth using in a couple hundred years is a completely different topic.
willie_901
Veteran
Absolutely.
In a previous life, my group's provided access to scientific instrumentation for approximately 400 scientists. There were a couple of dozen instruments in three physically locations connected by a corporate intranet. Each instrument was contolled by a UNIX workstation. Occasionally a workstation would fail. We always enjoyed the users' shock when we could restore a data system's files in an hour or so. We were also responsible for data recorded by approximately 400 corporate research scientists. We never lost a single file. This pleased patent attorneys and those Directors responsible for FDA and EPA compliance.
The only data you can loose is data that really isn't important for you. If it's important, then one has to plan and execute that plan. Fortunate storage is inexpensive and backups can be automated.
This issue (media degradation and device obsolescence) usually takes care of itself though. I don't buy the highest capacity storage devices. When one fills up I buy another. This provides fresh and new technology every couple of years.
I have all my original raw files (i.e. virtual negatives) on two devices. This thread reminded me it's time to pick up another 2 GB HD (my newest one will be three years old in a few months. Then I'll have a third copy.
My keeper raw files are on four different devices. But two of those are only refreshed every two or three months.
My finished work for projects and series are also stored as full-sized JPEGs somewhere in cyberspace. I rent server space for personal and business web hosting and a ton of storage is included. Then there's the free image storage offered by Amazon, Yahoo (flickr) and Google. I just divided groups of uploads into sets that take about 6 hours to upload. I started one every night until eventually everything was transferred. I know for a fact Amazon mirrors storage at multiple location around the globe.
Some people prefer to use off-site storage at family/friends/work locations.
Bike Tourist
Well-known
Let's see . . .
Approximately 40,000 transparencies (35mm, 6x6, 6x7), 10,000 negs (b+w, color, 35mm, 6x6, 4x5) and 22,000 image files (mostly jpeg) on DVDs.
No backups. In the unlikely case they become unusable humanity will survive.
Approximately 40,000 transparencies (35mm, 6x6, 6x7), 10,000 negs (b+w, color, 35mm, 6x6, 4x5) and 22,000 image files (mostly jpeg) on DVDs.
No backups. In the unlikely case they become unusable humanity will survive.
Archiver
Veteran
My data is spread over multiple harddrives for 'working' and backup. Everything gets migrated to new drives every few years, or when a given drive fills up. The old drives are stored and never touched, so I still have them if anything were to happen with the working drives.
I used to use floppies, then Imation Super Discs, then CD's, then DVD's, and now I only use harddrives.
As for printing: I really must print far more. The pleasure of looking through my film photo albums is greater than clicking through digital images, regardless of the vast difference in quantity, the ability to zoom into a picture, etc.
I used to use floppies, then Imation Super Discs, then CD's, then DVD's, and now I only use harddrives.
As for printing: I really must print far more. The pleasure of looking through my film photo albums is greater than clicking through digital images, regardless of the vast difference in quantity, the ability to zoom into a picture, etc.
Oscuro
He's French, I'm Italian.
Prints are the thing.
Redundant digital storage with offsite back up is an off the shelf solution these days. Anybody who can afford a camera and printing can afford a suitable digital solution.
I have a raid arrangement that works for the the studio. It's scalable and portable. I don't think about it much. An IT firm installed it. On assignment a trio of externals provides simple backup.
Far more important than the raid in the studio basement are the Epson 7890 and 3880 that sit in the center of the studio. The 3880 comes with me on certain assignments. A Canon 4x6 printer ALWAYS goes with me on any trip that lasts longer than an overnight. It's smaller than some of the cameras I've used. They are all run by a laptop that works as a wireless print server - much of my edits are done on an iPhone or iPad and sent to the printers wirelessly.
My house is full of children and I am fully immersed in their days and nights when I'm at home. I'd rather be with them than sit in front of my computer. So a phone-to-printer via wifi is a great thing. The photos get to the phone via Eye-fi SD cards. Magic. When I'm not at home, which is about half the year, a little Canon printer keeps me sane. It receives the files directly from the laptop, phone or the iPad, depending.
On my next trip I'm going without the laptop, taking only the cameras, phone, and Canon printer. Backup will be a pair of wireless hard drives with built in wifi nodes.
It's freaking liberating.
Redundant digital storage with offsite back up is an off the shelf solution these days. Anybody who can afford a camera and printing can afford a suitable digital solution.
I have a raid arrangement that works for the the studio. It's scalable and portable. I don't think about it much. An IT firm installed it. On assignment a trio of externals provides simple backup.
Far more important than the raid in the studio basement are the Epson 7890 and 3880 that sit in the center of the studio. The 3880 comes with me on certain assignments. A Canon 4x6 printer ALWAYS goes with me on any trip that lasts longer than an overnight. It's smaller than some of the cameras I've used. They are all run by a laptop that works as a wireless print server - much of my edits are done on an iPhone or iPad and sent to the printers wirelessly.
My house is full of children and I am fully immersed in their days and nights when I'm at home. I'd rather be with them than sit in front of my computer. So a phone-to-printer via wifi is a great thing. The photos get to the phone via Eye-fi SD cards. Magic. When I'm not at home, which is about half the year, a little Canon printer keeps me sane. It receives the files directly from the laptop, phone or the iPad, depending.
On my next trip I'm going without the laptop, taking only the cameras, phone, and Canon printer. Backup will be a pair of wireless hard drives with built in wifi nodes.
It's freaking liberating.
Oscuro
He's French, I'm Italian.
The beauty of the 4x6 print, for us, is we can play with layouts and sequences while we're in the middle of a project. Some of us work in cinema - it's like having rushes for the stills.
It's nice to be able to hand a print to someone you've just made a picture of. That can add up to major access points in the right circumstances.
You can make a book on the spot. Use a blank page volume and start glueing. Or a stock photo album. Think one-of art pieces.
Photos should be looked at. That's what they're for.
Print print print. ...
It's nice to be able to hand a print to someone you've just made a picture of. That can add up to major access points in the right circumstances.
You can make a book on the spot. Use a blank page volume and start glueing. Or a stock photo album. Think one-of art pieces.
Photos should be looked at. That's what they're for.
Print print print. ...
Timmyjoe
Veteran
From decades as a photographer before the advent of digital, I got used to the process of storing negatives, which I find more convenient than storing prints, and I like being able to go back to the source to make new prints.
I'd love to see some device that would let me make good quality negatives from my digital files. For me and my work flow, that would be an ideal way to store things.
Even though I've been shooting digital for over a decade, I still find myself going back to film for long term projects and book projects. Something about having the images on negatives, instead of in 1's and 0's, makes them seem more permanent to me.
I'd love to see some device that would let me make good quality negatives from my digital files. For me and my work flow, that would be an ideal way to store things.
Even though I've been shooting digital for over a decade, I still find myself going back to film for long term projects and book projects. Something about having the images on negatives, instead of in 1's and 0's, makes them seem more permanent to me.
oftheherd
Veteran
I thought where I work were the only ones who were stuck with old legacy programs. Out IT cannot upgrade to a new OS until they can ensure all of our legacy programs can be made to work properly.
On enquiry the market for dot matrix is small but strong, (do I feel a film analogy coming on?) apparently supported by the nuclear industry. Their critical programs were written and validated on commissioning and our stations are now largely very old, relatively, the risk of re-writing and bugs getting inis not worth it, so like us they run legacy and dot matrix, not saying they run the stations on a IIe though
Add some fire systems where the users find it appropriate to keep hard copies for some specified amount of time. The last place I worked was like that. We had a combined access control and fire alarm system. We could not afford for a dispatcher to see a fire alarm quickly scroll off the screen before it was read, pushed off by a malfunctioning door alarm. Some of our legacy programs also use dot matrix, sometimes since they were written that way, and sometimes due to the volume of printing needed. Dot matrix is a lot cheaper than ink jet.
Forget about the older media if it wasn't updated. Cosmic rays will eat up anything after a while. It may take a while to be noticed, but I am told it is an ongoing process on all media.
Yes, humanity will survive. I wasn't home so I survived a house fire too. But the majority of my slides did not. Somewhere between 8,000 and 10,000, probably 3/4 were Kodachrome. They exist, but not in a seriously usable form. Many negatives didn't do well either, but they faired a little better than the slides in many cases. I still find myself trying to unstick them from tissue or plastic holders, and getting the grain of the holders to go away. No fun.
But as you say, nothing is permanent and humanity will not be too much impressed with their loss. But I was. So being backed up some way may be worth the effort.