Raw cloud storage
Dec 24, 2023 07:39:17 #
Dec 24, 2023 07:57:31 #
TriX wrote:
Don’t let ill informed naysayers prevent you from using the safest, most reliable storage there is for a disaster recovery copy of your data. And in the event you think hackers are spending time looking through your tens of thousands of files for one nugget, remember use a major cloud provider that provides encryption.
Don’t let ill informed naysayers prevent you from using the safest, most reliable storage there is for a disaster recovery copy of your data. And in the event you think hackers are spending time looking through your tens of thousands of files for one nugget, remember use a major cloud provider that provides encryption.
If disaster recovery is important to you; these aren’t billing records that we’re talking about.
As I’ve already said, in over 50 years of photography, I’ve never protected my photos against serious loss.
Dec 24, 2023 08:12:19 #
rehess wrote:
If disaster recovery is important to you; these aren’t billing records that we’re talking about.
As I’ve already said, in over 50 years of photography, I’ve never protected my photos against serious loss.
As I’ve already said, in over 50 years of photography, I’ve never protected my photos against serious loss.
Neither have I. I never had to recover a local backup either.
The only reason I use the cloud is because it is available as disaster recovery, an "insurance policy for data".
I do not have only photos in the cloud, but all documents, manuals, spreadsheets, genealogy, checkbook register, every "data file" on our desktop.
Just in case.
An insurance policy is something one doesn't plan on using, but it it there if needed, like home, auto, ...
It's simply one for data.
Dec 24, 2023 09:11:10 #
Longshadow wrote:
Neither have I. I never had to recover a local bac... (show quote)
My point was that I’ve never had a disaster recovery system at all. Not for photos, not for financial records, certainly not for genealogy.
Dec 24, 2023 09:26:58 #
Leinik
Loc: Rochester NY
I agree with Longshadow here your "explanation" does not make it easy to understand your point. I will try to answer from what I understand, I do apologise if I miss the point.
The information contained in the RAW that have been extracted for the JPGs (with a loss in bit depth, usually from 14 to 8 bits that also translates in loss of dynamic range) are dependant on the software/algorithm used. As technology progresses, you will be able to get more out of your RAW files (with a better optimisation of the process). You may also want a different interpretation of the RAW file from the one you choose for your JPGs at the moment you first processed them. These are reasons for me to keep the RAW files even after having processed them into JPGs (or even better into TIFFs).
The information contained in the RAW that have been extracted for the JPGs (with a loss in bit depth, usually from 14 to 8 bits that also translates in loss of dynamic range) are dependant on the software/algorithm used. As technology progresses, you will be able to get more out of your RAW files (with a better optimisation of the process). You may also want a different interpretation of the RAW file from the one you choose for your JPGs at the moment you first processed them. These are reasons for me to keep the RAW files even after having processed them into JPGs (or even better into TIFFs).
Dec 24, 2023 09:29:05 #
rehess wrote:
My point was that I’ve never had a disaster recovery system at all. Not for photos, not for financial records, certainly not for genealogy.
My point was because I can.
(added insurance)
Dec 24, 2023 09:51:03 #
rehess wrote:
If disaster recovery is important to you; these aren’t billing records that we’re talking about.
As I’ve already said, in over 50 years of photography, I’ve never protected my photos against serious loss.
As I’ve already said, in over 50 years of photography, I’ve never protected my photos against serious loss.
Then they must not have great value to you. I find it curious that you would spend thousands (?) of dollars on equipment and decades of time both learning the craft and creating images and not caring enough about what all that $ and effort produces - your data. it’s your data and your personal choice, but not a good universal recommendation for everyone else.
Dec 24, 2023 10:01:27 #
TriX wrote:
Then they must not have great value to you. I find it curious that you would spend thousands (?) of dollars on equipment and decades of time both learning the craft and creating images and not caring enough about what all that $ and effort produces - your data. it’s your data and your personal choice, but not a good universal recommendation for everyone else.
Dec 24, 2023 10:53:37 #
How are your data valued?
Many people value their stuff purely financially. Others value their stuff on the basis of their life. Your photos of your 4Great grandparents probably have essentially zero monetary value but they are very valuable to some people.
My digital data are valuable to me based on history. I would be hard pressed to find someone to sell the data to so it has little monetary value. But that does not prevent me from trying to preserve it through a backup system.
My old negatives are long gone, victim to too many moves. Other physical assets have disappeared (my old cars, old furniture, clothing, gadgets, etc.). But digital things lend themselves to exact copying, so they're easy to back up. And technology has developed to make it possible at modest cost and limited space.
Many people value their stuff purely financially. Others value their stuff on the basis of their life. Your photos of your 4Great grandparents probably have essentially zero monetary value but they are very valuable to some people.
My digital data are valuable to me based on history. I would be hard pressed to find someone to sell the data to so it has little monetary value. But that does not prevent me from trying to preserve it through a backup system.
My old negatives are long gone, victim to too many moves. Other physical assets have disappeared (my old cars, old furniture, clothing, gadgets, etc.). But digital things lend themselves to exact copying, so they're easy to back up. And technology has developed to make it possible at modest cost and limited space.
Dec 24, 2023 11:15:08 #
Dec 24, 2023 15:11:25 #
I quit using external drives for all backups, when I had a fire in my office and 2-3 drives were destroyed. The one in the safe had a 4 month old copy of the Software we were developing. We spent 4 months recreating all of the updates. We lost about 500k. So now everything is backed up continously to my NAS. Every hour all changes are written to my cloud services.
Dec 24, 2023 15:57:29 #
gouldopfl wrote:
I quit using external drives for all backups, when I had a fire in my office and 2-3 drives were destroyed. The one in the safe had a 4 month old copy of the Software we were developing. We spent 4 months recreating all of the updates. We lost about 500k. So now everything is backed up continously to my NAS. Every hour all changes are written to my cloud services.
The voice of experience and the best argument I know for using the cloud for DR. Please listen if your data matters to you.
Dec 24, 2023 18:02:11 #
TriX wrote:
Then they must not have great value to you. I find it curious that you would spend thousands (?) of dollars on equipment and decades of time both learning the craft and creating images and not caring enough about what all that $ and effort produces - your data. it’s your data and your personal choice, but not a good universal recommendation for everyone else.
I’m in my mid-70’s now. In a relatively short time, they will belong to my daughters anyway. I’ve never spent that money with the intention of clutching it to the grave.
Dec 24, 2023 18:06:56 #
Right behind ya by a year or two...
I'm more worried about loosing the files between now and the grave.
If they get lost, my kids won't have the opportunity to have them.
I'm more worried about loosing the files between now and the grave.
If they get lost, my kids won't have the opportunity to have them.
Dec 24, 2023 18:10:20 #
I don't have any kids so that's not an issue. My 2nd wife has a daughter with a son but my ancestral photos are not really related to them. However, I have cousins, aunts/uncles, nieces/nephews, and other remote relatives who ARE interested so I try to protect the historical stuff. I believe there is existing demand.
In the meantime, my photos are of value to ME, so that's sufficient reason to protect them.
In the meantime, my photos are of value to ME, so that's sufficient reason to protect them.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.