Digital BW, The Print

I find it difficult to back up offline as a amateur photg... I have 
30k photos, about 230 gb. That's not including anything else!

What I do is rotate between three 1.5tb hard drives. One goes offsite 
every week, and the other two stay home. I rotate between them so I 
always have two complete backups on each harddrive, and one is always offsite.



At 09:26 AM 2/5/2010 -0800, Dana Myers wrote:
>On 2/5/2010 6:33 AM, Richard Sintchak wrote:
> > Just curious. How is the (and the time it takes) better than an additional
> > external HD that you backup everything to once a month or every few weeks
> > and store at your work, or parents, or somewhere else? I just got a Seagate
> > 1.5TB Ext HD for $99.
>
>Several reasons.
>
>1) If your house is destroyed (burns down, earthquake, etc.), your
>remote back-up is likely to remain intact.
>
>2) A single external disk drive has reliability limits, you may find
>it has read errors when you really need to restore from it. A
>good backup service stores data on redundant arrays of disks (either
>some form of RAID or multiple shadow copies, or both). Further,
>as disk errors are detected in these redundant arrays, the disks
>are replaced without loss of data or availability.
>
>3) Over time, you want to migrate your archive from one kind of
>storage to another to avoid the 8-track syndrome (lots of tapes
>but your player died and you can't replace it). A good back-up
>service is accessed via the network and can migrate actual
>storage as necessary, and the network interface is likely to
>remain useful for a very long time.
>
>It's far better to back-up to an external disk than no back-up
>at all, though.

Regards,


Denton Taylor
photogalleries at
www.pbase.com/dentontay/
www.dentontaylor.com