off site storage ?
Dec 11, 2011 09:45:45 #
it seems I just have to many images to store on home external hard drives. does anybody have any suggestions who to use for storage ?
Dec 11, 2011 09:58:40 #
I use SmugMug to both display and use it as an offsite storage. I have over 9,000 loaded on this website. BTW - I'm not using their storage vault. I only use the normal storage area. At the beginning of this year my external hard drive died on me, but I was able download my hi resolution jpg photos and print them. Arnold
Dec 11, 2011 10:06:58 #
Roger Hicks
Loc: Aquitaine
Not trying to dissuade you, but how many have you got? A 2TB drive holds an awful lot of images, and doesn't cost a fortune. I use one for main and one for backup, partitioned for faster access.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
Dec 11, 2011 10:24:40 #
Use labelled DVD, safer than anything else, if you discount fire and kids playing Frisbee with them.
On line storage or on the 'cloud' is just another way to lose total control of your property. I it free or relatively inexpensive but once everyone stats using this, do you honestly think this will stay that way? These servers are expensive, their maintenance is expensive and the backup is expensive, not counting the salaries of folks supporting the data center whose prices is also out of this world.
So, what do you think? A cheap solution in the long run? I think not.
How many things started out cheap and then ended up at a premium, after we were hooked on it? Look at the freaking software we use... Distributed computing (as it really is called) is just another way to lose control. It is driven first by software and OS makers then supporter by the like of amazon, yahoo, Google.
Do you trust corporations to make the right decisions for you or for their bottom line?
On line storage or on the 'cloud' is just another way to lose total control of your property. I it free or relatively inexpensive but once everyone stats using this, do you honestly think this will stay that way? These servers are expensive, their maintenance is expensive and the backup is expensive, not counting the salaries of folks supporting the data center whose prices is also out of this world.
So, what do you think? A cheap solution in the long run? I think not.
How many things started out cheap and then ended up at a premium, after we were hooked on it? Look at the freaking software we use... Distributed computing (as it really is called) is just another way to lose control. It is driven first by software and OS makers then supporter by the like of amazon, yahoo, Google.
Do you trust corporations to make the right decisions for you or for their bottom line?
Dec 11, 2011 10:31:12 #
Roger Hicks wrote:
Not trying to dissuade you, but how many have you got? A 2TB drive holds an awful lot of images, and doesn't cost a fortune. I use one for main and one for backup, partitioned for faster access.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
What he said.
Dec 11, 2011 14:16:09 #
Dec 12, 2011 08:56:32 #
I have about 50,000 pics, mixed RAW and JPG, on my main drive using about 1/2 TB. It is backed up daily to another drive in the same computer and to a Windows Home Server. Then I have an "offsite" storage of my own -- a 1 TB drive in an eSATA adapter which gets a copy and then the hard drive goes to the office. The cost of all of this is less than my best lens, and the time per week involved is less than driving to one place to do a shoot.
Dec 12, 2011 08:59:13 #
I use SmugMug for both Jpg display and for storage of my RAW files.
It's cheap, they have multiple redundant backups and I don't have to worry about it.
I have no reason to think that they will suddenly start taking financial advantage of me.
It's cheap, they have multiple redundant backups and I don't have to worry about it.
I have no reason to think that they will suddenly start taking financial advantage of me.
Dec 12, 2011 10:22:15 #
I never erase a memory card. I print out a thumbnail and make a archival gold cd and I store all of them together in the gun safe. I also back up my computer on and external hard drive which I also store in the gun safe. Don't think anyone will steal the gun safe and it is supposed to be fireproof. Hopefully some of them will survive in the future.
Dec 12, 2011 10:49:14 #
DK wrote:
I never erase a memory card. I print out a thumbnail and make a archival gold cd and I store all of them together in the gun safe. I also back up my computer on and external hard drive which I also store in the gun safe. Don't think anyone will steal the gun safe and it is supposed to be fireproof. Hopefully some of them will survive in the future.
Most"fireproof" safes contain a material in the walls that when heated will release moisture. This moistens papers contained within the safe delaying damage by an external fire. BUT, this moisture will play havoc with electronics stored within the safe.
Fireproof safes are for protecting money, wills, legal documents etc... a fireproof safe for electronics would be far more expensive than a gun safe.
I wouldn't count on it.
My backup solution is two USB3 external harddrives. I backup to both anytime there are major changes to my computer. One drive sits next to my computer to recover from "Oh darn, I deleted a file and now need it errors." and the other drive goes into the pouch in the car on the back on my seat.
Tom
Dec 12, 2011 11:21:47 #
Do gun safes also damage guns if there is a fire? I guess I will take my chances. I also store things in a different house or store them with my "kids."
Dec 12, 2011 11:38:29 #
DK wrote:
Do gun safes also damage guns if there is a fire? I guess I will take my chances. I also store things in a different house or store them with my "kids."
The gun safe will protect u against the common criminal (maybe, depends of how much time they have and if u have an easily located sledge hammer in the garage) and the offsite data storage will CYA for loss of data. Sounds like u are pretty well covered.
Depends on how paranoid you want to be and how valuable your data is.
Merry Christmas
Dec 12, 2011 13:41:23 #
Carbonite.com for unlimited storage @ $59/yr. It uploads files you designate automatically in the background while you are online. As a fall-back and easy viewing: Flickr.com where you can store unlimited photos and small video clips in their original size. Plus 2T external. It takes WAY too many DVD's, let alone CD's, to store all the photos and, in my case, videos.
Dec 12, 2011 13:48:35 #
One comment I hear at times is that archives should be kept on Gold CDs or DVDs, as they have a longer storage life than hard drives. A problem with this is, what if a newer archival system comes out and obsoletes the data format or drive system of the CD/DVD? Remember the floppy disk? If you use hard drives actively for backup, then you can change to the next better drive on the fly. It is no longer 'archiving' but more just 'massive storing'. Ten years ago you wouldn't think about 2 terrabytes of storage. Ten years from now that may be trivial.
Dec 12, 2011 14:31:21 #
The 'gold' standard is a myth.
On the change of media format, this is not going to happen soon. There is a push toward blue-ray but it is hurt by the number of DVD movies that have been sold. Blue-ray while writable is not backward compatible with all the DVDs drives out there so not an option for backup. Note that as with CD-Rw there will be about a decade or two overlap, plenty of time to adapt.
Floppy disks were quickly replaced because they were unreliable and overly fragile. (not counting incredibly small as far a data size stored in them from 160kb to 2.44 MB 3 1/2)
The trouble resides in the software norms. How many companies have lost data until everything stabilized onto SQL? For images, the same may happen as JPG is still not a stable standard. when it comes to the RAW files it is even worse and THAT worries me...
In the mean time DVDs are the most flexible for semi-permanent storage.
I would not be overly worried about DVDs becoming obsolete in the foreseeable future.
'The cloud' is not an option for me. I refuse to depend on someone else to insure something and ultimately lose control of my own stuff. The question becomes: "if something is important to you, will you trust an unknown party to take care of it?"
On the change of media format, this is not going to happen soon. There is a push toward blue-ray but it is hurt by the number of DVD movies that have been sold. Blue-ray while writable is not backward compatible with all the DVDs drives out there so not an option for backup. Note that as with CD-Rw there will be about a decade or two overlap, plenty of time to adapt.
Floppy disks were quickly replaced because they were unreliable and overly fragile. (not counting incredibly small as far a data size stored in them from 160kb to 2.44 MB 3 1/2)
The trouble resides in the software norms. How many companies have lost data until everything stabilized onto SQL? For images, the same may happen as JPG is still not a stable standard. when it comes to the RAW files it is even worse and THAT worries me...
In the mean time DVDs are the most flexible for semi-permanent storage.
I would not be overly worried about DVDs becoming obsolete in the foreseeable future.
'The cloud' is not an option for me. I refuse to depend on someone else to insure something and ultimately lose control of my own stuff. The question becomes: "if something is important to you, will you trust an unknown party to take care of it?"
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.