Re: photo storage question

[lea murphy <lea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Both are fragile mediums, really, and neither one without compromise.

The best one can do is do one's best to store well so as to protect the images contained...wether film or digital.

Lea

life is short. photograph it.

www.leamurphy.com

On Apr 28, 2008, at 12:34 AM, Trevor Cunningham <tr_cunningham@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Here in lies a reason to prefer film over digital.  Magnetic storage is far more unstable than sleeves and notebooks.  Burned storage has a suprisingly limited shelf life, so we are learning.  You can still play your cd's from the early 1980's, but the commerically produced materials are much higher quality than anything you can to make yourself. 

 

Indeed, digital is less expensive...but, then again, it's cheaper

 

 "somewhere between zero and one...everything else is exaggeration" - Anonymous

----- Original Message ----
From: Stephen Ylvisaker <stephen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 10:04:12 AM
Subject: Re: photo storage question

----- Original Message -----

> I've had four DVDs fail. Meaning the data didn't write or couldn't be 
> read. You couldn't pay me to use it as a back up medium.
>
> Lea
>
> life is short. photograph it.
> www.leamurphy.com

A local photographer also backs up, today, to hard drives. He used to backup to CD's and learned the hard way that he needed to always buy the best quality CD's. Then it was DVD's. He learned also, in the process, that DVD's and CD's can LOSE the data written to them; ie. it can degrade over time. Images he burned a couple of years ago are now irretrievable. Now, it is hard drives only, and he has many.

Stephen

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.