Backing Up Your Photos « Nikon Rumors Forum

The new Nikon Rumors Forum is now live at http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussions. This forum is now in "read only" mode until I figure a proper way to import all data over to the new platform. Please register over at the new forum.


Nikon Rumors Forum

where there’s smoke there’s forum fire

Register or log in - lost password?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Other Nikon stuff / news / commentary

Backing Up Your Photos

(86 posts) (40 voices)
  • Started 3 years ago by NSXType-R
  • Latest reply from spraynpray
  • Related Topics:
    1. Backing up your photos 2012 (Amazon S3)
    2. Capture-> photoshop?
    3. 17mm vs 20mm for inside photos .. photos to see how they compare on FOV
    4. blueish photos

Tags:

  • Backing Up Photos
  • opendrive
« Previous1234Next »
  1. JorPet

    preferred member
    Joined: Feb '10
    Posts: 261

    offline

    I use a Windows Home Server to do all of my backups. I back up three laptops and a desktop to the server each night. It then keeps two weeks of nightly backups, two months of weekly backups and two years of monthly backups. This covers the full system in each case, plus any data changes. This is all automated through WHS and is one of its prime purposes.

    If a file is modified or deleted and one of my kids or wife need to get what the file looked like yesterday or last week or last month, I can recover whichever version they want. The server also mirrors the information across multiple disks, so that I would have to loose three drives all at the same time to actually lose any file. The server has hot swappable drives, so if a drive goes bad, I can just pop it out, put in a new one and the data for that drive will be rebuilt from the other three. The last piece I would like to set up is to have it also store all data to another home server located some place else (like my parent's house). That would keep even the total loss of all hardware in the house from being catastrophic. There are WHS plug-ins that will handle this as well.

    I also copy all of my picture directories over to the server manually so that I have a redundant location of all my original files. This may be over kill, but it simplifies things if I just want to get a file back. All of these files are directly accessible over the internet from any location so there are times when I want to show someone a picture and I don't have my laptop and can just pull it directly from the server.

    This is not an expensive solution for what it does. I ordered the Acer 2GB/1TB HOME SERVER from B&H, which contains one Western Digital Caviar 1TB drive. I also ordered three more Western Digital 1TB CAVIER drives which matched the original installed drive. That gives me 4TB of storage of which I am currently running at about 20% capacity. If I get up to about 75% then I will start swapping 2TB drives in. Doing this one at a time, each will rebuild itself and after four are swapped it will be running at double the capacity. Total cost of the system last year was $632.99. The drives are currently $25 cheaper and the computer is $10 more. Running full time, it pulls 20-40 watts thanks to the "green" drives and low power consumption of the server. The server can also be your print server if you want and has USB ports for any external drives you currently have, plus a front USB port for backing up data keys.

    This is all plugged into a large UPS that can keep the server and my routers up and running for 4 hours. The server will do a graceful shut down at 50% battery power allowing the router to continue to function for another 4 hours or so.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  2. NSXType-R

    preferred member
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 2,803

    offline

    kaos said:
    I was loading the car to go skiing for a couple of days and set the backpack (with camera, lenses, laptop, iPod, and various other pieces of miscellany) behind the car. I then finished loading the car, got in, and threw it into reverse to get out of the driveway, backing over the backpack in the process. Fortunately, the bag twisted as I drove over it, so it only made the letter U out of my laptop. The camera, lenses, and miscellaneous electronics were completely spared, aside from a cosmetic crack in the hood on my 18-105.

    In reference to the comment for Raid arraying listed above. This solution is usually designed for people who constantly have both hard drives (or whatever the multiplicity is) connected. Local storage like this isn't a terribly good backup solution either if you're running a business, because anything that falls into the Act of God clause would cause the work to be destroyed either way. Think of backups like a 200mm f/2 lens. Yes, you can spend an extraordinary amount of money and be nearly 100% assured that everything will always be fine, but do you really need that kind of assurance. For me, an external hard drive and periodic backups are fine, although user dependent. For some people, network attached systems with automatic backups are acceptable. Still others catalog on physical media like CDs. There was an article on here a few months about a professional workflow with some crazy redundancy, but I can't find it at the moment.

    Ouch, do you know you can salvage the hard drive at least?

    Posted 2 years ago #
  3. kaos

    preferred member
    Joined: Oct '10
    Posts: 102

    offline

    @ NSX - I was hopeful, but while it suffered less damage than the rest of the system, the casing on the HDD did deform enough to cause it not to spin up.

    Fortunately, I ended up only losing about a week of local copies of e-mails since I do clone my system to an external fairly frequently, but I did have a few seconds of panic before I remembered that.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  4. randomnut

    member
    Joined: Jan '11
    Posts: 11

    offline

    I'll soon be investing in a NAS primarily for photo backup. I won't trust a single drive solution like a normal USB device.

    Unsure whether to go for a cheaper 2 drive in Raid 1 or more expensive 3 drive where I can go for Raid 5 and have more space.

    I feel just a 2 drive will be appropriate, but either way Nas is the only way to go for me. I don't have the upload speed to reasonably send my photos to the cloud for backup, I get about 0.5mb upload here :(

    Posted 2 years ago #
  5. warprints

    preferred member
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 769

    offline

    Randomnut - NAS is, in my opinion, almost a required component of a good photo backup system. At a minimum, you should use RAID 1 (mirroring) where two drives are given the exact same data. I use a two drive RAID 1 array at home for my photos.

    If you are a bit more anal, you can go with a RAID 5 array, which typically uses three drives, writing all files to two of the three drives. This does increase storage a bit, but also increases the cost of the NAS system a bit. I use RAID 5 at my office.

    However, a RAID array should not be the end of your backup plan. Even though your data is safe if one of the two (or three) drives fail, if thee is a fire, lightning strike, or a theft, the data is gone. At home I do occasional backups from the NAS to a portable hard drive, and keep that hard drive in a fire safe at work. At work, I back up EVERY day to tape (most secure and longest lasting backups) and store the daily tapes in a fire safe in the other end of the building, away from my file server and NAS, and I take one backup take every month to my house and keep in in a fire safe there.

    I'm sure someone will note that a hurricane could still wipe me out, and that I should store another backup on the Cloud or in some mountain in Norway, but if it come to that, I'll just give up and become a fruit vender on some street corner.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  6. kyoshinikon

    preferred member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 1,200

    offline

    I had a Raid 1 but my motherboard screwed up (and costs a bit to repair) so I switched to my other computer backing up my stuff on 2 drives and dvd's...

    Posted 2 years ago #
  7. JorPet

    preferred member
    Joined: Feb '10
    Posts: 261

    offline

    For those looking at NAS, I would seriously look at going to WHS instead. More functionality and about the same price.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  8. The Ridgeback

    member
    Joined: Oct '09
    Posts: 46

    offline

    I went down the route of a 4 disk drobo, which turned out to be a nightmare, only in the fact that it was so slow,

    I now use a Qnap 419P+ 4*2TB disks in raid 5, ive now got the drobo plugged into the qnap and that just sits there as a mirror of the Qnap, with the qnap automaticly backing up all the data to it.

    I've also got another copy of my photos on a 2TB internal disk in my PC, which i use for everything, knowing there is two backups available, and iv'e got a simple kiddy script that runs ever start up and copys over any files that have changed.

    I've had the master disk fail on an old raid server, and lost everything on the raid,
    the only joy was i had for some strange reason backed up my photos and mp3's a few weeks earlier, so i only lost a handfull of images and music.

    Mac.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  9. warprints

    preferred member
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 769

    offline

    The Ridgeback said:
    I've had the master disk fail on an old raid server, and lost everything on the raid...

    What? A "Master" disc on a Raid failed and you lost everything? You were using RAID 1 on your primary computer with system files on the RAID drives? Just say noooo. If you want a safe backup, ALWAYS set up a separate RAID array.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  10. Drab

    preferred member
    Joined: Aug '10
    Posts: 540

    offline

    RAID is for uptime, backups for security.
    RAID 1 (mirroring) does you jack squat worth of good when a virus or a fat finger trash a file.
    Multi-TB RAID 5 (parity) sets can take days to rebuild when you are forced to replace a drive. A period of time in which not only is your storage offline, but any other failure causes loss of the entire set. The other irony is that as RAID 5 sets gain more drives they can become more failure prone than a single drive.
    Hardware RAID (as comes as a "feature" on many motherboards) is often controller-specific. A failed motherboard leaves you with drives which are unreadable w/o that exact controller if using anything but a mirror set (0, 0+1, 5, 5+1, 6).
    < / rant>

    My solution:

    1 - No local storage.
    My "working set" is on a portable drive with an ESATA connection. Both my laptop and desktop have an ESATA port. A very minimal amount of personal data is ever on a computer. Local network storage for most everything except video and photos which are on said portable drive (for speed).

    2 - NAS
    Said portable drive is backed up to my Linux NAS box before I erase the original CF cards.

    3 - Mirrors
    Daily deltas rsync to my remote server backup from my local NAS box. Monthly mirrors are done manually to Truecrypted drives, stored bare in a Pelican 1500 case with "pink foam", and stored at my office.
    My "important" drives (tax documents, etc) are doubled so that at least one backup is always outside my house. I guess I run the risk one weekend a month that my photos could burn down with the house requiring me to pull together a restore (see below).

    4 - Archives
    Old drives get pulled from service (ROUGHLY bi-annually) and put in my safe deposit box, where they collect dust.
    When this happens their contents are also removed from my remote server to save space. Therefore my remote server SHOULD contain current data set minus safe deposit box set.

    Cost?
    Currently there are two major expenses to this solution, local storage and remote storage.
    I am strongly opposed to RAID as any part of a personal data storage solution.

    Because of my mirroring system I end up paying (at least) twice (notice how financial records occupy three drives) for everything. This I don't terribly mind, storage is cheap. Even with all these duplicates I'm still paying far less than half a penny per photo for local storage.

    My current NAS server is an Atom box, so cheap the UPS it is plugged into is the bulk of the cost. A WHS license costs more than this box.

    Remote storage, though, is the real expense. I currently pay around $80 a month to my hosting provider (Rackspace), though some of that is for my server itself (other uses) and only part of it (forget how much, honestly) for the additional storage. Amazon charges $0.10 per GB per month and I'm paying less than that.

    I've been using variations of this system for most of a decade now and have never lost a byte, be it through a drive failure, unintentional deletion, or malicious software. SATA has made it all so much easier, as now I don't need enclosures for backup drives, a common cradle is all.

    Drives are SOOOO much easier than tape.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  11. aetas

    preferred member
    Joined: Dec '09
    Posts: 273

    offline

    Wow old post.
    Ok I have a 500gb external on the desk by the laptop. Another one stored away. I backup to both for important shoots and both at least once a month. The desk hd gets all photos as soon as I get home. I keep a few dvd/s in my (fireproof) gunsafe which get backups ever few months. Then a cds and dvds at family members that I switch every year or so. I really dont want to loose my photos.
    ~Cheers

    Posted 2 years ago #
  12. gelu88

    preferred member
    Joined: Feb '10
    Posts: 295

    offline

    Thanks for reviving the thread, always a good idea to remind people of backing up.

    My local backups are nothing special: a 1TB NAS in the basement.

    But i would STRONGLY recommend people also backup online. I have about 300gigs backed up on Mozy. Though they just crippled their service so i'll have to switch. (either carbonite or backblaze)

    Check this great overview of what each service offers and their advantages/limitations:
    http://lifehacker.com/5749845/the-best-alternatives-to-mozy-for-big-or-unlimited-backups

    The biggest problem with online backup is getting hundreds of gigs up there to begin with, but once its there its the best possible single form of backup.

    I don't use it, but Crashplan has a service where they will send you an external drive, which you send back and they'll seed the backup for you. After that daily backups are generally not too big (most people can upload 2-4gigs a day without issue). They also have a "restore to you door" thing where they will send you an external drive with your stuff if you need it, negating the need to download 100's of gigs.

    apart from backing up, most of these services let you access all your files remotely, which is great too.

    Plus, its about $50 a year. So even if you wont get everything up, its so cheap you might as well get your most important stuff.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  13. RichJB

    senior member
    Joined: Sep '09
    Posts: 54

    offline

    A great thread, I use a external 1TB eSata Western Digital now, it is switched off between backups. A lot of my older Photo's are on an external 500GB, which is now unplugged. Internally I use a 300GB drive as my main drive and a 1TB WD green as my storage, I immediately put my photo's on that after a shoot. On that drive I have a folder with the year, inside that I have 12 folders for months and then my work is in folders with the days date and the main subject matter. I back-up to the external once a month.

    I had an internal drive pack up on me, it was a Seagate 500GB; I was able to recover around 90% of my files, I lost around 20 photo's. I can't remember the software I used, I think it was trial ware.

    gelu88, I was very interested in reading what you wrote about on line storage. A friend of mine suggested that to me in case my house was either burgled or I had a fire. I never got around to looking into it, but after reading your post it has made me decide to do it. I think in the UK there are free options.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  14. abetanco

    senior member
    Joined: Jul '10
    Posts: 63

    offline

    I have 400 GB in photos, backed-up in 4 external drives (2 desktop, 2 portable). 3 other externals drives have failed in time.

    With the Nikon D7000 delivering more pixels and HD video, for sure will increase my need for space.

    Looking at Amazon, there are Blue – Ray burners for about $150 (example Asus USB 2.0 Slim External 6x Blu-Ray Writer SBW-06C1S-U). I thought they were more expensive, so I´m considering getting one. Any experience with this model will be appreciated.

    I’m installing Backblaze (15 days trail) in order to have an online backup.

    Thank you for sharing your knowledge.

    Alfonso

    Posted 2 years ago #
  15. gelu88

    preferred member
    Joined: Feb '10
    Posts: 295

    offline

    One more disclaimer about online backup, many ISP's have bandwidth caps on their service. Here in Canada many people have a 25-60GB monthly caps. overage charges here are more than a 1$ a GB.

    So check with your provider before uploading hundreds of Gigs. I happen to be an an unlimited plan, but to get more speed, i tend to go to the library or my university, as they provide very high upload speeds.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  16. rbid

    preferred member
    Joined: Jan '11
    Posts: 344

    offline

    I just got a BlackArmor® NAS 220 from Seagate to be used as a backup storage for my photos. It is a RAID1 box, with two hard disks.

    The NAS will be connected to my home LAN, hidden somewhere in my house just in case some burglars come to visit.

    Currently at homge we have three desktop computers and I have my photos mirrored in the three computers, so if one disk goes away, I can still get the photos.. now the NAS will contain the fourth copy of them.

    Using USB is to dangerous as I learned from experience. If you are charged with some static electricity, you may damage the USB device when connecting to the PC.

    Using magnetic tapes to backup is also a possibility, but the tapes should be stored on a different location and be checked for corruption as well.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  17. ithurtswhenipee

    member
    Joined: Jul '10
    Posts: 40

    offline

    Wow, old thread but...

    I use a NAS device on my internal network. (Thecus 4100 Pro) I can access it remotely as well. It has 4 1.5 TB hot swappable hard drives in a RAID 5 configuration for a total of approximately 4 TB of usable space. I can also daisy chain additional NAS devices if I use up that space. This offers data redundancy if a drive fails - just pull out the bad one and put in a new one and the drive syncs with the array.

    It is pretty painless to setup, but I do say that as an IT professional. The included manual should be sufficient to get most people up and running.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  18. Drab

    preferred member
    Joined: Aug '10
    Posts: 540

    offline

    ithurtswhenipee said:
    I use a NAS device on my internal network. (Thecus 4100 Pro) I can access it remotely as well. It has 4 1.5 TB hot swappable hard drives in a RAID 5 configuration for a total of approximately 4 TB of usable space. I can also daisy chain additional NAS devices if I use up that space. This offers data redundancy if a drive fails - just pull out the bad one and put in a new one and the drive syncs with the array.

    What do you do in case of a house fire? Theft? Power surge? Software file corruption?

    Posted 2 years ago #
  19. Super Shooter

    preferred member
    Joined: Jun '10
    Posts: 277

    offline

    ithurtswhenipee said:
    It is pretty painless to setup

    ...but does it still hurt when you pee?

    Posted 2 years ago #
  20. adamz

    The Predator
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 3,461

    offline

    ithurtswhenipee said:
    Wow, old thread but...
    [...] It has 4 1.5 TB hot swappable hard drives in a RAID 5 configuration for a total of approximately 4 TB of usable space. I can also daisy chain additional NAS devices if I use up that space. This offers data redundancy if a drive fails - just pull out the bad one and put in a new one and the drive syncs with the array. [...]

    with four drives why didn't You go for RAID 1+0 configuration, do You utilize this 4TB of data?

    Posted 2 years ago #
  21. sevencrossing

    preferred member
    Joined: Sep '10
    Posts: 1,265

    offline

    Could someone point me to simpleton's guide to backing up using RAID and all its configurations and connections

    I am aware I probably need something bigger and more sophisticated the an external 1TB drive connected via a eSATA connection

    Posted 2 years ago #
  22. Drab

    preferred member
    Joined: Aug '10
    Posts: 540

    offline

    adamz said:
    with four drives why didn't You go for RAID 1+0 configuration, do You utilize this 4TB of data?

    Because with four drives a good RAID 5 gives you equal protection to raid 10, near equal speed (yes raid 5 can be set to stripe it's writes in many implementations), and more capacity?

    Posted 2 years ago #
  23. adamz

    The Predator
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 3,461

    offline

    drab - have to disagree with You, except for the gain in capacity, the speed factor is very negotiable as RAID 5 generates a lot of checksums, way to much IMHO for feeling secure. and with today hdd prices the capacity shouldn't be a big problem unless You record HD video.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  24. Drab

    preferred member
    Joined: Aug '10
    Posts: 540

    offline

    I won't take this diversion any further, but it's not really a question of opinion.

    RAID 5 and RAID 10 both are equally tolerant of failure, one disk. (Equal protection)
    They have near-equal speeds, with RAID 10 having a maximum read/write speed multiplier equal to the number of spindles, while RAID 5 has one of the number of spindles minus 1.

    LAS? You'll see an advantage for RAID 10 equal to the calculation above. But I was responding specifically to someone talking about a NAS box. In a NAS situation with four modern drives both RAID 10 and RAID 5 will saturate GB ethernet. No speed difference at all, as RAID performance is not your choke point.

    The "checksum" generation issue only exists with cheap hardware controllers. An Atom can keep up with a GB/s worth of calcs: http://www.howtofixcomputers.com/forums/storage/building-own-nas-237622.html#post1002489 eight to ten times the performance needed to saturate the heaviest of setups.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  25. Cold Hands Luke

    member
    Joined: Oct '10
    Posts: 41

    offline

    Small correction: RAID10, implemented properly (i.e. two mirrors striped, rather than two stripes mirrored - there's a difference), will actually tolerate two drive failures, provided the two failures are from different mirrors.

    But anyway...

    Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

« Previous1234Next »

Reply »

You must log in to post.

NikonRumors Forum (http://nikonrumors.com/forum) is proudly powered by bbPress
Disclaimer: This site has no affiliation with Nikon USA or any other subsidiary of Nikon. Please visit the official Nikon website at nikon.com
Copyright © 2008-2011 NikonRumors.com