[rollei_list] Re: OT: Film vs Digital to preserve archives

  • From: Don Williams <dwilli10@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2006 20:58:05 -0700

At 01:42 PM 7/20/2006 +0000, you wrote:

I should add that I wasn't referring to digital archiving in the strict sense, nor for public bodies in any sense - but that for a home user, it's not actually that onerous and can actually increase the security of one's images. I am in complete agreement with everything that has been said concerning genuine archiving, and of course if I were to pop my clogs tomorrow there is no guarantee that anyone would find my digitally-stored images, whereas my film archive could not be missed. I'm not in any way trying to suggest that digital is superior to film in any way, merely that for home users, this issue of storage is overplayed.

Nick

There's a nice article about backup of home computers in the current issue of Consumer Reports.


Only problem for me is that they discuss 200-300 Gb backup devices. I have 6 200-300 Gb drives in my system, admittedly all far from full, however.

Anyone every try the free (was free) Microsoft OneCare system. It does a nice job of picking out files to backup (digital photo files and financial files for example) and backs them up only when they change. OneCare is mentioned in Consumer Reports with a comment that it will be review in detail in a future issue. I think when you combine the free (for now) Microsoft Defender, with OneCare, you get a pretty stable system and a good set of backup programs.

DAW



Don Williams
La Jolla, CA

Other related posts: