I'd stick with what you have going now, a true backup and then mirrored drives. I don't think anyone can say for sure that in a year a DVD will still work, I have some from a couple years ago that are starting to error out. I think it partially has to do with the drive they were originally burned on. I've noticed that if I want them to work for sure, I need to keep the drive I burned them on. My wife has about 8500 photos of the kids, to threat of a bloody end, I have all of them on three HD's and also on a NAS my friend has at his house which I update about every month. Paranoia of wife beatings is the best motivation.
Mike On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Larry Sacks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Photos are usually best archived to DVD. But if you've got 200gb of > >archival photos it would take a month to burn all that. > > > Yeah... I've looked into DVDs for backups. When I first started the > biz, I used CDs for backup - one in my desk, the other into my safe > deposit box but that's gotten somewhat full, plus it's a hassle having > to go to the bank every few weeks. > > >Question 1: Is that entire 200G archival photos? I know you shoot huge > >raw files for a given project, but after you pick out a few keepers > >and save them as jpgs or something, then it's time to delete the bulk > >of the raw stuff. > > Most of the photos are jpgs. Some are the original 'raw' format, but > that's on a job-by-job basis. Figure 95% are jpgs and those have been > sorted through so the non-keepers are not kept. > > >Otherwise, you may be a good candidate to early adopt blu-ray. Burners > >are maybe $300, blanks ~$15, and they can hold ~25gb. > > I was considering that. One concern is longevity - will whatever format > (or media) I use will available upwards of 10 years down the road. > > >Never use the words "hard drive" and "archival" in the same sentence. > > I usually try not to but it seemed to fit. > > >Hard drives can and do fail suddenly and without warning. > > See my comment about my 1+ year old hard drive dying (the one that's > part of the RAID). That's why I don't trust "just" one hard drive. I > want to be sure I've got a backup to my backup (and quite possibly a > backup to that). > > > On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 3:03 PM, Larry Sacks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Not to jump into the RAID vs No-RAID fray... but I seek a relatively > > easily managed data backup solution. I've got a photography business > > and am trying to keep photos from various shoots around. At this > point, > > I'm mostly looking for the hardware answer. I'll worry about the > > software side of things down the road. > > > > I'm open to suggestions for data backup? I can't (or won't) rely on > > just 1 hard drive. DVD backups are a possibility, as are CD. > > > > I'm currently using about 200 or so gb disk space. > > > ************************************************************************ > * > ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy > ** > ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ > ** > ************************************************************************ > * > > > ************************************************************************* > ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** > ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** > ************************************************************************* > ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
