Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

The Hazards of going Digital

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
April 4, 2005 1:17:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
with a guarantee and none are fool proof.

With digital we *should* keep multiple copies on separate computers,
if possible and at least duplicate hard copies such as CD or DVD in
separate places. Still, the general the experienced and experience
say that sooner of later you will lose some images.

Now, as to experience.
I keep copies of current images on at least two computers and I keep
dual copies on DVDs stored in separate places.

Given that background:
I decided to upgrade three of the 4 computers here in February while
my wife was on a bike tour in a warm climate.

Sooo... I upgraded this machine to a 3.4 Gig, 64 bit Athlon with 2 Gig
of super fast DDR RAM with a new motherboard and Ultra ATA 120, 200
and 250 Gig HDs. That's 570 Gig, or over half a terabyte on this
computer.

I moved the old 2.8 Gig Athlon XP plus with 1 Gig RAM to my wife's
machine to replace the old 1.8 XP + system, and I upgraded the machine
next to this one by replacing the 2 Gig XP plus with a 3.2 Gig XP Plus
and one gig of fast DDR memory. That machine has two 160 Gig HDs for
320 Gig total.

The machine in the shop has 120, 200, and 250 HDs for back up (as I
recall) for another 570 Gig. That's *currently* a total of 1.46
terabytes between the three machines not counting my wife's which only
has a total of 80 Gig (two 40s)

Where am I heading? With all the changes, I backed up each computer
across the network before the upgrade and I did them one at a time to
keep the confusion factor low. I also had the images on dual backups.

Unfortunately, quite a few times I ended up splitting directories
between machines due to lack of space. The larger HDs were added
later.

After the upgrades were complete I had to restore the files and then
reorganize the backups.

Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed and there
were sub directories missing from the machines due to incomplete
backups due to lack of space.

Due to a very well organized filing system I did not lose any of my
scans, but I lost about 3,000 digital images for the year 2004 and
they are gone beyond retrieval. Most were unimportant, but a few were
once in a lifetime shots and I just had a request for a series of
those shots. There are many that are in categorized directories and
those were saved, but the majority from mid June through the end of
the year are gone. Now *maybe* some of the old DVDs will turn up. I
did find one so there *may* be others.

The main thing I got out of all this and want to pass on, is that
even with well organized filing systems and back ups you can easily
screw up and it is far easier to do with digital files than with boxes
of negatives. OTOH I have had negatives destroyed, or lost for one
reason or another as well.

NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and deleting
directories.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

More about : hazards digital

April 4, 2005 1:47:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Roger <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote:

>Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
>both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
>no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
>with a guarantee and none are fool proof.

[snip]

Roger,

I just slipped some dvd backups of my photos into my jacket. They are
heading in to work to be stored in my locked desk.

Hope you remember some drive you may have laid aside in the past.

Wes



--
Reply to:
Whiskey Echo Sierra Sierra AT Gee Tee EYE EYE dot COM
Lycos address is a spam trap.
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 6:10:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

clutch@lycos.com wrote:
> Roger <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
>>both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
>>no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
>>with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>
>
> [snip]
>
> Roger,
>
> I just slipped some dvd backups of my photos into my jacket. They are
> heading in to work to be stored in my locked desk.
>
> Hope you remember some drive you may have laid aside in the past.
>
> Wes

Hi...

I too sympathize with the loss, and hope old drives are found.

Let me share how we handle the risk; possibly preaching to the
choir, but perhaps useful to some newer users...

Live in cul-de-sac (half a dozen houses in a semi-circle.
Took pictures all my life, so over the past 25 years have
everyone in the bay sharing my hobby. Lots of pictures. Lots.

What we do is make backups, and store them for each other.
Blank dvd's are virtually free, and everyone, even if they
feel cramped, has tons of available long term storage space.

So I store backups of my neighbors stuff; they store mine.
I keep theirs in the furthest highest corner of the corner
kitchen cabinet. Almost unreachable space, without effort.
There's lots more if others prefer... the top corner shelf of
a bedroom closet... the back of the top shelf in a linen
closet. Lots of spots.

And the "rule" is that we don't touch each others. They're not
mine to look at, to inspect, nothing at all save hand them back
to their owner on request. Maybe move them once a year or so
when the shelf liner is replaced, but that's it. And they're so
tiny that none ever get thrown out, just added to.

And, with respect for Roger's loss; the ideal would be to do a
complete back up immediately before doing anything that presented
even the tiniest of risks.

And after backing up, deliver them to "his neighbor". You can't
touch what you can't see, and you can't hurt what you can't touch.

Hope this is helpful, once again hope Roger finds his missing pics.

Take care.

Ken
Related resources
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 7:38:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Roger" <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote in message
news:5a31515ffeqq2mml2b2gl24ba4u3fprfp9@4ax.com...
> Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
> both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
> no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
> with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>
> With digital we *should* keep multiple copies on separate computers,
> if possible and at least duplicate hard copies such as CD or DVD in
> separate places. Still, the general the experienced and experience
> say that sooner of later you will lose some images.
>
> Now, as to experience.
> I keep copies of current images on at least two computers and I keep
> dual copies on DVDs stored in separate places.
>
> Given that background:
> I decided to upgrade three of the 4 computers here in February while
> my wife was on a bike tour in a warm climate.
>
> Sooo... I upgraded this machine to a 3.4 Gig, 64 bit Athlon with 2 Gig
> of super fast DDR RAM with a new motherboard and Ultra ATA 120, 200
> and 250 Gig HDs. That's 570 Gig, or over half a terabyte on this
> computer.
>
> I moved the old 2.8 Gig Athlon XP plus with 1 Gig RAM to my wife's
> machine to replace the old 1.8 XP + system, and I upgraded the machine
> next to this one by replacing the 2 Gig XP plus with a 3.2 Gig XP Plus
> and one gig of fast DDR memory. That machine has two 160 Gig HDs for
> 320 Gig total.
>
> The machine in the shop has 120, 200, and 250 HDs for back up (as I
> recall) for another 570 Gig. That's *currently* a total of 1.46
> terabytes between the three machines not counting my wife's which only
> has a total of 80 Gig (two 40s)
>
> Where am I heading? With all the changes, I backed up each computer
> across the network before the upgrade and I did them one at a time to
> keep the confusion factor low. I also had the images on dual backups.
>
> Unfortunately, quite a few times I ended up splitting directories
> between machines due to lack of space. The larger HDs were added
> later.
>
> After the upgrades were complete I had to restore the files and then
> reorganize the backups.
>
> Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
> and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed and there
> were sub directories missing from the machines due to incomplete
> backups due to lack of space.
>
> Due to a very well organized filing system I did not lose any of my
> scans, but I lost about 3,000 digital images for the year 2004 and
> they are gone beyond retrieval. Most were unimportant, but a few were
> once in a lifetime shots and I just had a request for a series of
> those shots. There are many that are in categorized directories and
> those were saved, but the majority from mid June through the end of
> the year are gone. Now *maybe* some of the old DVDs will turn up. I
> did find one so there *may* be others.
>
> The main thing I got out of all this and want to pass on, is that
> even with well organized filing systems and back ups you can easily
> screw up and it is far easier to do with digital files than with boxes
> of negatives. OTOH I have had negatives destroyed, or lost for one
> reason or another as well.
>
> NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
> Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and deleting
> directories.
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com

Does anyone know of some software that will compare 2 directories and copy
the files that are different? I wish I could just drag the dir that I use
daily onto my other drive but windows doesn't have an option to replace only
newer files, or to say no to all for overwriting...What I end up doing is
just kicking on "yes to all" to overwrite all the files in the backup dir
whether they have changed or not.
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 7:38:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dirty Harry" <NOJUNK@FU.ca> writes:
> Does anyone know of some software that will compare 2 directories and copy
> the files that are different?

Yes, rsync: http://samba.anu.edu.au/rsync/

If you want to use it under Windows you will first need to install
Cygwin: www.cygwin.com.
April 4, 2005 7:41:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 03:38:51 GMT, "Dirty Harry" <NOJUNK@FU.ca> wrote:

>
>"Roger" <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote in message
>news:5a31515ffeqq2mml2b2gl24ba4u3fprfp9@4ax.com...
>> Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
>> both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
>> no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
>> with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>>
>> With digital we *should* keep multiple copies on separate computers,
>> if possible and at least duplicate hard copies such as CD or DVD in
>> separate places. Still, the general the experienced and experience
>> say that sooner of later you will lose some images.
>>
>> Now, as to experience.
>> I keep copies of current images on at least two computers and I keep
>> dual copies on DVDs stored in separate places.

<snip>

>Does anyone know of some software that will compare 2 directories and copy
>the files that are different? I wish I could just drag the dir that I use
>daily onto my other drive but windows doesn't have an option to replace only
>newer files, or to say no to all for overwriting...What I end up doing is
>just kicking on "yes to all" to overwrite all the files in the backup dir
>whether they have changed or not.
>
it's relatively simple. I hadn't thought of tackling it as there are
programs out there, but a back up that looks at dates and backs up
every thing since is pretty much standard. I'm not sure if those
could be used to copy files as back ups are usually images of files.


At any rate I may try to set something up that can search a computer,
or computers for duplicates, and by date. Then back up files between
designated directories such as any that have been changed when dups
are found.

Without researching, it sounds simple and probably would not take more
than a few hours to write. The last program I wrote searched the
entire FAA aircraft registration data disk, a database, and files fro
a PDA. It searched by N#, City, state, owner's name with a partial
and multiple match, air craft type, make and model, and even the row
and position in which it was parked. Where ever multiple matches were
returned it brought them up (sorted) in a table where you just clicked
on the one you wanted.

it also allowed for data entry and was designed as a "fill in the
blanks" for non computer people.
Searching on one or two computers across the network should be
relatively easy compared to that.

I hasten to add that I've been retired for a few years and would have
to review a bit, but with Visual Basic and Visual C++ they are almost
plug in the blocks of code.

More than likely, as it's relatively simple there are lots of versions
out there.


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
April 4, 2005 7:47:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In message <5a31515ffeqq2mml2b2gl24ba4u3fprfp9@4ax.com>
Roger <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote:

> Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
> ...
> Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
> and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed
> ...

Ouch. Always clearly mark your box of negatives. ;) 

> ...
> NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
> Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and
> deleting directories.

That's actually a very old rule, and it's still superb advice!

Jeff
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 8:02:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Roger wrote:
> Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
> both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
> no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
> with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>
> With digital we *should* keep multiple copies on separate computers,
> if possible and at least duplicate hard copies such as CD or DVD in
> separate places. Still, the general the experienced and experience
> say that sooner of later you will lose some images.
>
> Now, as to experience.
> I keep copies of current images on at least two computers and I keep
> dual copies on DVDs stored in separate places.
>
> Given that background:
> I decided to upgrade three of the 4 computers here in February while
> my wife was on a bike tour in a warm climate.
>
> Sooo... I upgraded this machine to a 3.4 Gig, 64 bit Athlon with 2 Gig
> of super fast DDR RAM with a new motherboard and Ultra ATA 120, 200
> and 250 Gig HDs. That's 570 Gig, or over half a terabyte on this
> computer.
>
> I moved the old 2.8 Gig Athlon XP plus with 1 Gig RAM to my wife's
> machine to replace the old 1.8 XP + system, and I upgraded the machine
> next to this one by replacing the 2 Gig XP plus with a 3.2 Gig XP Plus
> and one gig of fast DDR memory. That machine has two 160 Gig HDs for
> 320 Gig total.
>
> The machine in the shop has 120, 200, and 250 HDs for back up (as I
> recall) for another 570 Gig. That's *currently* a total of 1.46
> terabytes between the three machines not counting my wife's which only
> has a total of 80 Gig (two 40s)
>
> Where am I heading? With all the changes, I backed up each computer
> across the network before the upgrade and I did them one at a time to
> keep the confusion factor low. I also had the images on dual backups.
>
> Unfortunately, quite a few times I ended up splitting directories
> between machines due to lack of space. The larger HDs were added
> later.
>
> After the upgrades were complete I had to restore the files and then
> reorganize the backups.
>
> Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
> and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed and there
> were sub directories missing from the machines due to incomplete
> backups due to lack of space.
>
> Due to a very well organized filing system I did not lose any of my
> scans, but I lost about 3,000 digital images for the year 2004 and
> they are gone beyond retrieval. Most were unimportant, but a few were
> once in a lifetime shots and I just had a request for a series of
> those shots. There are many that are in categorized directories and
> those were saved, but the majority from mid June through the end of
> the year are gone. Now *maybe* some of the old DVDs will turn up. I
> did find one so there *may* be others.
>
> The main thing I got out of all this and want to pass on, is that
> even with well organized filing systems and back ups you can easily
> screw up and it is far easier to do with digital files than with boxes
> of negatives. OTOH I have had negatives destroyed, or lost for one
> reason or another as well.
>
> NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
> Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and deleting
> directories.
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com

I move the picture files to my wife's computer (two 120GB drives), to
the internal drive first across the network, then copy them to the
external USB2 drive (I have had problems copying from the network
directly to the USB external drive). I also copy to my laptop (60GB).
That gives me 4 copies on 4 drives, one of them easily portable. I have
nowhere NEAR the number of pictures you seem to have, and with HD prices
trending down, and sizes trending up, I see no future problem with
space. My experiences with CDs have been mixed and I don't consider
them reliable backup media.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 8:04:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ken Weitzel wrote:
>
>
> clutch@lycos.com wrote:
>
>> Roger <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
>>> both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
>>> no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
>>> with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>>
>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> Roger,
>>
>> I just slipped some dvd backups of my photos into my jacket. They are
>> heading in to work to be stored in my locked desk.
>>
>> Hope you remember some drive you may have laid aside in the past.
>>
>> Wes
>
>
> Hi...
>
> I too sympathize with the loss, and hope old drives are found.
>
> Let me share how we handle the risk; possibly preaching to the
> choir, but perhaps useful to some newer users...
>
> Live in cul-de-sac (half a dozen houses in a semi-circle.
> Took pictures all my life, so over the past 25 years have
> everyone in the bay sharing my hobby. Lots of pictures. Lots.
>
> What we do is make backups, and store them for each other.
> Blank dvd's are virtually free, and everyone, even if they
> feel cramped, has tons of available long term storage space.
>
> So I store backups of my neighbors stuff; they store mine.
> I keep theirs in the furthest highest corner of the corner
> kitchen cabinet. Almost unreachable space, without effort.
> There's lots more if others prefer... the top corner shelf of
> a bedroom closet... the back of the top shelf in a linen
> closet. Lots of spots.
>
> And the "rule" is that we don't touch each others. They're not
> mine to look at, to inspect, nothing at all save hand them back
> to their owner on request. Maybe move them once a year or so
> when the shelf liner is replaced, but that's it. And they're so
> tiny that none ever get thrown out, just added to.
>
> And, with respect for Roger's loss; the ideal would be to do a
> complete back up immediately before doing anything that presented
> even the tiniest of risks.
>
> And after backing up, deliver them to "his neighbor". You can't
> touch what you can't see, and you can't hurt what you can't touch.
>
> Hope this is helpful, once again hope Roger finds his missing pics.
>
> Take care.
>
> Ken
>

Nice to have neighbors with similar interests. Most of my neighbors
wouldn't know what to do with a DVD.... Except for the kids, of course.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 8:06:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dirty Harry wrote:
> "Roger" <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote in message
> news:5a31515ffeqq2mml2b2gl24ba4u3fprfp9@4ax.com...
>
>>Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
>>both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
>>no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
>>with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>>
>>With digital we *should* keep multiple copies on separate computers,
>>if possible and at least duplicate hard copies such as CD or DVD in
>>separate places. Still, the general the experienced and experience
>>say that sooner of later you will lose some images.
>>
>>Now, as to experience.
>>I keep copies of current images on at least two computers and I keep
>>dual copies on DVDs stored in separate places.
>>
>>Given that background:
>>I decided to upgrade three of the 4 computers here in February while
>>my wife was on a bike tour in a warm climate.
>>
>>Sooo... I upgraded this machine to a 3.4 Gig, 64 bit Athlon with 2 Gig
>>of super fast DDR RAM with a new motherboard and Ultra ATA 120, 200
>>and 250 Gig HDs. That's 570 Gig, or over half a terabyte on this
>>computer.
>>
>>I moved the old 2.8 Gig Athlon XP plus with 1 Gig RAM to my wife's
>>machine to replace the old 1.8 XP + system, and I upgraded the machine
>>next to this one by replacing the 2 Gig XP plus with a 3.2 Gig XP Plus
>>and one gig of fast DDR memory. That machine has two 160 Gig HDs for
>>320 Gig total.
>>
>>The machine in the shop has 120, 200, and 250 HDs for back up (as I
>>recall) for another 570 Gig. That's *currently* a total of 1.46
>>terabytes between the three machines not counting my wife's which only
>>has a total of 80 Gig (two 40s)
>>
>>Where am I heading? With all the changes, I backed up each computer
>>across the network before the upgrade and I did them one at a time to
>>keep the confusion factor low. I also had the images on dual backups.
>>
>>Unfortunately, quite a few times I ended up splitting directories
>>between machines due to lack of space. The larger HDs were added
>>later.
>>
>>After the upgrades were complete I had to restore the files and then
>>reorganize the backups.
>>
>>Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
>>and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed and there
>>were sub directories missing from the machines due to incomplete
>>backups due to lack of space.
>>
>>Due to a very well organized filing system I did not lose any of my
>>scans, but I lost about 3,000 digital images for the year 2004 and
>>they are gone beyond retrieval. Most were unimportant, but a few were
>>once in a lifetime shots and I just had a request for a series of
>>those shots. There are many that are in categorized directories and
>>those were saved, but the majority from mid June through the end of
>>the year are gone. Now *maybe* some of the old DVDs will turn up. I
>>did find one so there *may* be others.
>>
>>The main thing I got out of all this and want to pass on, is that
>>even with well organized filing systems and back ups you can easily
>>screw up and it is far easier to do with digital files than with boxes
>>of negatives. OTOH I have had negatives destroyed, or lost for one
>>reason or another as well.
>>
>>NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
>>Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and deleting
>>directories.
>>
>>Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
>>(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
>>www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>
> Does anyone know of some software that will compare 2 directories and copy
> the files that are different? I wish I could just drag the dir that I use
> daily onto my other drive but windows doesn't have an option to replace only
> newer files, or to say no to all for overwriting...What I end up doing is
> just kicking on "yes to all" to overwrite all the files in the backup dir
> whether they have changed or not.
>
>
Of course it does. Just hold 'shift' while clicking on 'no' in the
overwrite message.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 8:08:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Roger wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 03:38:51 GMT, "Dirty Harry" <NOJUNK@FU.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>"Roger" <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote in message
>>news:5a31515ffeqq2mml2b2gl24ba4u3fprfp9@4ax.com...
>>
>>>Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
>>>both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
>>>no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
>>>with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>>>
>>>With digital we *should* keep multiple copies on separate computers,
>>>if possible and at least duplicate hard copies such as CD or DVD in
>>>separate places. Still, the general the experienced and experience
>>>say that sooner of later you will lose some images.
>>>
>>>Now, as to experience.
>>>I keep copies of current images on at least two computers and I keep
>>>dual copies on DVDs stored in separate places.
>
>
> <snip>
>
>>Does anyone know of some software that will compare 2 directories and copy
>>the files that are different? I wish I could just drag the dir that I use
>>daily onto my other drive but windows doesn't have an option to replace only
>>newer files, or to say no to all for overwriting...What I end up doing is
>>just kicking on "yes to all" to overwrite all the files in the backup dir
>>whether they have changed or not.
>>
>
> it's relatively simple. I hadn't thought of tackling it as there are
> programs out there, but a back up that looks at dates and backs up
> every thing since is pretty much standard. I'm not sure if those
> could be used to copy files as back ups are usually images of files.
>
>
> At any rate I may try to set something up that can search a computer,
> or computers for duplicates, and by date. Then back up files between
> designated directories such as any that have been changed when dups
> are found.
>
> Without researching, it sounds simple and probably would not take more
> than a few hours to write. The last program I wrote searched the
> entire FAA aircraft registration data disk, a database, and files fro
> a PDA. It searched by N#, City, state, owner's name with a partial
> and multiple match, air craft type, make and model, and even the row
> and position in which it was parked. Where ever multiple matches were
> returned it brought them up (sorted) in a table where you just clicked
> on the one you wanted.
>
> it also allowed for data entry and was designed as a "fill in the
> blanks" for non computer people.
> Searching on one or two computers across the network should be
> relatively easy compared to that.
>
> I hasten to add that I've been retired for a few years and would have
> to review a bit, but with Visual Basic and Visual C++ they are almost
> plug in the blocks of code.
>
> More than likely, as it's relatively simple there are lots of versions
> out there.
>
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com
>

Not to say this will be the case, but when a programming job LOOKS
simple, it usually ISN'T. The ones the look hard often turn out to be
the simplest when broken down into component parts. Good luck, and if
you do get such a program working, I am sure a lot of us would be
interested.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 8:09:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Confused wrote:
> In message <5a31515ffeqq2mml2b2gl24ba4u3fprfp9@4ax.com>
> Roger <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
>>...
>>Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
>>and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed
>>...
>
>
> Ouch. Always clearly mark your box of negatives. ;) 
>
>
>>...
>>NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
>>Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and
>>deleting directories.
>
>
> That's actually a very old rule, and it's still superb advice!
>
> Jeff

Sure is. Most of us don't multitask at all well.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 8:19:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dirty Harry wrote:

> Does anyone know of some software that will compare 2 directories and copy
> the files that are different? I wish I could just drag the dir that I use
> daily onto my other drive but windows doesn't have an option to replace only
> newer files, or to say no to all for overwriting...What I end up doing is
> just kicking on "yes to all" to overwrite all the files in the backup dir
> whether they have changed or not.

If you're familiar with the command line, try an enhanced command-line
interpreter like 4NT. The following command in 4NT (/u is for "update")
would copy from DIRA to DIRB, only files that are newer that the
existing ones in DIRB, or files that don't exist in DIRB:

copy /u dira\* dirb

Or something like this:

move /su dira\* dirb

....would move all new or non-existing (at the destination) files,
including subdirectories (/s).

Another useful option is /c (changed - only replace existing older files).

There are also enhanced options for selecting by size, date, time, and
other criteria as well (you could have it, say, move only files dated
last thursday...)
April 4, 2005 9:18:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

2005-04-04, Roger wrote:
>[...]
> After the upgrades were complete I had to restore the files and then
> reorganize the backups.
>
> Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
> and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed and there
> were sub directories missing from the machines due to incomplete
> backups due to lack of space.

Maybe a dumb question, but wouldn't the backup software warn when this
happens? If it fails like this I would not want to use it. Btw, what OS
and software where you using for this?

-peter
April 4, 2005 10:29:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

2005-04-04, Peter wrote:
> 2005-04-04, Roger wrote:
>>[...]
>
> Maybe a dumb question, but wouldn't the backup software warn when this
> happens? If it fails like this I would not want to use it. Btw, what OS
> and software where you using for this?

I'm blind, I see you wrote XP in the original posting. So it was a dumb
question :-)

-peter
April 4, 2005 10:29:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 04 Apr 2005 06:29:08 GMT, Peter <durians.nomail@gmx.net> wrote:

>2005-04-04, Peter wrote:
>> 2005-04-04, Roger wrote:
>>>[...]
>>
>> Maybe a dumb question, but wouldn't the backup software warn when this
>> happens? If it fails like this I would not want to use it. Btw, what OS
>> and software where you using for this?
>
>I'm blind, I see you wrote XP in the original posting. So it was a dumb
>question :-)
>
Not at all. The only dumb questions are the ones not asked.

I have a sticker on an old computer in the basement. Actually it's my
first computer and predates PCs and Apples. Neither were heard of at
the time of the Ohio Scientific C28P. 48K of dynamic RAM with a 1 MHz
6502 for a CPU and dual 8 inch Seimens floppy drives that held 320K
each as I recall.

That sticker says: "Do not be afraid to ask dumb questions. They are
a lot easier to handle than dumb mistakes".

And, yes the soft ware told me it had run out of space, but having
done a cut and paste I ended up with the directory split. That
directory was probably 60 to 70 Gigs total. At that point I should
have either copied and pasted the moved files back in the original
directory, or written down where every thing was located. Moving it
back would have been the safest. Then adding the third drive to the
back up computer out in my shop and THEN moving the files to it.
Unfortunately the directory was still on the second computer so when
cleaning back up directories to add that third drive the wrong disk
was cleaned and reformatted.

Now I do have at least 5 populated "pull out" hard drives that vary
from 40 to 120 gig and there is a possibility of the 120 gig having
some of the files on it, but I think the one I want has already been
used. That's a good project for next week end. Add another 250 Gig
HD to the other compute in there and then check out the spare drives
in the shop on that computer.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>-peter
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 11:06:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Matt Ion" <soundy@moltenimage.com> wrote in message
news:o f34e.893761$6l.37417@pd7tw2no...
> Dirty Harry wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know of some software that will compare 2 directories and
copy
> > the files that are different? I wish I could just drag the dir that I
use
> > daily onto my other drive but windows doesn't have an option to replace
only
> > newer files, or to say no to all for overwriting...What I end up doing
is
> > just kicking on "yes to all" to overwrite all the files in the backup
dir
> > whether they have changed or not.
>
> If you're familiar with the command line, try an enhanced command-line
> interpreter like 4NT. The following command in 4NT (/u is for "update")
> would copy from DIRA to DIRB, only files that are newer that the
> existing ones in DIRB, or files that don't exist in DIRB:
>
> copy /u dira\* dirb
>
> Or something like this:
>
> move /su dira\* dirb
>
> ...would move all new or non-existing (at the destination) files,
> including subdirectories (/s).
>
> Another useful option is /c (changed - only replace existing older files).
>
> There are also enhanced options for selecting by size, date, time, and
> other criteria as well (you could have it, say, move only files dated
> last thursday...)

thanks for the info, also found this little guy http://allwaysync.com/
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 3:36:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dirty Harry" <NOJUNK@FU.ca> wrote in message
news:fF24e.893335$8l.438600@pd7tw1no...
> www.rogerhalstead.com
>
> Does anyone know of some software that will compare 2 directories and copy
> the files that are different? I wish I could just drag the dir that I use
> daily onto my other drive but windows doesn't have an option to replace
> only
> newer files, or to say no to all for overwriting...What I end up doing is
> just kicking on "yes to all" to overwrite all the files in the backup dir
> whether they have changed or not.
>
>

www.syncback.com

Great stuff.
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 3:51:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I use the stealth method to keep back up of my photos off site. I
mostly take photo of family and vacation pictures. When I back up my
photos I make copies and give them as presents to my daughters,
brothers, etc. Works will for both I have many dispersed back up copies
of my photos and they get copies of picture that I have taken.



Roger wrote:
> Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
> both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
> no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
> with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>
> With digital we *should* keep multiple copies on separate computers,
> if possible and at least duplicate hard copies such as CD or DVD in
> separate places. Still, the general the experienced and experience
> say that sooner of later you will lose some images.
>
> Now, as to experience.
> I keep copies of current images on at least two computers and I keep
> dual copies on DVDs stored in separate places.
>
> Given that background:
> I decided to upgrade three of the 4 computers here in February while
> my wife was on a bike tour in a warm climate.
>
> Sooo... I upgraded this machine to a 3.4 Gig, 64 bit Athlon with 2 Gig
> of super fast DDR RAM with a new motherboard and Ultra ATA 120, 200
> and 250 Gig HDs. That's 570 Gig, or over half a terabyte on this
> computer.
>
> I moved the old 2.8 Gig Athlon XP plus with 1 Gig RAM to my wife's
> machine to replace the old 1.8 XP + system, and I upgraded the machine
> next to this one by replacing the 2 Gig XP plus with a 3.2 Gig XP Plus
> and one gig of fast DDR memory. That machine has two 160 Gig HDs for
> 320 Gig total.
>
> The machine in the shop has 120, 200, and 250 HDs for back up (as I
> recall) for another 570 Gig. That's *currently* a total of 1.46
> terabytes between the three machines not counting my wife's which only
> has a total of 80 Gig (two 40s)
>
> Where am I heading? With all the changes, I backed up each computer
> across the network before the upgrade and I did them one at a time to
> keep the confusion factor low. I also had the images on dual backups.
>
> Unfortunately, quite a few times I ended up splitting directories
> between machines due to lack of space. The larger HDs were added
> later.
>
> After the upgrades were complete I had to restore the files and then
> reorganize the backups.
>
> Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
> and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed and there
> were sub directories missing from the machines due to incomplete
> backups due to lack of space.
>
> Due to a very well organized filing system I did not lose any of my
> scans, but I lost about 3,000 digital images for the year 2004 and
> they are gone beyond retrieval. Most were unimportant, but a few were
> once in a lifetime shots and I just had a request for a series of
> those shots. There are many that are in categorized directories and
> those were saved, but the majority from mid June through the end of
> the year are gone. Now *maybe* some of the old DVDs will turn up. I
> did find one so there *may* be others.
>
> The main thing I got out of all this and want to pass on, is that
> even with well organized filing systems and back ups you can easily
> screw up and it is far easier to do with digital files than with boxes
> of negatives. OTOH I have had negatives destroyed, or lost for one
> reason or another as well.
>
> NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
> Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and deleting
> directories.
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com
April 4, 2005 9:11:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:

> >>...
> >>NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
> >>Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and
> >>deleting directories.
> >
> > That's actually a very old rule, and it's still superb advice!
>
> Sure is. Most of us don't multitask at all well.

Not to mention good old stable Windows (any version). ;^)

Jeff
April 4, 2005 9:33:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi,

Are image backups on DVD better than on CD-R, in terms of longevity and
resistance to damage? (I'm excluding the factor of more storage space per
DVD than per CD-R)

Thank you.

Morton



Roger wrote:

> Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
> both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
> no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
> with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>
> With digital we *should* keep multiple copies on separate computers,
> if possible and at least duplicate hard copies such as CD or DVD in
> separate places. Still, the general the experienced and experience
> say that sooner of later you will lose some images.
>
> Now, as to experience.
> I keep copies of current images on at least two computers and I keep
> dual copies on DVDs stored in separate places.
>
> Given that background:
> I decided to upgrade three of the 4 computers here in February while
> my wife was on a bike tour in a warm climate.
>
> Sooo... I upgraded this machine to a 3.4 Gig, 64 bit Athlon with 2 Gig
> of super fast DDR RAM with a new motherboard and Ultra ATA 120, 200
> and 250 Gig HDs. That's 570 Gig, or over half a terabyte on this
> computer.
>
> I moved the old 2.8 Gig Athlon XP plus with 1 Gig RAM to my wife's
> machine to replace the old 1.8 XP + system, and I upgraded the machine
> next to this one by replacing the 2 Gig XP plus with a 3.2 Gig XP Plus
> and one gig of fast DDR memory. That machine has two 160 Gig HDs for
> 320 Gig total.
>
> The machine in the shop has 120, 200, and 250 HDs for back up (as I
> recall) for another 570 Gig. That's *currently* a total of 1.46
> terabytes between the three machines not counting my wife's which only
> has a total of 80 Gig (two 40s)
>
> Where am I heading? With all the changes, I backed up each computer
> across the network before the upgrade and I did them one at a time to
> keep the confusion factor low. I also had the images on dual backups.
>
> Unfortunately, quite a few times I ended up splitting directories
> between machines due to lack of space. The larger HDs were added
> later.
>
> After the upgrades were complete I had to restore the files and then
> reorganize the backups.
>
> Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
> and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed and there
> were sub directories missing from the machines due to incomplete
> backups due to lack of space.
>
> Due to a very well organized filing system I did not lose any of my
> scans, but I lost about 3,000 digital images for the year 2004 and
> they are gone beyond retrieval. Most were unimportant, but a few were
> once in a lifetime shots and I just had a request for a series of
> those shots. There are many that are in categorized directories and
> those were saved, but the majority from mid June through the end of
> the year are gone. Now *maybe* some of the old DVDs will turn up. I
> did find one so there *may* be others.
>
> The main thing I got out of all this and want to pass on, is that
> even with well organized filing systems and back ups you can easily
> screw up and it is far easier to do with digital files than with boxes
> of negatives. OTOH I have had negatives destroyed, or lost for one
> reason or another as well.
>
> NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
> Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and deleting
> directories.
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com
April 4, 2005 9:39:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

mort wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Are image backups on DVD better than on CD-R, in terms of longevity and
> resistance to damage? (I'm excluding the factor of more storage space per
> DVD than per CD-R)


I believe they do have a thicker sturdier build.
April 4, 2005 9:40:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

P.S.

I forgot to mention that I use so-called 300 year gold CD-R blanks to back
up my images.

Morton


Roger wrote:

> Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
> both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
> no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
> with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>
> With digital we *should* keep multiple copies on separate computers,
> if possible and at least duplicate hard copies such as CD or DVD in
> separate places. Still, the general the experienced and experience
> say that sooner of later you will lose some images.
>
> Now, as to experience.
> I keep copies of current images on at least two computers and I keep
> dual copies on DVDs stored in separate places.
>
> Given that background:
> I decided to upgrade three of the 4 computers here in February while
> my wife was on a bike tour in a warm climate.
>
> Sooo... I upgraded this machine to a 3.4 Gig, 64 bit Athlon with 2 Gig
> of super fast DDR RAM with a new motherboard and Ultra ATA 120, 200
> and 250 Gig HDs. That's 570 Gig, or over half a terabyte on this
> computer.
>
> I moved the old 2.8 Gig Athlon XP plus with 1 Gig RAM to my wife's
> machine to replace the old 1.8 XP + system, and I upgraded the machine
> next to this one by replacing the 2 Gig XP plus with a 3.2 Gig XP Plus
> and one gig of fast DDR memory. That machine has two 160 Gig HDs for
> 320 Gig total.
>
> The machine in the shop has 120, 200, and 250 HDs for back up (as I
> recall) for another 570 Gig. That's *currently* a total of 1.46
> terabytes between the three machines not counting my wife's which only
> has a total of 80 Gig (two 40s)
>
> Where am I heading? With all the changes, I backed up each computer
> across the network before the upgrade and I did them one at a time to
> keep the confusion factor low. I also had the images on dual backups.
>
> Unfortunately, quite a few times I ended up splitting directories
> between machines due to lack of space. The larger HDs were added
> later.
>
> After the upgrades were complete I had to restore the files and then
> reorganize the backups.
>
> Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
> and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed and there
> were sub directories missing from the machines due to incomplete
> backups due to lack of space.
>
> Due to a very well organized filing system I did not lose any of my
> scans, but I lost about 3,000 digital images for the year 2004 and
> they are gone beyond retrieval. Most were unimportant, but a few were
> once in a lifetime shots and I just had a request for a series of
> those shots. There are many that are in categorized directories and
> those were saved, but the majority from mid June through the end of
> the year are gone. Now *maybe* some of the old DVDs will turn up. I
> did find one so there *may* be others.
>
> The main thing I got out of all this and want to pass on, is that
> even with well organized filing systems and back ups you can easily
> screw up and it is far easier to do with digital files than with boxes
> of negatives. OTOH I have had negatives destroyed, or lost for one
> reason or another as well.
>
> NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
> Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and deleting
> directories.
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com
April 5, 2005 12:36:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 17:11:42 GMT, Confused
<somebody@someplace.somenet> wrote:

>Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:
>
>> >>...
>> >>NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
>> >>Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and
>> >>deleting directories.
>> >
>> > That's actually a very old rule, and it's still superb advice!
>>
>> Sure is. Most of us don't multitask at all well.
>
>Not to mention good old stable Windows (any version). ;^)
>
This one's been running for months.
All 4 machines run 24 X 7. The only machine problem was the other in
this room. The power supply went flaky. Didn't fail, just got noisy
which trashed the occasional file.

As for multi-tasking, I run Firefox, OE (text mode only), Agent, Word,
Excel, bittorrent, Front page, as well as Photoshop CS and/or
Photoshop Elements or PaintShop Pro 9, all at the same time.

What really makes it work is running the LS5000 ED scanner which feeds
it's images directly into Photoshop CS, 4 to 6 at a time. Each image
is a tad over 64 megs (24 megapixels) at 8 bit color depth. 16 bit
depth makes them 128 megs each.. That's why it has 2 Gigs of DDR400
RAM and a 64 bit processor with a one meg onboard cache.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>Jeff
April 5, 2005 1:32:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Roger <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote in
news:5a31515ffeqq2mml2b2gl24ba4u3fprfp9@4ax.com:

> Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
> and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed and there

Ummm, why were any DVDs disposed?


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 20-Jan-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 1:34:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

MarkH wrote:
> Roger <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote in
> news:5a31515ffeqq2mml2b2gl24ba4u3fprfp9@4ax.com:
>
>
>>Unfortunately, due to working with multiple backups across the network
>>and updating DVDs, the wrong DVDs ended up being disposed and there
>
>
> Ummm, why were any DVDs disposed?
>
>
I hope he isn't going to say they take up too much room. Grin.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
April 5, 2005 4:42:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 02:10:08 GMT, Ken Weitzel <kweitzel@shaw.ca> wrote:
>Live in cul-de-sac (half a dozen houses in a semi-circle.
>Took pictures all my life, so over the past 25 years have
>everyone in the bay sharing my hobby. Lots of pictures. Lots.
>
>What we do is make backups, and store them for each other.
>Blank dvd's are virtually free, and everyone, even if they
>feel cramped, has tons of available long term storage space.
Not a bad idea. However, as evidenced by the problems California had with fires
& earthquakes (etc) taking out whole neighbourhoods, swapping backups with
people further away may be a better idea.

A friend who lives on the other side of the city would be better. That way, it's
less likely that a fire/earthquake/bomb/meteor will take out both backup
locations. Of course, distance depends on your level of paranoia.

Another alternative would be a safe deposit box at the bank. If you already have
one, a little CD case with 20 or 30 discs won't take up too much room.

- ---
Norman
Please reply via group. E-mail ID does not exist.
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 6:35:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Roger wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 17:11:42 GMT, Confused
> <somebody@someplace.somenet> wrote:
>
>
>>Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>...
>>>>>NEW RULE: Only do one thing at a time when working with files!
>>>>>Do not do anything else to distract you when backing up and
>>>>>deleting directories.
>>>>
>>>>That's actually a very old rule, and it's still superb advice!
>>>
>>>Sure is. Most of us don't multitask at all well.
>>
>>Not to mention good old stable Windows (any version). ;^)
>>
>
> This one's been running for months.
> All 4 machines run 24 X 7. The only machine problem was the other in
> this room. The power supply went flaky. Didn't fail, just got noisy
> which trashed the occasional file.
>
> As for multi-tasking, I run Firefox, OE (text mode only), Agent, Word,
> Excel, bittorrent, Front page, as well as Photoshop CS and/or
> Photoshop Elements or PaintShop Pro 9, all at the same time.
>
> What really makes it work is running the LS5000 ED scanner which feeds
> it's images directly into Photoshop CS, 4 to 6 at a time. Each image
> is a tad over 64 megs (24 megapixels) at 8 bit color depth. 16 bit
> depth makes them 128 megs each.. That's why it has 2 Gigs of DDR400
> RAM and a 64 bit processor with a one meg onboard cache.
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>>Jeff
>
>
Have you used the Photoshop Elements 3.0 'separate and straighten'
feature on those scans? Makes the job a lot easier, but I wish they had
included a more flexible naming option.
April 5, 2005 10:24:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

2005-04-04, Roger wrote:
>>
>>I'm blind, I see you wrote XP in the original posting. So it was a dumb
>>question :-)
>>
> Not at all. The only dumb questions are the ones not asked.
>
> I have a sticker on an old computer in the basement. Actually it's my
> first computer and predates PCs and Apples. Neither were heard of at
> the time of the Ohio Scientific C28P. 48K of dynamic RAM with a 1 MHz
> 6502 for a CPU and dual 8 inch Seimens floppy drives that held 320K
> each as I recall.
>
> That sticker says: "Do not be afraid to ask dumb questions. They are
> a lot easier to handle than dumb mistakes".

So true :-)

[...]

Thanks, for the info! It seems easy to make backups, but things go wrong
so easily too. I haven't lost large amounts yet (knocks on wood), but a
few pictures have disappeared here and there. The worst "accident" was
from a bunch of pictures we took on holiday in India in 1999. We had a
kodak dc200 with us, and had finally managed to find a place with a
computer where we could copy some images to floppy. They got safely back
to europe. The HD we later copied them too gave up one day. We never found
the floppies back...

Regards,
-peter
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 12:27:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter wrote:
> Roger wrote:
>
>> Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
>> both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
>> no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
>> with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>> With digital we *should* keep multiple copies on separate computers,
>> if possible and at least duplicate hard copies such as CD or DVD in
>> separate places. Still, the general the experienced and experience
>> say that sooner of later you will lose some images.
There are alt.binary.pictures.* . Post them there and google will store
them for you! :-)

Lots of Greetings!
Volker
April 5, 2005 1:31:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Norman <user@node.domain> wrote:

>Another alternative would be a safe deposit box at the bank. If you already have
>one, a little CD case with 20 or 30 discs won't take up too much room.

Do you have any idea of what a safe deposit box costs? I've always
been curious.

Wes
--
Reply to:
Whiskey Echo Sierra Sierra AT Gee Tee EYE EYE dot COM
Lycos address is a spam trap.
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 1:31:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 09:31:57 -0400, clutch@lycos.com wrote:

>Norman <user@node.domain> wrote:
>
>>Another alternative would be a safe deposit box at the bank. If you already have
>>one, a little CD case with 20 or 30 discs won't take up too much room.
>
>Do you have any idea of what a safe deposit box costs? I've always
>been curious.

Some banks provide them free for a minimum average balance. A small
one which you would need is about 50 dollars a year in Central Texas.
I can't imagine not having one for data and important documents.
April 5, 2005 2:38:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John A. Stovall <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote:

>>Do you have any idea of what a safe deposit box costs? I've always
>>been curious.
>
>Some banks provide them free for a minimum average balance. A small
>one which you would need is about 50 dollars a year in Central Texas.
>I can't imagine not having one for data and important documents.

I think I will contact both of my banks.

Thanks,
Wes

--
Reply to:
Whiskey Echo Sierra Sierra AT Gee Tee EYE EYE dot COM
Lycos address is a spam trap.
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 4:52:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 08:49:21 -0500, John A. Stovall
<johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 09:31:57 -0400, clutch@lycos.com wrote:
>
>>Norman <user@node.domain> wrote:
>>
>>>Another alternative would be a safe deposit box at the bank. If you already have
>>>one, a little CD case with 20 or 30 discs won't take up too much room.
>>
>>Do you have any idea of what a safe deposit box costs? I've always
>>been curious.
>
>Some banks provide them free for a minimum average balance. A small
>one which you would need is about 50 dollars a year in Central Texas.
>I can't imagine not having one for data and important documents.

There are other alternatives, althought not for everyone.
I have a gun safe that holds far more than just guns, for example.
It's also fire resistant for 1200 degrees for up to 30 minutes
(nothing is fireproof), and will keep CD/DVDs safe in a normal house
fire (put it far away from the gas lines!).

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"
April 6, 2005 7:52:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:35:22 -0500, Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net>
wrote:

>Roger wrote:
>> On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 17:11:42 GMT, Confused
>> <somebody@someplace.somenet> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote


<snip>

>> What really makes it work is running the LS5000 ED scanner which feeds
>> it's images directly into Photoshop CS, 4 to 6 at a time. Each image
>> is a tad over 64 megs (24 megapixels) at 8 bit color depth. 16 bit
>> depth makes them 128 megs each.. That's why it has 2 Gigs of DDR400
>> RAM and a 64 bit processor with a one meg onboard cache.
>>
>> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
>> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
>> www.rogerhalstead.com
>>
>>>Jeff
>>
>>
>Have you used the Photoshop Elements 3.0 'separate and straighten'
>feature on those scans? Makes the job a lot easier, but I wish they had
>included a more flexible naming option.

I usually scan into Photoshop CS, but I have on occasion scanned into
Elements 3 or PaintShop Pro 9. AS both Nikon Scan and Vue Scan
separate the images and if I have the crop set properly, there is no
need to separate or straighten so I have never found the need to try
that part of Elements.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
April 6, 2005 7:58:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 05 Apr 2005 06:24:05 GMT, Peter <durians.nomail@gmx.net> wrote:

>2005-04-04, Roger wrote:
>>>
>>>I'm blind, I see you wrote XP in the original posting. So it was a dumb
>>>question :-)
>>>
>> Not at all. The only dumb questions are the ones not asked.
>>
>> I have a sticker on an old computer in the basement. Actually it's my
>> first computer and predates PCs and Apples. Neither were heard of at
>> the time of the Ohio Scientific C28P. 48K of dynamic RAM with a 1 MHz
>> 6502 for a CPU and dual 8 inch Seimens floppy drives that held 320K
>> each as I recall.
>>
>> That sticker says: "Do not be afraid to ask dumb questions. They are
>> a lot easier to handle than dumb mistakes".
>
>So true :-)
>
>[...]
>
>Thanks, for the info! It seems easy to make backups, but things go wrong
>so easily too. I haven't lost large amounts yet (knocks on wood), but a
>few pictures have disappeared here and there. The worst "accident" was
>from a bunch of pictures we took on holiday in India in 1999. We had a
>kodak dc200 with us, and had finally managed to find a place with a
>computer where we could copy some images to floppy. They got safely back
>to europe. The HD we later copied them too gave up one day. We never found
>the floppies back...

As I said, I'd not miss most of the shots, but there was a series of a
Falcon 900 (30,000# plus jet) landing at our little airport. They
came out really good too. 8 X 10s were crystal sharp.

Another time (with film) I had a weeks worth of slides I shot at the
big fly-in at Oshkosh Wisconsin ruined. They came back from Kodak
with spots all over them. They appear to have been bacteria, or could
possibly have been solids. At any rate, only a couple boxes out of
about 20 were any good. That was from the 50th anniversary of D-day
when they had the largest formation of WW-II airplanes in formation
since WW-II.

I was out on that flight line from around 7:00 AM until nearly 7:00 PM
every day of the fly-in and I went over a week before it started to
work as a volunteer.
>
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com


>Regards,
>-peter
April 6, 2005 8:10:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 08:27:54 +0200, Volker Hetzer
<volker.hetzer@gmx.de> wrote:

>Ron Hunter wrote:
>> Roger wrote:
>>
>>> Methods for storage of digital images have been discussed at length
>>> both on the photo and scanning groups and one consensus has been that
>>> no matter what method of storage used, be it film of digital none come
>>> with a guarantee and none are fool proof.
>>> With digital we *should* keep multiple copies on separate computers,
>>> if possible and at least duplicate hard copies such as CD or DVD in
>>> separate places. Still, the general the experienced and experience
>>> say that sooner of later you will lose some images.
>There are alt.binary.pictures.* . Post them there and google will store
>them for you! :-)

I may make mistakes, but I do not trust leaving my photos with *any*
on-line site.<:-)) Actually I've only had the one digital mishap.
Besides I don't want them posted. Plus as roughly 60 megs each for
scans and the Tiffs at a bit over 10 megs, with 6,000 or more shots
a year that is a *lot* of upload time. Last year was about 70 Gigs.
That and on cable my upload is throttled to 256Kbs.

I run a gigabit network between the computers and complain about the
time it takes to transfer between computers.<:-)). Now I have enough
memory and am in the process of adding two 200 gig SATA drives to this
computer and probably another two to the one beside it. That should
give me about 2.4 terabytes of HD space on the network. Next comes
one or two 300 GIG external drives on firewire.

So far this year it's 6.66 gigs and 1297 files, not counting about a
100 still on one camera and maybe 20 on the other.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>Lots of Greetings!
>Volker
April 6, 2005 8:24:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 17:39:19 -0700, paul <paul@not.net> wrote:

>mort wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Are image backups on DVD better than on CD-R, in terms of longevity and
>> resistance to damage? (I'm excluding the factor of more storage space per
>> DVD than per CD-R)
>
>
>I believe they do have a thicker sturdier build.

I'll address both of these here.

The jury is still out on which is more reliable, but we have a lot
more experience with CDs compared to DVDs.

Yes, DVDs are thicker and heavier. The recording layer is sandwiched
between two layers of plastic where as it's on the top of a CD. That
doesn't necessarily make the recording layer on the DVD better
protected. They suffer from different mechanical failure mechanisms.

The CD can be easily scratched and the recording layer is fragile.
The DVD protects the surface of the recording layer quite well *until*
some one "flexes" the DVD in the manner most people use to remove them
from the jewel cases. They should never be flexed. Press in on the
center of the case and they pop right out.

Flexing *may* cause the layers to separate, fracturing the recording
layer.

Both types should be stored on edge, in jewel cases in dry, cool, dark
places when kept for extended periods.

There are failure mechanisms for the recording layer on both that are
not fully understood. Both have suffered some strange failures, but
those have been rather isolated.

Accelerated life testing has been done with some very long lifetimes
projected from the extrapolated data. We are now finding that *maybe*
the testing was not thorough enough.

Theoretically, both CDs and DVDs of high quality should have very long
storage lifetimes. They have not been around long enough for this to
be proven yet.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 12:33:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

[A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
Paul Rubin
<http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt;], who wrote in article <7xacof9ole.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>:
> > Does anyone know of some software that will compare 2 directories and copy
> > the files that are different?

> Yes, rsync: http://samba.anu.edu.au/rsync/

I do not think this is a "good" solution. A computer can do errors
millions of times quickier than a human... So the fact that rsync can
overwrite files speaks against using it.

A solution which would never-ever delete anything would be much more
reliable. It can *mark things for deletion*, but the actual deletion
should better be a separate step - after possible manual inspection of
stuff-to-delete.

Exersize: imaging running rsync in a wrong direction (I never did it,
but this is my recurrent nightmare...).

Yours,
Ilya
!