Hard drive RAID arrangement seems to be the safest Way to go. Just using individual HDDs aint. I have had three HDDs fail on me in last 20 yrs, I have (yet) to Have a single CD or DVD become unreadable during that time ( I do Data verify when I burn them). jco
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Shell Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 6:37 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: File size of scanned 6x7 neg On Oct 19, 2006, at 10:16 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > Depending on the compression algorithms/format, original file size and > Compression levels the time to compress/save and uncompress/open > Can be noticed (at least on my machine ). > > You asked/wondered why anyone would not use compression and I told > You why. That's all. For me, I prefer the speed to saving space. > For archival stuff I put on DVDs. Sounds like you prefer to keep > Everything on the HDDs. To each his own and for different reasons. Agreed. After all the conflicting studies on CD and DVD longevity, many pro photographers have chosen to use multiple hard drives instead. Of course everything is mirrored onto more than one hard drive. Some even do the backup weekly and keep the mirror hard drive (s) in a separate location. I know one person who keeps the backup in a bank safe deposit box, but that seems a bit extreme to me. Personally, I suspect hard drives will become extinct in the near future as flash memory keeps getting cheaper. I have already read that computer makers are working on a new generation of laptops that will use flash memory instead of hard drives. No moving parts should make flash memory outlast hard drives by a long span. I still do back things up onto CD and DVD, but that's just one more level of security. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
