Storage of photos
Sep 2, 2019 09:35:31 #
Hello everyone, to guard against hard drive loss, I have been using Carbonite. I love that it works in the background, (lately when it's working) I love the fact I can the view my photos on my smart phone and then text msg one or more. However, as I said it has not been working the best and the price keeps going up. Any opinions on other options that provide the same capability and more?
John
John
Sep 2, 2019 09:57:16 #
For abut $6 a month for unlimited on one computer (drive) I don't feel that it is excessive.
Been using Carbonite for years with no problems.
I also backup my files to a local external drive.
Been using Carbonite for years with no problems.
I also backup my files to a local external drive.
Sep 2, 2019 10:01:33 #
Welcome to the Hog, John, enjoy, I hope you find the answer that suits you.
Sep 2, 2019 14:43:27 #
juan_uy
Loc: Uruguay
Not sure if you have the option you mention regarding accessing photos from the cell phone (I use it only for backup). I have been happy with Backblaze for the last two or three years.
Sep 3, 2019 07:57:37 #
Sep 3, 2019 08:00:53 #
Off-site storage is ideal, but not as convenient as on-site. I use two external drives and a NAS. If the house is destroyed by fire, I'll probably lost everything, and 50k pictures will be the least of my problems. I have enough monthly payments without adding another for photo storage.
Sep 3, 2019 08:05:17 #
Mixed media.
Never put all your eggs in one basket. Local storage is most convenient and probably cost effective. Cloud storage is safest but has bandwidth issues. Use both. Local for convenience and quick access, cloud for backup backup.
And when new technology has matured a bit to the point at which it is widely accepted, embrace it and add it to your archiving protocol.
Never put all your eggs in one basket. Local storage is most convenient and probably cost effective. Cloud storage is safest but has bandwidth issues. Use both. Local for convenience and quick access, cloud for backup backup.
And when new technology has matured a bit to the point at which it is widely accepted, embrace it and add it to your archiving protocol.
Sep 3, 2019 10:00:39 #
Sep 3, 2019 11:35:45 #
juan_uy
Loc: Uruguay
jerryc41 wrote:
Off-site storage is ideal, but not as convenient as on-site. I use two external drives and a NAS. If the house is destroyed by fire, I'll probably lost everything, and 50k pictures will be the least of my problems. I have enough monthly payments without adding another for photo storage.
I also have local backup. Cloud is just an addition or "safe net" in case of disaster (and it also backups up complete system).
After talking with people that lost their house in a fire, the thing they regret the most was not having copies or backups of photographs. The insurance could replace all the rest, but not those memories
Sep 3, 2019 13:34:31 #
timcc
Loc: Virginia
Welcome to the hog pen, John. You might want to look into Acronis. May not be the cheapest, but it is reliable. I back up my photos (and all other files) on two hard drives, one of which I keep in a safe deposit box in case of fire. I switch them out every few weeks to keep the remote one reasonably current. Acronis also has a cloud option for an additional fee. Good luck!
Sep 3, 2019 23:43:09 #
I use Microsoft OneDrive to store all of my jpeg photos that I have edited you can also obtain all of your photos on your smartphone or any other device that you own but I also have a 10 terabyte on-site hard drive that I store everything on all the Raw photos and all the jpegs so the jpegs are backed up twice
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.