Select Canon cameras can now auto-backup to Google Photos

[Canon Rumors Guy]

Google has added support to the image.canon app to allow automatic backup to Google Photos. If you’re not comfortable with backing up to Canon’s cloud solution, this is probably a great feature for you.
From Google:
With the latest version of the image.canon app (available on Android or iOS) and a compatible Canon camera, you can choose to automatically transfer original quality photos to Google Photos, eliminating the hassle of using your computer or phone to back them up.
In addition to a compatible Canon camera and the image.canon app, you’ll also need a 

[url=https://www.canonrumors.com/select-canon-cameras-can-now-auto-backup-to-google-photos/]Continue reading...

 

[marathonman]

Google is also *******.

 

[addola]

I want direct backup to Amazon Photos. With Amazon Prime, you have unlimited full-size photo storage and it supports RAW formats.

 

[marathonman]

I want direct backup to Amazon Photos. With Amazon Prime, you have unlimited full-size photo storage and it supports RAW formats.

It doesn't support CR3 does it?

 

[Tom W]

I wouldn't trust google to hold my beer while I did something stupid. They have an agenda, and if you don't agree with their agenda, they essentially cancel you.

 

[RMac]

I want direct backup to Amazon Photos. With Amazon Prime, you have unlimited full-size photo storage and it supports RAW formats.

It doesn't support CR3 does it?

No, Amazon treats .CR3 as video files from a data accounting standpoint and does not include them in the "unlimited" category. Super annoying. One workaround is to wrap the .CR3 in a .DNG, which, if you bundle the original .CR3 file into the DNG, makes for a much larger file. Obviously this workaround wouldn't work if the files are coming straight from Canon.


If this ever got fixed, It would be a dream system for those using Prime + image.canon: Unlimited long-term automatic cloud backup of RAW files straight out of your camera over wifi. As it is, I doubt Amazon is chomping at the bit to extend their "unlimited" coverage. I've already got 3+TB of mostly .CR2 files on their cloud which means I'm using storage that would normally cost me well more than what they charge for Prime, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

 

[marathonman]

If this ever got fixed, It would be a dream system for those using Prime + image.canon:

I used it for CR2 and my Synology NAS for a long time. But with the switch to CR3 and Amazon not supporting them as "photos", I decided to switch to BackBlaze.

 

[dwarven]

I wouldn't trust google to hold my beer while I did something stupid. They have an agenda, and if you don't agree with their agenda, they essentially cancel you.

I've used Google Drive since it first launched and I've never lost a single file.

 

[JustUs7]

I've used Google Drive since it first launched and I've never lost a single file.

I don’t think it’s about them losing your files. It’s not trusting what they do with them.

 

[twoheadedboy]

I don’t think it’s about them losing your files. It’s not trusting what they do with them.

Ok, fine, you don't trust the safeguards Google as a provider of cloud services has in places. That's not unreasonable.

Why then would Canon's offering alone, or paired with another provider, be safer? Do you even know whose cloud Canon's data is stored on? Because I guarantee they're not running their own physical datacenter.

Could be AWS (Amazon) or Azure (Microsoft), could be Google, could be any number of other providers.

Do you understand transport security/encryption from end-to-end, and which ones the three letter agencies of the US and other countries have either broken into or have a backdoor into those networks? Or how absolutely boned your home router probably is (if someone wanted to get your traffic), or your cellphone if you use that for any data transfer?

I'm not really sure what the concern is specifically with what Google could do with the photos you shoot, but I'd be interested in hearing what that is, and what cloud solution you prefer to Canon+Google.

 

[SteveC]

Ok, fine, you don't trust the safeguards Google as a provider of cloud services has in places. That's not unreasonable.

No, he's not worried about safeguards. When he said he did't trust what they would do with them, he was alluding to the fact that Google makes its money by mining data from everything they can get their hands on. That includes any personal information you might be storing on the cloud that they're giving you for FREE even though it costs them money to do so.

 

[JustUs7]

No, he's not worried about safeguards. When he said he did't trust what they would do with them, he was alluding to the fact that Google makes its money by mining data from everything they can get their hands on. That includes any personal information you might be storing on the cloud that they're giving you for FREE even though it costs them money to do so.

I remain one of the very view people without a Facebook page as well for that reason. I post in a couple boards like this anonymously and have a LinkedIn page (but I’m not active in it). That’s the extent of any social media. My only gmail account is a .edu due to teaching part time.

 

[twoheadedboy]

No, he's not worried about safeguards. When he said he did't trust what they would do with them, he was alluding to the fact that Google makes its money by mining data from everything they can get their hands on. That includes any personal information you might be storing on the cloud that they're giving you for FREE even though it costs them money to do so.

Ok but that's shared by an even bigger swath of providers than just cloud services, that's the entire free (and much of the paid) internet. Anything you view on the web has a cost, and if you are not paying that cost, the provider is using your data to some extent to pay for it.

 

[twoheadedboy]

I remain one of the very view people without a Facebook page as well for that reason. I post in a couple boards like this anonymously and have a LinkedIn page (but I’m not active in it). That’s the extent of any social media. My only gmail account is a .edu due to teaching part time.

I hate to tell you, but even if you block ads, the fact that you are a registered and logged-on user of this site means you have a browser cookie and are being tracked to some extent or another, and more so if you're using this site with your smart phone. Even if you use Tor, that's likely compromised at the state level (primarily funded by the US Government), even if you use a private VPN, someone owns those servers and someone definitely owns the connections between the two. Your best hope for privacy on the internet is that no one cares about you personally, and your communications are not swept up in connection with someone they do care about - but there is no possibility of absolute privacy on the public internet.

 

[unfocused]

This seems like a nice option, but with 64GB being the absolute minimum size available in CFExpress cards and most cards being at least 125GB, I wonder how useful it is to have 100GB of automatic back up. Certainly not a long term storage solution.

 

[melgross]

Why would anyone, other than Android phone camera users want to do that?

 

[melgross]

I hate to tell you, but even if you block ads, the fact that you are a registered and logged-on user of this site means you have a browser cookie and are being tracked to some extent or another, and more so if you're using this site with your smart phone. Even if you use Tor, that's likely compromised at the state level (primarily funded by the US Government), even if you use a private VPN, someone owns those servers and someone definitely owns the connections between the two. Your best hope for privacy on the internet is that no one cares about you personally, and your communications are not swept up in connection with someone they do care about - but there is no possibility of absolute privacy on the public internet.

Apple does a much better job of stopping trackers than Androud does. As witness: Facebook just said that’s Apple’s iOS 14 will cost them half of their tracking Ad business. Nothing said about Android 10 or the new 11. Why? Because Google is in the Ad tracking business, why Apple isn’t.

sorry for the rant, but there is a big difference between the two.

 

[AlanF]

Why would anyone, other than Android phone camera users want to do that?

The OP has "(available on Android or iOS)" so iPhones as well and also iPads and tablets.

 

[JordanCS13]

Why would anyone, other than Android phone camera users want to do that?

Because Google Photos is fantastic. Auto tags most everything, and allows you to easily find images from years ago just based on what is in it. "Oh....there was a great shot of my daughter near a fountain." Search your daughter's name and 'fountain' and the photo instantly comes up. I don't back up my major photos to it, but all my mobile images and anything from my real cameras I've transferred to my phone, or downloaded are all in there. I'll sometimes upload good images I've taken to it also if I want super easy access to them.

 

[twoheadedboy]

Apple does a much better job of stopping trackers than Androud does. As witness: Facebook just said that’s Apple’s iOS 14 will cost them half of their tracking Ad business. Nothing said about Android 10 or the new 11. Why? Because Google is in the Ad tracking business, why Apple isn’t.

sorry for the rant, but there is a big difference between the two.

Apple has been in the PRISM program for nearly a decade - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data