Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

Has been some discussion about use of Amazon prime unlimited photo storage for prime members. I had tried it awhile back and it worked, but was a 100% manual process, which sucked. I eventually gave up on it and deleted my images and opted to sign up with Crashplan for a 100% automated true backup of my entire computer, which was fine until they raised the rates last year.

Having dropped them due to the new costs I saw posted on here about Amazon photos again, so took another look. I was pleasantly surprised to find they have automated the backup process nicely with client software, and greatly improved the restore process.

Sadly, I was again left with no way to make use of it due to just upgrading my DSLR to a Canon 90D which uses CR3 files as raw (Amazon does not support CR3 at this point.)

I did send a note to Amazon asking about CR3 support as well as supporting XMP files as photo files for free storage.

I am checking everyday to see when CR3 makes the cut, and did a quick check on my use of XMP files for raw edits - looks like I currently need space for about 7,600 XMP files using up about 46 MB of space - easily fits within the 5 GB of free space, as long as CR3 files are added to the supported image types.

Once CR3's are allowed I will begin the process of uploading them.

I mean, I pay for PRIME anyway for the free shipping plus video streaming, why not enjoy the other free benefits?

Of course cloud storage is not meant as the only backup, and in my case is an optional off site storage for my images for use in event of a disaster where I lose my other backups stored at home.

(Download)

Magaliaman Loc: Magalia, CA

Donald,

Frankly I'm shocked Amazon supports .NEF and not .CR3 files. Hopefully for all the Canon users out there, they'll adopt .CR3 soon. I have my fingers crossed for you. I don't know how bad Amazon Photo software was before its latest iteration, but its a usable and very cost effective solution for me at this point in time.

Maybe if others emailed Amazon and asked for .CR3 support, it will motivate them to adopt them sooner. Here's hoping !

-Gary

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

I am sure the cr3 support will come along, if you store a cr3 now they do not display it, so it comes down to raw conversion support. Hopefully it will not be far off.

From the look and tests I ran recently they have vastly improved the client and system, so enjoy it!

Hopefully you won’t use up all the space!

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

Not trusting Amazon (or any of the big guys) I wonder if their terms of service include phraseology that indicates you agree to them having the right to use the images as they deem fit. That could possibly explain why they don't yet "handle" CR3 files - after all, what kind of "processing" do they need to do just to store digital files, regardless if they re PDF, JPEG, NEF, PSD or any of the myriad of other formats out there?

ChrisKet Loc: Orange, CA

Donald -

I’m so glad you posted this. I’ve been using their back up service as an “extreme” emergency should I lose my original, and both portable backup drives; but I am kind of worried about having to use them to restore anything. I have Amazon set to backup, not sync, because I was very worried about giving control to delete files, fearing I would not discover missing files til it was too late. Right now, Amazon shows I have over 150k photo files, while my LR catalog and Photos library combined show only about 50k. I’m sure it has something to do with both Amazon software and my manual upload process when I first started using it.

Do you feel, in your research, that Amazon’s sync features are sufficiently programmed to alleviate my fears, and do you intend to use Amazon’s sync features when you start, or will you just be doing backups?

Thanks again for posting your thoughts and research. I’ll also send in a request to Amazon to support your CR3 files (in addition to my NEF’s)...

~Chris

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Does that mean you'd rather use a small cloud service? I would think that would be riskier. A small company would have fewer resources to maintain their servers.

If you're primarily worried about someone using your stuff, just don't send anything sensitive to the cloud.

Personally, I view cloud storage as safer than home storage. Home storage is local. Cloud storage is distributed. Home storage is maintained by amateurs. Cloud storage is maintained by professionals.

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

No, that means I do not use any cloud service (since some of those have gone under anyway). I rotate 4 sets of drives and store one offsite, not relying out cloud service at all.

Dave H2

I use Idrive cloud backup but encrypt my data prior to sending it to the cloud. They seem very reliable and not too expensive. If you have your access password, you can download any backup info anywhere you have internet access. Since the data, (pics or other type, doesn't matter) is already encrypted , nobody at the cloud storage facility or in between can access anything. Free encryption software is available all over the net.
Dave

Bullfrog Bill Loc: CT

I switched from Crashplan to Backblaze when Crashplan raised rates. It works great and is quite reasonable.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Personally, I consider storing one offsite insufficient. That's because I don't have the resources to store a drive far enough away to be able to avoid a regional disaster. "When it comes to archives, you can't be paranoid enough".

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

Donald

Please share the good news when Amazon starts supporting CR3's.
I will be on the lookout as well.
Smile,
JimmyT Sends

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

This online storage has always worried me. Amazon is strange company. Did you ever try to contact
them and talk to rep. I had a credit coming to me for a printer I returned. They put the credit in
their gift card system and I didnt know it. Usually the promptly credit your card.
I finally found a telephone number buried in Google to talk to someone. A very nice lady
from South Africa a rep told me they put my credit where they did.
I like the service have used for purchasing anything for a long time.
But recent articles about how chaotic their services are that fulfill your purchases in record time.
Articles about how they manage their staff is scary.
What does this have to do with photo storage. I have the Adobe suite and would think of
that as the first place to go. All my original video and stills is on multiple drives backed up at home.
You can Get 4-6 TB drives reasonably now. I posted recently in My Topics the issue with EXIF ID
on your photos being able to date mine off your photos anywhere. Location, lifestyle, family age
and if you think they are not doing this. The Federal government has and it updating your
pictures on our licenses and putting them in a national data base. Big Brother??

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Online storage is backup backup.

The best way to archive your stuff (not just photos) is on a local disk. Two at home in case one fails. One elsewhere in case lightning strikes. The cloud in case of a regional disaster that gets your town, not just your house and your elsewhere site.

anotherview Loc: California

Good point: "I wonder if their terms of service include phraseology that indicates you agree to them having the right to use the images as they deem fit."

A while back, I bought a software that could organize and track my photographs by embedded GPS information. The user interface seemed easy to use.

Then I decided to read the software fine print. There I found weasel words that in effect by default gave my permission to let Google use my photographs for its purposes. I found no wording that compelled Google to compensate me for its use of my product for its business. I saw no option to disconnect the software from Google. Of course I objected to this uncompensated arrangement.

I deleted the software.

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

Yes, sadly, the concept of Intellectual Property and how it is getting (mis)used by some of the big players is relatively new and, for obvious reasons, not something Bezos and his brethren want to publicize.

Apparently some years back (2008), folks who previously purchased "1984" for their Kindles discovered that Amazon had "retrieved" said copies (due to some sort of kerfuffle with the author's estate or something). Amazon reimbursed them and said they were sorry. Of course, those who purchased the hard copies of the book were not affected.

An interesting read is "The End of Ownership: Personal Property in the Digital Economy" by Aaron Perzanowski and Jason Schultz - where they essentially point out that the concept of "ownership" no longer means what people think. It's one thing that people believe they "bought" that copy of software for $10 or $1000 when in fact it has always been the case that the money was to purchase the right to use said software (thus the whining about Adobe's and others' subscription schemes falls on deaf ears to those who understand the realities), but when something like a book that you ostensibly "bought" is suddenly retracted because, well for whatever reason, it shakes your confidence in what it means to have "bought" that book.

The bigger lesson, particularly with the "free" services like Google, Facebook et al, is that you are not the customer...you are the product that they sell to their actual customers, who are the advertisers.