[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: