March 06, 2015, 12:54:28 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - etg9

Pages: [1] 2 3
Software & Accessories / Re: DxO Optics Pro 9 released
« on: October 24, 2013, 04:34:27 PM »
I'm in the minority that LR just doesn't do anything really worth it to me. I use this and photoshop to accomplish what I need. I will be updating to ver 9 soon to see what the new noise correction can do. I'd like to see more about the software but the website is currently dead.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 12-24 f/2.8L [CR1]
« on: March 01, 2013, 10:20:10 AM »
The 16-35II is my most used lens by a lot, I too would add to the ranks to be much happier with a 16-35III than a 16-35IS. I don't need this lens to be much wider than it is (although 14-24 is fine). I really want it to have much better sharpness than it currently does.

Good they are fixing it, I can see why a fringe problem like using the newest Canon flash with the newest Canon cameras might have been missed in testing. Hopefully it will come out in April although with all the money they are charging for DSLR's they might want to hire another couple programmer monkeys to get this ball rolling.

I would like to know more about this getting your money back...

//no house
///pays too much in taxes

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: January 16, 2013, 11:36:26 AM »
I just got one for myself for the holidays and what a great present it is. I've been very happy with the look and feel of everything so far. This and the 16-35 never leave my bag.

Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Production to Begin in Q2
« on: January 10, 2013, 12:04:46 PM »
I'd be interested in this lens at 4-5k tops but at over 10k it's looking to be for highly paid sports pros only. I wish 3rd party would step up their game on the longer focal lengths as I feel it's where canon is ridiculous with pricing.

400-600mm stuff is more expensive to make and I understand that. 400mm f4 @ $3500-4500ish would be great. Get me a 600mm f5.6 for 5-6k and that seems fair and good too. Maybe something cheap and long that's not an L lens would be great too.

I have the GF Lightsphere Collapsible and really like it plus it doesn't take up very much room in my bag. It's a nice defuser for what it is. I like that you can just pop the top out and fold the deal down to go back to normal flash without taking it off the flash. I also mount the dome different ways for different uses. because the dome sits in the cup it's easy to put a tissue in there to have it give off a much softer light.

 I agree with everyone above. Nero's setup is great but you can't move that bad boy around easily enough for me. I couldn't do it for events.

Technical Support / Re: Best Methods For Long Term File Storage ??
« on: November 15, 2012, 02:29:05 PM »

I totally agree with you on the facts. Cloud storage has risks. Local storage has risks. And print is a great format, with a long shelf life.

With regards to "prints as backup storage", I think it boils down to volume. The problem with print storage is that it has scaling issues. For smaller collections (or people with lots of money), print is a great way to preserve and backup photos. But for most shooters, print doesn't work as a primary method of cold storage. It requires one to have both a digital storage system and an analog system. It's just too much work/money for most of us.

Now, having said all that... for selected images, having prints makes a lot of sense.
I'm not suggesting prints as a solution for the reasons you mention, just pointing out that with digital media, we do not have a nice reliable long term solution similar to the store it in a shoebox method so our descendents can view images 100 years from now.
I'm hoping that someone steps up and creates a storage media that is reliable, its certainly possible, but only available to the technically astute, and who knows if anyone could read the media in 50 years.  Its not happening because no one sees a market, or maybe there is no good known technical solution (I doubt that).


We just really have no idea, 100 years ago they probably weren't sure the prints would be around now as the first prints in the mid 1800's didn't hold up so well. RAW is a little funkier as it has to get processed when opened but JPEG is a much more developed and solid standard. I can imagine that will be around in 100 years as it's already been around for 20 and it doesn't seem like it's going anywhere.

Technical Support / Re: Best Methods For Long Term File Storage ??
« on: November 15, 2012, 11:25:48 AM »
...  I have a netgear readynas ultra 2...

ReadyNAS was developed by a company called Infrant, they were aquired by Netgear. Up until they were aquired they were considered one of the best quality NAS boxes you could get. They don't have the sweetheart status they used to but they are still a great product.

I moved from Infrant to Synology and have been extremely happy.

I also agree with most of what you said, it's hard to tell someone what the best thing to do is when we don't know what he is trying to accomplish.

Technical Support / Re: Best Methods For Long Term File Storage ??
« on: November 15, 2012, 09:51:25 AM »
The snaps of the RAID I was talking about before was exactly this and what I have recommended. They work just like Time Machine or VSS if you are familiar with either of those.
Sure ZFS solves that but it sounds like because of the volume of data you sync over a local network so it's physically close?

Correct, and the out to the Amazon cloud for my offsite.

Technical Support / Re: Best Methods For Long Term File Storage ??
« on: November 15, 2012, 08:28:48 AM »
You could also consider Thecus N7700 series.

It basically seems to be Freenas with a reasonable management GUI in a 7 slot box with support for both Apple and PC and iSCSI et al..

Supports RAID 5 and 6 and now has a 10GE interface.


Thecus is another well regarded brand. I believe the box has version control to guard against what people are talking about with accidental deletions, viruses, etc.

The snaps of the RAID I was talking about before was exactly this and what I have recommended. They work just like Time Machine or VSS if you are familiar with either of those.

One of the things I don't like about hard drive pushing is that it's not automagic. You forget to back up to disk after a big download and 36 hours later your back at your computer to find a failed disk that data is gone. My NAS doesn't forget, my computer might bug out and install windows updates in the middle of the day when I'm gone but the operation isn't computer based so backups don't stop. If your backup spans more than one disk you're in more drives to your rotation. I have 7TB of files that I would like to take care of, not all of it goes up to the cloud but I would like to keep it around if I can and that would mean 9 single 3TB hard drives to do active/passive/offsite plus rotating them out so offsite is fresh every 2 weeks or month. too much work for my tastes.

Do you use the 10GBE link? with what switch? I've been thinking about picking up a 24 port dell for home use as it's one of the cheaper ones.

Technical Support / Re: Best Methods For Long Term File Storage ??
« on: November 14, 2012, 11:50:19 PM »
As an IT guy who designs DR (just a part of what I do) for a living and like I said earlier in this thread a working copy on site, a back up on site and a backup offsite and in many locations as possible is the safest bet.

I never told anyone to use the cloud as a single backup method. Tape is a poor backup solution for long term, as are DVD's but for different reasons. DVD's tend to get scratched or wear out, tapes no one has that model tape drive 10 years later and they are not backwards compatible. Single external hard drives die all the time.

Keep you data yourself, on a NAS. Use the cloud as a backup to that. Very easy to manage and very hard to kill.

Print is a bad idea for archival, I'm happy MSP's photos are around. a lot of people's aren't: fires, floods, tornadoes, earthquakes, burglars, or just getting lost have claimed lots of photos. They also take lots of room and are hard to move about and organize. This may work as a last ditch backup of very important family photos.

People telling you to keep backups in bank boxes or at parents houses tend to live close by, no geographic dispersion. that big earthquake/flood/fire may very well hit them too. 

do not rely on Teh Cloud, in any form. If you don't have physical control over your data, you don't own it, and whoever does own it can do anything they want to it and you've got very little recourse. That could include deleting it, peeking inside it, or even sharing it with the world.

Disk(s) 1 are where you keep everything. Put a copy of everything on disk(s) 2. Every week (or month or whatever), take disk(s) 2 offsite to your bank deposit vault or your parent's place or somewhere you trust and exchange it for disk(s) 3, which you bring back with you and start treating as you used to do with disk(s) 2. The next week, do the swap again.

But you only want to think about RAID if a single disk isn't big and / or fast enough to hold all your stuff, and you should then think of the RAID array as a single disk that happens to have some extra moving parts.

...and the only reason you'd need an offsite backup is if you're worried about theft.

The Cloud, read the TOS for the provider and make sure it fits your needs. don't make the cloud (or anything) your single backup source.

The disk swap is a ton of work, hopefully the last backups were good and hopefully the disk didn't fail. when you fill up one disk you get to buy 3 more. don't do this.

RAID (other than 0-1) also protects against hardware failure with an extra hot spare (5/6) or array (10/50). A NAS also doesn't have to be a single drive, the space can be logically separated.

or any other natural disaster.

Technical Support / Re: Best Methods For Long Term File Storage ??
« on: November 14, 2012, 05:47:26 PM »
NAS (Raid 5 or 6) to Cloud is what I safe is the safest bet. That covers corruption, accidental file damage, disk failure, enclosure failure, catastrophic damage, and regional damage. International damage would not be covered but if the US is gone then I don't need my pictures anymore.

I have a Synology NAS at home and love it. It's small and quiet and has lots of options. I have it keep 5 snaps of any changes so I can revert if need be. There are cheaper things to buy, but their are tradeoffs and this one fit my needs. Pick a provider with a  good long term track record and replace the NAS every 4-5 years

After that data gets sent off to the cloud for an offsite backup. I use Amazon Glacier now but have jumped around and another service may fit your needs better. I copy compressed JPEG only to Skydrive as a complete last ditch about every quarter.

My photo backup is currently about 500GB (I don't keep too many raw) so that's only $5/mo. To get it all back out of there would be about $60, for DR this is cheap and Amazon is a good trusted name.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Conversion to Nikon
« on: November 14, 2012, 05:08:01 PM »
Great shot. Congratz on winning.

Since you have that nice new Nikon and that junk Canon (I read the forums, I know the DxO scores) if you just don't want that Canon anymore send me a PM and I will take it off your hands. ;-)

//he's not switching
///it's a Nikon P&S  :o

Street & City / Re: Post Hurricane Sandy black out photos.
« on: November 14, 2012, 10:54:07 AM »
I'm happy to add a couple after storm pictures. photos completely untouched and unprocessed. Everyone else's shots look really great, kind of pretty. I wanted to capture more of the eerie feel of the city after the power was out. People would just kind of pop out of no where or roam in packs with lights.

Pages: [1] 2 3