Seems like http://www.loom.com/ would be great?
I've been on the waiting list of Loom for ages. Thought it was in the deadpool...
Storage for Photographers
11–20 of 186 posts
Re: Storage for Photographers
#12Backup is about having several copies. If you delete files after you uploaded them to the cloud, you don't have a backup - with all the problems that come with it (say, if you delete a file by accident there will probably be no way to restore it). If your files are important to you - you need a back up. If not - just get rid of them in the name of simplicity :) PS. Also, uploading many gigabytes over a typical ADSL c…
I only used Glacier in this example but I did mention how it could be tied to additional cloud services. The thing is that not many like cheap long-term Glacier alternatives exist yet. Rest assured when they do, this ideal app would have them in the settings. :)
Re: Storage for Photographers
#13Yes, PLEASE. We run a wedding photography business, and our numbers are something like this:
- 40-60gigs shot in a weekend, need to offsite the RAWs as soon as possible. In six or seven years we've never needed offsite retrieval. Fine for it to be slow.
- Only need around 100-200g of raws locally for jobs in progress
- Once processed into final jpgs files are approx 8-10x smaller. Offsite these as well, and need access to last 1-2 yrs of jpgs randomly/sparsely w/in 1-2 days of a print order coming in
I definitely think some well thought out service that uses maybe a hybrid of glacier and S3 could be really awesome. Especially if the pain is taken out of getting the bolus 40-50g of photos "uploaded" in the first place.. We'd happily pay for a service that just sends us an external drive and a postage-paid box.. we drop it in the mail after a job and get another drive sent to us right away.
[EDIT: Occurs to me you might wonder what this looks like today. Today we get home, and immediately back up onto an 8-bay Drobo Pro (http://bit.ly/1diZUHD). It's a fancy proprietary RAID-like system. I think ours has 7 1TB Drives in it currently, and it's at about 70% capacity. Then we back up the same jobs to an external hard drive which gets driven offsite (used to be my office, but now that I work at home it's the in-laws place) and copied to a hard drive for permanent offsite storage. Once that happens, the cards from the camera can be cleared. After processing, the final JPGs get copied to the drobo and make it into the sneakernet offsite process as well.]
Re: Storage for Photographers
#14Yes, PLEASE. We run a wedding photography business, and our numbers are something like this: - 40-60gigs shot in a weekend, need to offsite the RAWs as soon as possible. In six or seven years we've never needed offsite retrieval. Fine for it to be slow. - Only need around 100-200g of raws locally for jobs in progress - Once processed into final jpgs files are approx 8-10x smaller. Offsite these as well, and need acce…
This thread is becoming great customer research for people to build this app. :)
Re: Storage for Photographers
#15I'm in a similar situation as the OP...an amateur but avid photographer with terabytes of RAW image files.
Currently, I have several multi-terabyte drives that I erratically back up to...I just got a 4TB drive that I'm going to try to backup everything I've ever shot in the last 3 years...
But I do want to move it to online storage...and I think this requires triage. For nearly every photoset, I've quickly gone through them with Lightroom and starred the ones that I kind of like, and then for maybe 1% of them, have taken the time to fully process, label, and upload them (in JPG form) to Flickr.
So for online storage, I think what I'll do is write a batch script that dumps all the unstarred RAW files as JPGs, because they chances that I'll ever need these photos in RAW is very slim, and then upload them. For photos that I've given at least one star and/or taken the time to properly edit and categorize, I'll send up the RAW file along with the processed JPG.
If I have about 3TB of RAW files...and maybe 10% of those are RAW images that weren't disposable...that's 300GB right there. And then the remaining RAW "keep em just in case" files would end up being compressed from 24MB to about 2-3 MB (let's say 15% as an average)...so 400GB.
700GB is still quite a big footprint. However, the biggest problem will be...let's say I give up local storage all together and rely on the cloud...what's the best way to browse any photoset at any arbitrary time? When it's all local, it's trivial to pop open Lightroom and do some quick browsing and filtering. For online storage, I'll have to put a ton of work into proper folder-naming, at the very least
Re: Storage for Photographers
#16A service would be great ... but you might be able to "roll-your-own" with some basic scripts to handle the conversion (down-sizing) and backup sync - and something like Koken to handle the sharing with friends & family.
For back-ups - just buy a huge disk or set of disks, and keep 'em off-site wherever you have a trustable location (friend, family, work - if allowed and bandwidth isn't an issue) and use CrashPlan's free software to sync a copy to the secondary location. It's free after the initial expense of the drives and gives you encrypted, but physical access to the content in case of an emergency. You could find a friend with the same problem, and just agree to dedicate a certain amount of disk-space to each-other for this purpose.
Re: Storage for Photographers
#17I'm in a similar situation as the OP...an amateur but avid photographer with terabytes of RAW image files. Currently, I have several multi-terabyte drives that I erratically back up to...I just got a 4TB drive that I'm going to try to backup everything I've ever shot in the last 3 years... But I do want to move it to online storage...and I think this requires triage. For nearly every photoset, I've quickly gone throu…
Your last few sentences are exactly why I wrote this post. I want everything stored in the cloud but ALSO have a decent way of browsing them locally. The idea is to just store tiny jpegs (you can set how big they are, but something like 500-1000px wide likely, just for you to get a sense of which photo this is and allow you to remotely delete, retreive, etc)
Re: Storage for Photographers
#18I think Filosync (www.filosync.com, currently in beta, I'm the founder) would work for this. You could have many projects in your cloud and only sync the one(s) you need to a given computer. We'd just need to add a feature that stores "previews" of the items in the folder so you could browse without downloading.
But it uses S3 in your AWS account, so would be cost-prohibitive for a consumer storing terabytes.
Re: Storage for Photographers
#19How about git-annex assistant with the glacier remote? http://git-annex.branchable.com/special_remotes/glacier/ . It will move files off your local once they have been transfered to the remote.
The large part of this post for me is about the local thumbnail exports of the RAWs so I actually know what files are what without having to go just by album names, dates et cetera.
You could keep the thumbnails local and annex the raws. Based on the thumbnails, you could selectively git annex get from the remote glacier
Re: Storage for Photographers
#20Seems like http://www.loom.com/ would be great?
+1 for loom. I've been using it for a while now. It's pretty awesome!