The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!!

The Dave© <no RemoveThis @no.com> wrote:
>
>At the time all I had was a Minolta XG9 and a Vivitar zoom lens. It
>wasn't until years later that I caught the 'photo bug', so I wasn't
>even aware of the change over at the time. What I know is more from
>reading and talking with people and trying to look at it in a
>historical perspective.


Didn't Minolta go through a similar process, with manual focus lenses
being incompatible with the (then) new AF mount?
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

The Dave© wrote:
>> Rita Berkowitz wrote:
>>> John Sheehy wrote:
>>> It's just a machine, sucker.
>> Yep, and it should be sold after 18-months of use.
>
> Why?

Amortization. *IF* you can get the tax deduction.
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

The Dave© <no.TakeThisOut@no.com> wrote:
>
>Subjective and biased consumer reviews aside... why would the mounting
>necessarily affect the glass itself?


The large diameter opening in the lens mount would allow larger rear
elements, and the very short film/sensor plane to lens flange distance
would allow optics that were not so dependent on retrofocus designs.

The irony is that, with the exception of the Tilt and Shift lenses,
Canon has never truly taken advantage of these two opportunities to
produce high quality optics, especially wide angle lenses.

I am very happy with my two Canon EOS 5D bodies, but most of the
lenses I use have "Carl Zeiss" engraved around the front element.
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

On 3/10/08 6:40 PM, in article 13tbhrshi68cd02.RemoveThis@news.supernews.com, "Rita
Berkowitz" <ritaberk2008.RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote:

> Tony Polson wrote:
>
>>> Subjective and biased consumer reviews aside... why would the
>>> mounting necessarily affect the glass itself?
>
> I put my money where my mouth is
>
> Rita
>
I would guess so.
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

William Graham wrote:

> Date: 2070
> Place: The attic of grandpa's old place, just before we put it on the
> market.
> Found in a box: A bunch of CD's with Grandpa's old pictures on
> them.......
> Found in a box: A bunch of grandpa's old slides.
>
> Which are more likely to be viewed and enjoyed by the grandkids? Will the
> computers of 2070 even be able to accept the CD's of 2008?

Accept the CD's? Certainly. Why not? The survival of standards,
devices and the s/w to read them is growing, not fading. I can still
read late 80's 9 track tapes that I have stored. (But the data has
migrated else wise and more convenient to get at ...)

However, what is more likely is that the CD backups were
made with ordinary organic based CD or DVD's. These will go 5 - 10
years in benign (20'C or less, not humid) conditions. An uninsulated
attic will spend many months per year above 35'C or so... these disks
will be dead within a few years. The slides will be faded, perhaps, but
quite viewable. If you store the CD's in a very cool, dry place, they
might go 10 years or so.

To really archive reliably for decades you need to get the "metal" based
CD's and DVD's. They retail for a higher price, of course about $2 /
disk in spindles.

OTOH, the practice of migrating data on external drives has certainly
taken off. I just ordered a 1 TB drive; double the capacity of my
40% or so used 500 GB drive. We'll see how well "Time Machine" works.
The life of data on a hard disk is probably not much better than 5 - 10
years. Gotta move it around to preserve it.

For fire coverage, however, disk, CD/DVD or attic does not work well
(unless the CD/DVD's are stored off site).

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- 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.
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:01:06 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne.DeleteThis@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:

>William Graham wrote:
>
>> Date: 2070
>> Place: The attic of grandpa's old place, just before we put it on the
>> market.
>> Found in a box: A bunch of CD's with Grandpa's old pictures on
>> them.......
>> Found in a box: A bunch of grandpa's old slides.
>>
>> Which are more likely to be viewed and enjoyed by the grandkids? Will the
>> computers of 2070 even be able to accept the CD's of 2008?
>
>Accept the CD's? Certainly. Why not? The survival of standards,
>devices and the s/w to read them is growing, not fading. I can still
>read late 80's 9 track tapes that I have stored. (But the data has
>migrated else wise and more convenient to get at ...)
>
>However, what is more likely is that the CD backups were
>made with ordinary organic based CD or DVD's. These will go 5 - 10
>years in benign (20'C or less, not humid) conditions. An uninsulated
>attic will spend many months per year above 35'C or so... these disks
>will be dead within a few years. The slides will be faded, perhaps, but
>quite viewable. If you store the CD's in a very cool, dry place, they
>might go 10 years or so.
>
>To really archive reliably for decades you need to get the "metal" based
>CD's and DVD's. They retail for a higher price, of course about $2 /
>disk in spindles.
>
>OTOH, the practice of migrating data on external drives has certainly
>taken off. I just ordered a 1 TB drive; double the capacity of my
>40% or so used 500 GB drive. We'll see how well "Time Machine" works.
>The life of data on a hard disk is probably not much better than 5 - 10
>years. Gotta move it around to preserve it.
>
>For fire coverage, however, disk, CD/DVD or attic does not work well
>(unless the CD/DVD's are stored off site).
>
>Cheers,
>Alan

FYI....

I recently decided to replace my CD backups, starting with the oldest CD...
aprox. 1998... since they are at the 10 year mark...

I had about 100 to do, and it took me a few months of leisurely after-work
activity... I moved them to a HD and then burned them onto both CDs and DVD's.

Of the 100 discs, I had 2 that had read errors. And only a few of the files were
bad, not the whole disk. Pretty good results I'd say... because of my multiple
backup philosophy, I didn't lose anything.

But the big problem?

Format!!

Lots of the discs were Direct CD, now called drag-and-drop, a form of packet
writing... Most disks were closed, but a few were open, but that didn't seem to
matter... these old format discs took 3.5 hours each to copy the files! I know I
timed a few!!

These disks had from a few hundred to a few thousand files, depending on type,
and you could watch the names slowly go by! 10,000 seconds IS a long time!

If you have packet discs I suggest you get started replacing them!

As for other storage problems, I have 3 bad HD's that were in my sock drawer...
it seems that putting a HD aside doesn't do any good... someone recently told me
they should be spun every month or so because the mech gets frozen... like your
old bike from the 60s in the back of the garage!

Did you ever open a HD to see what makes it tick? Those little parts look real
fragile!

Now I'm relying on massive DVD redundancy... every file on 3 or more discs...
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

<bobF DeleteThis @Can.com> wrote in message
news:l55et3t5puh0cmht0l315rjjbnrn0g5jen@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:01:06 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne DeleteThis @freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>>William Graham wrote:
>>
>>> Date: 2070
>>> Place: The attic of grandpa's old place, just before we put it on the
>>> market.
>>> Found in a box: A bunch of CD's with Grandpa's old pictures on
>>> them.......
>>> Found in a box: A bunch of grandpa's old slides.
>>>
>>> Which are more likely to be viewed and enjoyed by the grandkids? Will
>>> the
>>> computers of 2070 even be able to accept the CD's of 2008?
>>
>>Accept the CD's? Certainly. Why not? The survival of standards,
>>devices and the s/w to read them is growing, not fading. I can still
>>read late 80's 9 track tapes that I have stored. (But the data has
>>migrated else wise and more convenient to get at ...)
>>
>>However, what is more likely is that the CD backups were
>>made with ordinary organic based CD or DVD's. These will go 5 - 10
>>years in benign (20'C or less, not humid) conditions. An uninsulated
>>attic will spend many months per year above 35'C or so... these disks
>>will be dead within a few years. The slides will be faded, perhaps, but
>>quite viewable. If you store the CD's in a very cool, dry place, they
>>might go 10 years or so.
>>
>>To really archive reliably for decades you need to get the "metal" based
>>CD's and DVD's. They retail for a higher price, of course about $2 /
>>disk in spindles.
>>
>>OTOH, the practice of migrating data on external drives has certainly
>>taken off. I just ordered a 1 TB drive; double the capacity of my
>>40% or so used 500 GB drive. We'll see how well "Time Machine" works.
>>The life of data on a hard disk is probably not much better than 5 - 10
>>years. Gotta move it around to preserve it.
>>
>>For fire coverage, however, disk, CD/DVD or attic does not work well
>>(unless the CD/DVD's are stored off site).
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Alan
>
> FYI....
>
> I recently decided to replace my CD backups, starting with the oldest
> CD...
> aprox. 1998... since they are at the 10 year mark...
>
> I had about 100 to do, and it took me a few months of leisurely after-work
> activity... I moved them to a HD and then burned them onto both CDs and
> DVD's.
>
> Of the 100 discs, I had 2 that had read errors. And only a few of the
> files were
> bad, not the whole disk. Pretty good results I'd say... because of my
> multiple
> backup philosophy, I didn't lose anything.
>
> But the big problem?
>
> Format!!
>
> Lots of the discs were Direct CD, now called drag-and-drop, a form of
> packet
> writing... Most disks were closed, but a few were open, but that didn't
> seem to
> matter... these old format discs took 3.5 hours each to copy the files! I
> know I
> timed a few!!
>
> These disks had from a few hundred to a few thousand files, depending on
> type,
> and you could watch the names slowly go by! 10,000 seconds IS a long time!
>
> If you have packet discs I suggest you get started replacing them!
>
> As for other storage problems, I have 3 bad HD's that were in my sock
> drawer...
> it seems that putting a HD aside doesn't do any good... someone recently
> told me
> they should be spun every month or so because the mech gets frozen... like
> your
> old bike from the 60s in the back of the garage!
>
> Did you ever open a HD to see what makes it tick? Those little parts look
> real
> fragile!
>
> Now I'm relying on massive DVD redundancy... every file on 3 or more
> discs...
>
Definitely good advice.

I tend to split my efforts between maintaining an external USB HD backup,
and dual layer DVD's. I have a phobia about simply using multiple disks
written from the same drive. If the drive is slightly off in it's sector
writing, they can be useless in other drives.


But, at the first signal that dual layered disks are going the way of the
dodo, I'll be using an alternate secondary storage method.

Take Care,
Dudley
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

"Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dudley.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:pjFBj.100230$C61.96094@edtnps89...
>
> <bobF.TakeThisOut@Can.com> wrote in message
> news:l55et3t5puh0cmht0l315rjjbnrn0g5jen@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:01:06 -0400, Alan Browne
>> <alan.browne.TakeThisOut@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>William Graham wrote:
>>>
>>>> Date: 2070
>>>> Place: The attic of grandpa's old place, just before we put it on
>>>> the
>>>> market.
>>>> Found in a box: A bunch of CD's with Grandpa's old pictures on
>>>> them.......
>>>> Found in a box: A bunch of grandpa's old slides.
>>>>
>>>> Which are more likely to be viewed and enjoyed by the grandkids? Will
>>>> the
>>>> computers of 2070 even be able to accept the CD's of 2008?
>>>
>>>Accept the CD's? Certainly. Why not? The survival of standards,
>>>devices and the s/w to read them is growing, not fading. I can still
>>>read late 80's 9 track tapes that I have stored. (But the data has
>>>migrated else wise and more convenient to get at ...)
>>>
>>>However, what is more likely is that the CD backups were
>>>made with ordinary organic based CD or DVD's. These will go 5 - 10
>>>years in benign (20'C or less, not humid) conditions. An uninsulated
>>>attic will spend many months per year above 35'C or so... these disks
>>>will be dead within a few years. The slides will be faded, perhaps, but
>>>quite viewable. If you store the CD's in a very cool, dry place, they
>>>might go 10 years or so.
>>>
>>>To really archive reliably for decades you need to get the "metal" based
>>>CD's and DVD's. They retail for a higher price, of course about $2 /
>>>disk in spindles.
>>>
>>>OTOH, the practice of migrating data on external drives has certainly
>>>taken off. I just ordered a 1 TB drive; double the capacity of my
>>>40% or so used 500 GB drive. We'll see how well "Time Machine" works.
>>>The life of data on a hard disk is probably not much better than 5 - 10
>>>years. Gotta move it around to preserve it.
>>>
>>>For fire coverage, however, disk, CD/DVD or attic does not work well
>>>(unless the CD/DVD's are stored off site).
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>Alan
>>
>> FYI....
>>
>> I recently decided to replace my CD backups, starting with the oldest
>> CD...
>> aprox. 1998... since they are at the 10 year mark...
>>
>> I had about 100 to do, and it took me a few months of leisurely
>> after-work
>> activity... I moved them to a HD and then burned them onto both CDs and
>> DVD's.
>>
>> Of the 100 discs, I had 2 that had read errors. And only a few of the
>> files were
>> bad, not the whole disk. Pretty good results I'd say... because of my
>> multiple
>> backup philosophy, I didn't lose anything.
>>
>> But the big problem?
>>
>> Format!!
>>
>> Lots of the discs were Direct CD, now called drag-and-drop, a form of
>> packet
>> writing... Most disks were closed, but a few were open, but that didn't
>> seem to
>> matter... these old format discs took 3.5 hours each to copy the files! I
>> know I
>> timed a few!!
>>
>> These disks had from a few hundred to a few thousand files, depending on
>> type,
>> and you could watch the names slowly go by! 10,000 seconds IS a long
>> time!
>>
>> If you have packet discs I suggest you get started replacing them!
>>
>> As for other storage problems, I have 3 bad HD's that were in my sock
>> drawer...
>> it seems that putting a HD aside doesn't do any good... someone recently
>> told me
>> they should be spun every month or so because the mech gets frozen...
>> like your
>> old bike from the 60s in the back of the garage!
>>
>> Did you ever open a HD to see what makes it tick? Those little parts look
>> real
>> fragile!
>>
>> Now I'm relying on massive DVD redundancy... every file on 3 or more
>> discs...
>>
> Definitely good advice.
>
> I tend to split my efforts between maintaining an external USB HD backup,
> and dual layer DVD's. I have a phobia about simply using multiple disks
> written from the same drive. If the drive is slightly off in it's sector
> writing, they can be useless in other drives.
>
>
> But, at the first signal that dual layered disks are going the way of the
> dodo, I'll be using an alternate secondary storage method.
>
> Take Care,
> Dudley
>
>
You know, after reading all the above, I am more convinced than ever that
it's wise to have the slides.......As a back up, if nothing else.....:^)
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

"William Graham" <weg9 RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
news:gsmdndtG_u1E8UranZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dudley RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:pjFBj.100230$C61.96094@edtnps89...
>>
>> <bobF RemoveThis @Can.com> wrote in message
>> news:l55et3t5puh0cmht0l315rjjbnrn0g5jen@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:01:06 -0400, Alan Browne
>>> <alan.browne RemoveThis @freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>>William Graham wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Date: 2070
>>>>> Place: The attic of grandpa's old place, just before we put it on
>>>>> the
>>>>> market.
>>>>> Found in a box: A bunch of CD's with Grandpa's old pictures on
>>>>> them.......
>>>>> Found in a box: A bunch of grandpa's old slides.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which are more likely to be viewed and enjoyed by the grandkids? Will
>>>>> the
>>>>> computers of 2070 even be able to accept the CD's of 2008?
>>>>
>>>>Accept the CD's? Certainly. Why not? The survival of standards,
>>>>devices and the s/w to read them is growing, not fading. I can still
>>>>read late 80's 9 track tapes that I have stored. (But the data has
>>>>migrated else wise and more convenient to get at ...)
>>>>
>>>>However, what is more likely is that the CD backups were
>>>>made with ordinary organic based CD or DVD's. These will go 5 - 10
>>>>years in benign (20'C or less, not humid) conditions. An uninsulated
>>>>attic will spend many months per year above 35'C or so... these disks
>>>>will be dead within a few years. The slides will be faded, perhaps, but
>>>>quite viewable. If you store the CD's in a very cool, dry place, they
>>>>might go 10 years or so.
>>>>
>>>>To really archive reliably for decades you need to get the "metal" based
>>>>CD's and DVD's. They retail for a higher price, of course about $2 /
>>>>disk in spindles.
>>>>
>>>>OTOH, the practice of migrating data on external drives has certainly
>>>>taken off. I just ordered a 1 TB drive; double the capacity of my
>>>>40% or so used 500 GB drive. We'll see how well "Time Machine" works.
>>>>The life of data on a hard disk is probably not much better than 5 - 10
>>>>years. Gotta move it around to preserve it.
>>>>
>>>>For fire coverage, however, disk, CD/DVD or attic does not work well
>>>>(unless the CD/DVD's are stored off site).
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>Alan
>>>
>>> FYI....
>>>
>>> I recently decided to replace my CD backups, starting with the oldest
>>> CD...
>>> aprox. 1998... since they are at the 10 year mark...
>>>
>>> I had about 100 to do, and it took me a few months of leisurely
>>> after-work
>>> activity... I moved them to a HD and then burned them onto both CDs and
>>> DVD's.
>>>
>>> Of the 100 discs, I had 2 that had read errors. And only a few of the
>>> files were
>>> bad, not the whole disk. Pretty good results I'd say... because of my
>>> multiple
>>> backup philosophy, I didn't lose anything.
>>>
>>> But the big problem?
>>>
>>> Format!!
>>>
>>> Lots of the discs were Direct CD, now called drag-and-drop, a form of
>>> packet
>>> writing... Most disks were closed, but a few were open, but that didn't
>>> seem to
>>> matter... these old format discs took 3.5 hours each to copy the files!
>>> I know I
>>> timed a few!!
>>>
>>> These disks had from a few hundred to a few thousand files, depending on
>>> type,
>>> and you could watch the names slowly go by! 10,000 seconds IS a long
>>> time!
>>>
>>> If you have packet discs I suggest you get started replacing them!
>>>
>>> As for other storage problems, I have 3 bad HD's that were in my sock
>>> drawer...
>>> it seems that putting a HD aside doesn't do any good... someone recently
>>> told me
>>> they should be spun every month or so because the mech gets frozen...
>>> like your
>>> old bike from the 60s in the back of the garage!
>>>
>>> Did you ever open a HD to see what makes it tick? Those little parts
>>> look real
>>> fragile!
>>>
>>> Now I'm relying on massive DVD redundancy... every file on 3 or more
>>> discs...
>>>
>> Definitely good advice.
>>
>> I tend to split my efforts between maintaining an external USB HD backup,
>> and dual layer DVD's. I have a phobia about simply using multiple disks
>> written from the same drive. If the drive is slightly off in it's sector
>> writing, they can be useless in other drives.
>>
>>
>> But, at the first signal that dual layered disks are going the way of the
>> dodo, I'll be using an alternate secondary storage method.
>>
>> Take Care,
>> Dudley
>>
>>
> You know, after reading all the above, I am more convinced than ever that
> it's wise to have the slides.......As a back up, if nothing else.....:^)
>

I agree, completely, William.
My wife and I make sure that, in addition to the hard-drive and DVD copies,
we print prints of the most important pics. Slides would be even better.
Now, if I only had a digital to film converter...

Take Care,
Dudley
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

bobF.TakeThisOut@Can.com wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:01:06 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne.TakeThisOut@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:

> Did you ever open a HD to see what makes it tick? Those little parts look real
> fragile!

Yep. Yet, even under Windows which tortures disk drives I have one
drive that is still ticking along after over 8 years of use (actually I
just retired it after using in it in a Linux box for a year).

But I did have my first partial failure of a younger disk (about 4 years
old) a couple months ago. Suddenly some areas of the disk were
unreadable and WinXP would sulk while trying to access. I did manage to
offload most of it onto an external drive (and most of the data was
backed up in any case...). That disk is for recycling.

> Now I'm relying on massive DVD redundancy... every file on 3 or more discs...

Well, just remember that DVD's are also (in the main) organic based
dyes, so all three sets will be degrading together. Further, they are
more allowing of errors as video (for which they were made) does not
need anywhere 100% data recovery. There could be a 20% error rate and
you would not see it on the television. I'm not specifically sure how
it is implemented on computer DVD recorders.

I have CD's from ca.1999 that are still readable. But the data has been
cycled forward onto DVD's.

Again: For long life buy the so-called "gold" Verbatim disks (CD and
DVD). In benign conditions the data will last well over 100 years.

I just ordered an IOmega 1 TB drive (actually 2 500 GB drives in one
unit) that can be configured RAID 0 or 1, (I'll use 0) and a couple
other modes. It has Firewire 800 which is very fast.

I'm beginning to believe that hot backing up is really the only way to
go. Managing backup volumes is tedious. It will be interesting to see
how well Apple Time Machine works.

--
-- 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.
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:27:01 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne.TakeThisOut@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:

>bobF@Can.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:01:06 -0400, Alan Browne
>> <alan.browne.TakeThisOut@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> Did you ever open a HD to see what makes it tick? Those little parts look real
>> fragile!
>
>Yep. Yet, even under Windows which tortures disk drives I have one
>drive that is still ticking along after over 8 years of use (actually I
>just retired it after using in it in a Linux box for a year).
>
>But I did have my first partial failure of a younger disk (about 4 years
>old) a couple months ago. Suddenly some areas of the disk were
>unreadable and WinXP would sulk while trying to access. I did manage to
>offload most of it onto an external drive (and most of the data was
>backed up in any case...). That disk is for recycling.
>
>> Now I'm relying on massive DVD redundancy... every file on 3 or more discs...
>
>Well, just remember that DVD's are also (in the main) organic based
>dyes, so all three sets will be degrading together. Further, they are
>more allowing of errors as video (for which they were made) does not
>need anywhere 100% data recovery. There could be a 20% error rate and
>you would not see it on the television. I'm not specifically sure how
>it is implemented on computer DVD recorders.
>
>I have CD's from ca.1999 that are still readable. But the data has been
>cycled forward onto DVD's.
>
>Again: For long life buy the so-called "gold" Verbatim disks (CD and
>DVD). In benign conditions the data will last well over 100 years.
>
>I just ordered an IOmega 1 TB drive (actually 2 500 GB drives in one
>unit) that can be configured RAID 0 or 1, (I'll use 0) and a couple
>other modes. It has Firewire 800 which is very fast.
>
>I'm beginning to believe that hot backing up is really the only way to
>go. Managing backup volumes is tedious. It will be interesting to see
>how well Apple Time Machine works.

Another thing I an considering is saving as RAR archives, with massive Par2 loss
protection... I've ran some tests on this stuff, and once set up it works like
magic! You can make a 4G archive of photos, save it as perhaps 100 .RAR pieces,
with a few dozen Par2 files set to 100%, save everything on 2 discs, and you can
be missing half the files on each disk and still get everything back!

It's worth learning this stuff!


As for my bad HDs, they are all the new ones! 2 are Western 160G and one is a
Seagate 160G... All my old HDs are still good, and they go back to when 10G was
in style...
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!! 

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:02:59 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dudley DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:

>
>"William Graham" <weg9 DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:gsmdndtG_u1E8UranZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dudley DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:pjFBj.100230$C61.96094@edtnps89...
>>>
>>> <bobF DeleteThis @Can.com> wrote in message
>>> news:l55et3t5puh0cmht0l315rjjbnrn0g5jen@4ax.com...
>>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:01:06 -0400, Alan Browne
>>>> <alan.browne DeleteThis @freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>William Graham wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Date: 2070
>>>>>> Place: The attic of grandpa's old place, just before we put it on
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> market.
>>>>>> Found in a box: A bunch of CD's with Grandpa's old pictures on
>>>>>> them.......
>>>>>> Found in a box: A bunch of grandpa's old slides.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which are more likely to be viewed and enjoyed by the grandkids? Will
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> computers of 2070 even be able to accept the CD's of 2008?
>>>>>
>>>>>Accept the CD's? Certainly. Why not? The survival of standards,
>>>>>devices and the s/w to read them is growing, not fading. I can still
>>>>>read late 80's 9 track tapes that I have stored. (But the data has
>>>>>migrated else wise and more convenient to get at ...)
>>>>>
>>>>>However, what is more likely is that the CD backups were
>>>>>made with ordinary organic based CD or DVD's. These will go 5 - 10
>>>>>years in benign (20'C or less, not humid) conditions. An uninsulated
>>>>>attic will spend many months per year above 35'C or so... these disks
>>>>>will be dead within a few years. The slides will be faded, perhaps, but
>>>>>quite viewable. If you store the CD's in a very cool, dry place, they
>>>>>might go 10 years or so.
>>>>>
>>>>>To really archive reliably for decades you need to get the "metal" based
>>>>>CD's and DVD's. They retail for a higher price, of course about $2 /
>>>>>disk in spindles.
>>>>>
>>>>>OTOH, the practice of migrating data on external drives has certainly
>>>>>taken off. I just ordered a 1 TB drive; double the capacity of my
>>>>>40% or so used 500 GB drive. We'll see how well "Time Machine" works.
>>>>>The life of data on a hard disk is probably not much better than 5 - 10
>>>>>years. Gotta move it around to preserve it.
>>>>>
>>>>>For fire coverage, however, disk, CD/DVD or attic does not work well
>>>>>(unless the CD/DVD's are stored off site).
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>Alan
>>>>
>>>> FYI....
>>>>
>>>> I recently decided to replace my CD backups, starting with the oldest
>>>> CD...
>>>> aprox. 1998... since they are at the 10 year mark...
>>>>
>>>> I had about 100 to do, and it took me a few months of leisurely
>>>> after-work
>>>> activity... I moved them to a HD and then burned them onto both CDs and
>>>> DVD's.
>>>>
>>>> Of the 100 discs, I had 2 that had read errors. And only a few of the
>>>> files were
>>>> bad, not the whole disk. Pretty good results I'd say... because of my
>>>> multiple
>>>> backup philosophy, I didn't lose anything.
>>>>
>>>> But the big problem?
>>>>
>>>> Format!!
>>>>
>>>> Lots of the discs were Direct CD, now called drag-and-drop, a form of
>>>> packet
>>>> writing... Most disks were closed, but a few were open, but that didn't
>>>> seem to
>>>> matter... these old format discs took 3.5 hours each to copy the files!
>>>> I know I
>>>> timed a few!!
>>>>
>>>> These disks had from a few hundred to a few thousand files, depending on
>>>> type,
>>>> and you could watch the names slowly go by! 10,000 seconds IS a long
>>>> time!
>>>>
>>>> If you have packet discs I suggest you get started replacing them!
>>>>
>>>> As for other storage problems, I have 3 bad HD's that were in my sock
>>>> drawer...
>>>> it seems that putting a HD aside doesn't do any good... someone recently
>>>> told me
>>>> they should be spun every month or so because the mech gets frozen...
>>>> like your
>>>> old bike from the 60s in the back of the garage!
>>>>
>>>> Did you ever open a HD to see what makes it tick? Those little parts
>>>> look real
>>>> fragile!
>>>>
>>>> Now I'm relying on massive DVD redundancy... every file on 3 or more
>>>> discs...
>>>>
>>> Definitely good advice.
>>>
>>> I tend to split my efforts between maintaining an external USB HD backup,
>>> and dual layer DVD's. I have a phobia about simply using multiple disks
>>> written from the same drive. If the drive is slightly off in it's sector
>>> writing, they can be useless in other drives.
>>>
>>>
>>> But, at the first signal that dual layered disks are going the way of the
>>> dodo, I'll be using an alternate secondary storage method.
>>>
>>> Take Care,
>>> Dudley
>>>
>>>
>> You know, after reading all the above, I am more convinced than ever that
>> it's wise to have the slides.......As a back up, if nothing else.....:^)
>>
>
>I agree, completely, William.
>My wife and I make sure that, in addition to the hard-drive and DVD copies,
>we print prints of the most important pics. Slides would be even better.
>Now, if I only had a digital to film converter...
>
>Take Care,
>Dudley
>
>

Slides are a good idea, but they too will eventually fade, and that will be it
for them...

It's better to stay in the digital domain and copy over the data every so
often... every decade as it now stands... perhaps every century in tomorrows
technology...

One advantage we have is the increasing speeds... I made my first CDR's at x2
!!! Now I can burn 6 CDs onto a DVD+R in about 12 minutes or less!
 >> Stay informed about: The Nikon D3 makes everyone's life better, even mine!!!