If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
archiving of digital photos
Mark Thomas wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote: Alan Browne wrote: Ray Fischer wrote: Alan Browne wrote: But nonetheless BR readers will be around for at least the next 20 years. More like 40 - 50. You _are_ an idiot. Demonstrably not. Do you still have a 5.25" floppy drive connected to your computer? How about a 10" mag tape drive? Do *you* still have any useful data on 5.25's or tape? Anyone out there? I stil have a functional Apple //e out in the garage with some stuff on 5.25 floppies, but I haven't turned it on in years. [...] It's an accepted fact (for me anyway) that moving data to newer medium is just part of the digital age. Apart from avoiding any alleged problems with readers becoming unavailable (actually just LESS available), the process of copying is a test of the data itself. Some people believe that putting your data onto high-quality DVDs will mean that the data are safe for the next half century. -- Ray Fischer |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
archiving of digital photos
Alan Browne wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote: Alan Browne wrote: Ray Fischer wrote: Alan Browne wrote: But nonetheless BR readers will be around for at least the next 20 years. More like 40 - 50. You _are_ an idiot. Demonstrably not. Do you still have a 5.25" floppy drive connected to your computer? How about a 10" mag tape drive? Look at the cassette tape. Do you have one of those connected to your computer? The point is not what's being used, No, that is the point. If you cannot get the data into your computer then it matters not in the slightest if they're still on some media. That's over 40 years for a mechanically quaint device. A much simpler device such as DVD or BR disc That's it. You've confirmed that you're an idiot who hasn't a clue. Anybody who claims that a DVD is "much simpler" than a cassette is an idiot troll. It is of course much simpler. Moron. -- Ray Fischer |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
archiving of digital photos
Stormin Mormon wrote:
Yeah, waiting for someone to write that all his digital data is stored on abacus in the attic. Takes a lot of abacus to store a MB of photo data. Its all on cards ... punch cards that is. -- Len |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
archiving of digital photos
l v wrote:
Stormin Mormon wrote: Yeah, waiting for someone to write that all his digital data is stored on abacus in the attic. Takes a lot of abacus to store a MB of photo data. Its all on cards ... punch cards that is. There's an interesting exercise - how many cards? Take one 8MB - that's 8,000,000 bytes. Each card could hold 80 bytes. Thus, 100,000 cards. Each box held 2,000 cards so that's 50 boxes. At about 3.5 inches in height for each box that'd be a stack of boxes 175 inches high, or almost 15 feet. And flash memory cards typically hold 500 such photos, making for a small forest worth of paper. Enough cards to build a house. -- Ray Fischer |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
archiving of digital photos
Ray Fischer wrote:
l v wrote: Stormin Mormon wrote: Yeah, waiting for someone to write that all his digital data is stored on abacus in the attic. Takes a lot of abacus to store a MB of photo data. Its all on cards ... punch cards that is. There's an interesting exercise - how many cards? Take one 8MB - that's 8,000,000 bytes. Each card could hold 80 bytes. Thus, 100,000 cards. Each box held 2,000 cards so that's 50 boxes. At about 3.5 inches in height for each box that'd be a stack of boxes 175 inches high, or almost 15 feet. And flash memory cards typically hold 500 such photos, making for a small forest worth of paper. Enough cards to build a house. LOL!!! Don't forget the duplicate copy for the archive! -- Len |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
archiving of digital photos
|
#77
|
|||
|
|||
archiving of digital photos
l v wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote: l v wrote: Stormin Mormon wrote: Yeah, waiting for someone to write that all his digital data is stored on abacus in the attic. Takes a lot of abacus to store a MB of photo data. Its all on cards ... punch cards that is. There's an interesting exercise - how many cards? Take one 8MB - that's 8,000,000 bytes. Each card could hold 80 bytes. Thus, 100,000 cards. Each box held 2,000 cards so that's 50 boxes. At about 3.5 inches in height for each box that'd be a stack of boxes 175 inches high, or almost 15 feet. And flash memory cards typically hold 500 such photos, making for a small forest worth of paper. Enough cards to build a house. LOL!!! Don't forget the duplicate copy for the archive! Use a photocopier. g -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. -- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out. |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
archiving of digital photos
Dave Martindale wrote:
writes: I have a similar arrangement, though there are multiple computers being backed up. Each computer does an automated backup (Windows backup) to the home fileserver (NSLU2 and USB disk) a couple of times a week, and that's copied once a week to a portable drive that lives at work. Of course, if you have a _really_ fast network connection and a tolerant ISP you can just do your weekly archiving to a remote netork drive. :-) Not practical at the moment. The NSLU2 transfer rate is about 5 MB/sec, which is slow but tolerable. Our network connection to the outside world is 5Mb/s (0.6 MB/s) incoming, and some small fraction of that outgoing. It would take approximately forever to copy over a full set of backups, and make the Internet connection nearly unusable in the process. Now, when someone starts providing fiber to the home, this might all change. Well, AT&T is rolling out its uVerse which is fiber almost to the home, and Verison has its FIOS which is likewise, and Comcast claims fairly high data rates, but all of them cost money, and lots of money for lots of speed. And in the case of AT&T the service support a couple of high def MPEG video streams in addition to your phone and network access, so it's plenty fast. -- Ray Fischer |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Archiving Old Photos - A Newbie Question | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 4 | June 10th 06 09:19 PM |
Archiving Old Photos - A Newbie Question | [email protected] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 5 | June 10th 06 03:50 AM |
Do you use CD or DVD for archiving? | Laser Faire | Digital Photography | 15 | February 25th 05 04:44 PM |
negative archiving | Conrad Weiler | Digital Photography | 4 | December 30th 04 10:07 PM |
Archiving digital pictures. Experiences? | Jacob K. | Digital Photography | 5 | November 26th 04 06:20 AM |