Larry Colen wrote: > >On Oct 5, 2010, at 4:30 PM, John Francis wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 08:57:04AM +1000, Tanya Love wrote: >>> >>> I know this is an opposing view to what most have posted here, but it works >>> for me. And when I am shooting 2-3000 frames every week, the storage space >>> and time it would take to keep the "average" shots, would be ridiculous. >> >> 2000 images a week, 50 weeks a year, at 10MB/image, is one TB a year. >> I don't think that's a "ridiculous" amount of storage; A decades worth >> of storage will fit in a single RAID array the size of a desktop PC. > >AT today's prices, that's about a buck a week for storage. With backups, call >it $4/week or about $0.50 per day. > >By this time next year, it'll be about half that. If my time is worth any >money at all, it's practically not worth the time to go through the bother of >deleting them.
Whenever I can't think of a better reason for keeping a shot than how cheap and easy it is to do so, I know that's a photograph that isn't worth keeping. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
