| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/23/2004 11:37:42 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by dwoolridge:
don't forget a firesafe!
personally, i like rotating drives in a raid mirror unit. |
I hear film negatives melt in a firesafe during a fire. I imagine CD's etc would also.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2004 11:57:07 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by KarenB:
Originally posted by dwoolridge:
don't forget a firesafe!
personally, i like rotating drives in a raid mirror unit. |
I hear film negatives melt in a firesafe during a fire. I imagine CD's etc would also. |
how about a fridge powered by unobtainium inside the safe? :-)
Yes, film negatives are best stored in fridge-like conditions anyway (controlled humidity?). CDs probably benefit from the same or similar conditions. I guess if you're using HDs for archiving you could insulate them from heat somehow and then put them in a firesafe.
oh, the infinite struggle against entropy!
i mean our continuous contribution to it. |
|
|
|
04/23/2004 12:22:11 PM · #28 |
I have a lot of CDRs that go back to early 1998 and have not had problems with any of them to date. The last three years they have been in a tropical climate, hot and fairly humid. There is a worry that the newer CDRs might not last as long as the older ones, time will tell.
I am pretty paranoid about backing up my critical data keeping many copies around. For photos I keep the full resolution low compression version on DVD and lower resolution (1200x900) on my hard drive. I also keep those photos that I really like in full resolution on the hard drive.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2004 01:30:29 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
...If you are doing inkjet printing, with dye based inks, those pictures will probably last 10 years at the outside.
If you are doing printing at sam's club or walmart on their typical one hour processes, I think the lifetime is probably the same - it certainly used to be like that. No doubt things have improved a bit - I haven't checked archival ratings for frontier printers. Fuji Crystal Archive prints with the correct handling should last a lifetime at least though (not stored in sunlight etc)...
...Don't assume harddrives never fail - they always do.
Don't assume CDs never have errors - they are designed to assume that there are always errors, and recover from them.
Don't assume you'll be able to read your files in 10 years
Don't assume you'll be able to read your CDs in 10 years... |
Just to let you know, certain systems of prints (printer, ink, and paper by the same manufacturer) will last longer than ten years without fading. There are several independent studies done that have shown this. A couple of links:
New Inkjets and Papers
Lasting Impressions - Wilhelm Imaging Research
Wilhelm Imaging Research has many good articles about inkjet print life, of course, there is still that matter of CD-Rs. I have many, and when properly stored, quality CD-Rs definately last more than 2 years. I have some CD-Rs from 8 years ago that show no sign of degradation (and some of them were cheap!). Not to say that this is not a good subject to research...
I do agree with your assumptions, though, basically to not assume anything! :) And, for now, I will keep transfering my files to new media, because you also have to think that the computer industry will continue to change also, and that in the years to come, CD-Rs will become obselete also, and so on. So, I say, keep transfering!!
-Danielle
Message edited by author 2004-04-23 13:31:14. |
|
|
|
04/23/2004 09:01:24 PM · #30 |
I'm doing inkjet prints that I expect to last 100+ years. But I'm not using dye based inks.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2004 09:25:48 PM · #31 |
Anyone know how long DVD+Rs or DVD-Rs are supposed to last? I've been backing up on these.
|
|
|
|
04/23/2004 09:29:17 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Maverick:
Anyone know how long DVD+Rs or DVD-Rs are supposed to last? I've been backing up on these. |
Expect similar performance as CD-R -- they are essentially the same with the data packed onto it more tightly. |
|
|
|
04/23/2004 09:31:01 PM · #33 |
One of my favorite quotations is from an engineer at Texas Instruments, speaking of CD-Rom technology, "You know, sometimes it's hard to believe this stuff works at all."
Message edited by author 2004-04-23 21:31:34. |
|
|
|
04/23/2004 09:41:06 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by KarenB:
Originally posted by lelani:
.....so where is it safe to save? or on what? |
right!
so, can anyone offer an alternative? |
I got external 120 GB HD to back up all my photos. |
|
|
|
04/23/2004 09:44:24 PM · #35 |
| See if the listed value for MTBF is > infinity. |
|
|
|
04/23/2004 09:56:02 PM · #36 |
To reiterate quality cd`s will last a long time if stored properly and a second hard drive for things you really want to keep is always a great idea!!
;-) |
|
|
|
04/23/2004 10:00:27 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
I'm doing inkjet prints that I expect to last 100+ years. But I'm not using dye based inks. |
What are you using? From the research done on the Wilhelm Imaging research site, even the HP photo inkjet printer that I have, if used with their Premium Plus glossy photo paper, and their new ink, is supposed to last 70 years. And, it is a dye based system. Although, I am actually an advocate of Epson's new pigment based inks. I have an Epson C82 for my graphics and text, but when printing photos, although not bad in quality, they leave some dots in lines through the print, from the wheels that they use to keep the paper in line, and I have seen better quality (I am fully aware that this is not a photo inkjet). I was reading on Epson's web site, and the Wilhelm Imaging Research web site, and they say that, even though the Durabrite and the Ultrachrome are pigment based, they are also only supposed to last 70 years. And, from what I have read, even dye sub prints don't last much longer. Although, I just saw this Epson photomate, which claims to have prints last 100 years in a frame, and 200 years in protective sleeves in a binder. If you know of another technology, I would like to hear about it, because I'm very interested in this, and have heard many debates on it. Thanks for any info that you can give me!
Here is another little tidbit that everyone might find interesting, if you are REALLY worried about print life: Sub-Zero Cold Storage .
Here's another one that's interesting, too, if you have time: An Interview with Henry Wilhelm.
One more, a permanance chart...Permanence Chart
Message edited by author 2004-04-23 22:02:02. |
|
|
|
04/23/2004 11:10:47 PM · #38 |
| I can confirm this story. I have three CD's of original images taken from a digital camera from 2000-2001 that are no longer readable :( I HATE that I've lost these images. Most I can never reproduce. |
|
|
|
04/23/2004 11:35:26 PM · #39 |
To elaborate on my post at the beginning... we had routinely archived large jobs to CD at my office upon completion for years. At some point, we discovered that some of the discs were de-laminating (the metallic layer was literally peeling off like wallpaper) and others had become simply unreadable by any computer. These were brand-name discs (Verbatim and Kodak, respectively) that were stored in individual cases at room temperature and away from sunlight. Needless to say, it was a rude awakening (especially since my recommendations for multiple backups went unheeded).
I researched CD media exhaustively. As you'd expect, not all media is created equally. Bottom line- look for Mitsui-branded media if you're worried about longevity. It uses a proprietary Pthalocyanine dye that's a lot more durable and stable than other dyes. The company makes several "grades" including archival and medical media, but the overriding theme of their entire product line is that it lasts. The discs are more expensive (from 50¢ to several dollars a disc), but if you make two or more copies and store them separately, you'll never have to worry about it.
Re: Gordon's comments on obsolesence... standards like TIFF and JPEG are still going to be around a long time, and future applications will likely be able to read those formats for many years after they've been replaced by new standards. Similarly, CD-R will be readable long into the future- even after it's superceded by blue laser or other technologies. The popularity and sheer volume of the world's data on CDs will make backward compatibility a necessity that Zip, SyQuest and even floppy discs didn't enjoy. Just as today's DVD drives can read CD and CD-R, future laser discs will either share compatibility or boast enough volume and speed that you could easily copy all your CDs to the new format. Compatibility is driven by need and demand, which is why you can still buy turntables and USB floppy readers today even though the media is totally obsolete. Eventually, CD media and the JPEG format will die out, but it certainly won't be an overnight surprise when that happens. |
|
|
|
04/24/2004 01:08:03 AM · #40 |
It's quite simple.
To make archival CD-Rs, you just need to turn up the laser power a bit.
 |
|
|
|
04/24/2004 01:46:01 AM · #41 |
| no one's mentioned this. you could store your images that you really like online somewhere in original format, and you could set it up so you would be the only one who has access to them. possibly in a couple of different places as well. |
|
|
|
04/24/2004 02:09:28 AM · #42 |
To those of you backing up to hard drive:
The expected useful life of a hard disk drive is about 3 years.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
04/24/2004 09:07:23 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by nborton:
no one's mentioned this. you could store your images that you really like online somewhere in original format, and you could set it up so you would be the only one who has access to them. possibly in a couple of different places as well. |
I was thinking of bringing that up. I use a service called Connected.com, which isn't cheap, but if you have important files changing daily, it's worth it. It costs $14.95 per month (I think it just went up to $16.00 or so) for 4GB storage. The cool thing is that it works automatically in the background, and that it "diffs" files automatically, so duplicates are not backed up, and the actual backup is very efficient.
I've been using it for a couple of years now. BUT: I mainly use it for my important work files other than my photos. Photos would be hard, since I have more than 20 GB worth on my hard drive.
But for some of you worried about this, this might be a solution. |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 07:02:25 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Originally posted by nborton:
no one's mentioned this. you could store your images that you really like online somewhere in original format, and you could set it up so you would be the only one who has access to them. possibly in a couple of different places as well. |
I was thinking of bringing that up. I use a service called Connected.com, which isn't cheap, but if you have important files changing daily, it's worth it. It costs $14.95 per month (I think it just went up to $16.00 or so) for 4GB storage. The cool thing is that it works automatically in the background, and that it "diffs" files automatically, so duplicates are not backed up, and the actual backup is very efficient.
I've been using it for a couple of years now. BUT: I mainly use it for my important work files other than my photos. Photos would be hard, since I have more than 20 GB worth on my hard drive.
But for some of you worried about this, this might be a solution. |
Just make sure you have a way of getting your data back when the company goes belly up :) There were several dot.bomb companies doing online photostorage that ran out of money, closed the doors and it either took the users years to get access to their images, or they lost them for good.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/05/2025 02:11:56 PM EDT.
