Digital BW, The Print

Starting again regarding the above. 

You are all on the same track regarding your existing files. But I'm 
not even certain you will be able to put the disk into a matchbox 
sized device we now call a PC.

In the previous discussion everyone talked about the backup method, 
system or media readability in the future. The possibility of loss 
due to fire, flood, lost or stolen. Media corrosion due to age etc 
etc etc.

BUT what about the fact that in a few years, (yes a few years) that 
your RAW files will not be able to be converted to DNG. Why because 
Adobe may be bought by a company that doesn't want to support DNG 
anymore for whatever reason. Mainly financial. Google looks like the 
company that would buy Adobe and why would they care about RAW or 
even TIF, JPG and GIF. They just want to control the ability to share 
not archive. If they did they may want the rights to your files just 
so you could look at them. 

Now what happens if Microsoft and Mac OS is a distant memory and we 
all are using "Google Quick Start" on a mobile device that is smaller 
than a CD or DVD and only capable of taking the replacement for what 
is now known as Flash drives. Or maybe the only input or output 
device is a Google web device and all they understand is a file 
without any .xxx extension, which is now a thing of the past, and 
images are digital signatures and compressed to a single pixel and 
can be expanded to several thousand billion pixels in a second and be 
read by pointing the device at fresh air. 

Does all this sound like science fiction. Maybe but I don't think so  
because this is how I see things progressing. The PC as we know today 
is a pig of a beast and is just waiting to be replaced.

I'd be interested in your comments and before you ask, our cameras 
would all be wirelessly connected to Googles website as well. Every 
photo shot will be sent to their comets travelling the world and 
sucking up information and sharing it with all.

Peter Banks
Telecommunications Technician
and IT Engineer for over 30 years
New Zealand

> From: pjb74nz
> 
> You are all on the same track regarding your existing files. But I'm 
> not even certain you will be able to put the disk into a matchbox 
> sized device we now call a PC.
> 
> In the previous discussion everyone talked about the backup method, 
> system or media readability in the future. The possibility of loss 
> due to fire, flood, lost or stolen. Media corrosion due to age etc 
> etc etc.
> 
> BUT what about the fact that in a few years, (yes a few years) that 
> your RAW files will not be able to be converted to DNG. Why because 
> Adobe may be bought by a company that doesn't want to support DNG 
> anymore for whatever reason. Mainly financial. Google looks like the 
> company that would buy Adobe and why would they care about RAW or 
> even TIF, JPG and GIF. They just want to control the ability to share 
> not archive. If they did they may want the rights to your files just 
> so you could look at them. 
> 
> Now what happens if Microsoft and Mac OS is a distant memory and we 
> all are using "Google Quick Start" on a mobile device that is smaller 
> than a CD or DVD and only capable of taking the replacement for what 
> is now known as Flash drives. Or maybe the only input or output 
> device is a Google web device and all they understand is a file 
> without any .xxx extension, which is now a thing of the past, and 
> images are digital signatures and compressed to a single pixel and 
> can be expanded to several thousand billion pixels in a second and be 
> read by pointing the device at fresh air. 
> 
> Does all this sound like science fiction. Maybe but I don't think so  
> because this is how I see things progressing. The PC as we know today 
> is a pig of a beast and is just waiting to be replaced.
> 
> I'd be interested in your comments and before you ask, our cameras 
> would all be wirelessly connected to Googles website as well. Every 
> photo shot will be sent to their comets travelling the world and 
> sucking up information and sharing it with all.

Archiving isn't just a matter of preserving a physical medium. Unlike books
(or paintings, or sculptures, or architecture), the deterioration of digital
media isn't visible unless the data are actually read, something that
doesn't happen when the medium is sitting on a shelf or in a safe. You
therefore need to read all your archived files every few years or so. Since
storage density always increases over time, and one needs more and more of
it anyway, the obvious time to do this is whenever moving to a larger
medium. You also need to keep two current copies of everything, so that if a
medium does fail, and you discover this during the copy, you can still have
another copy to make your two new copies from.

Archiving also isn't just a matter of preserving data, for the reasons you
desribed. When you do the copy, you also need to decide if any of your data
is in an obsolete file format that requires old software to read. If it
does, it would be a good time to use that old software to convert to a newer
format. For instance, at this point, one might convert raw files from old
cameras to DNG, in case support for those old cameras is dropped from later
converters. But in the future, if DNG looks like it's falling out of favor,
one might convert DNG files to something else, before it's too late.

-- 

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

Peter, what you mention is a very valid concern. I use to have data 
on 5 inch floppies and I actually still have some 5 inch floppies but 
nothing to read them with. Proper archival is simple, although no 
necessarily quick and inexpensive:

Two or more copies on different types of media.
The copies must be stored in different locations.
The media must be periodically verified and rotated out faster than 
the media degrades or becomes obsolete.

Cheers,
Mark

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pjb74nz" 
<peter@...> wrote:
>
> Starting again regarding the above. 
> 
> You are all on the same track regarding your existing files. But 
I'm 
> not even certain you will be able to put the disk into a matchbox 
> sized device we now call a PC.
> 
> In the previous discussion everyone talked about the backup method, 
> system or media readability in the future. The possibility of loss 
> due to fire, flood, lost or stolen. Media corrosion due to age etc 
> etc etc.
> 
> BUT what about the fact that in a few years, (yes a few years) that 
> your RAW files will not be able to be converted to DNG. Why because 
> Adobe may be bought by a company that doesn't want to support DNG 
> anymore for whatever reason. Mainly financial. Google looks like 
the 
> company that would buy Adobe and why would they care about RAW or 
> even TIF, JPG and GIF. They just want to control the ability to 
share 
> not archive. If they did they may want the rights to your files 
just 
> so you could look at them. 
> 
> Now what happens if Microsoft and Mac OS is a distant memory and we 
> all are using "Google Quick Start" on a mobile device that is 
smaller 
> than a CD or DVD and only capable of taking the replacement for 
what 
> is now known as Flash drives. Or maybe the only input or output 
> device is a Google web device and all they understand is a file 
> without any .xxx extension, which is now a thing of the past, and 
> images are digital signatures and compressed to a single pixel and 
> can be expanded to several thousand billion pixels in a second and 
be 
> read by pointing the device at fresh air. 
> 
> Does all this sound like science fiction. Maybe but I don't think 
so  
> because this is how I see things progressing. The PC as we know 
today 

> is a pig of a beast and is just waiting to be replaced.
> 
> I'd be interested in your comments and before you ask, our cameras 
> would all be wirelessly connected to Googles website as well. Every 
> photo shot will be sent to their comets travelling the world and 
> sucking up information and sharing it with all.
> 
> Peter Banks
> Telecommunications Technician
> and IT Engineer for over 30 years
> New Zealand
>

Good to see some have shown an interest and are aware. 
But most people I talk to about this subject say they'll leave that 
up to someone else to worry about. 
Now in NZ maybe I may have to take the lead and start doing that but 
I don't think that is possible. All our computer products like most 
countries are imported. I rely on getting people like you guys to 
help push the bandwagon and hope that programmers and hardware 
manufactures become aware of what they are could be doing to our 
future or should I say past.
I agree that some of our backups can be disposed of over time. But if 
you look at what is happening now with photos. People quickly go 
through their photos and hit the delete key and keep only those that 
are required at that point in time. Whereas our old family albums 
from our Grandparents contain every shot that was taken with that old 
Kodak Box Brownie.

As for the current websites that store files for free, I wonder how 
long they can continue to do that and back them up as well. One day 
some money cruncher will decide to dump those files. If they try to 
find the owners and suceed will those owner remember there login and 
passwords. Worse still if only relatives are available.

So I see this problem as a major headache that is going to get worse. 
History will be the worse off for information because of it.

Peter Banks
New Zealand
 





--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Rogers" 
<mrgs1001@...> wrote:
>
> Peter, what you mention is a very valid concern. I use to have data 
> on 5 inch floppies and I actually still have some 5 inch floppies 
but 
> nothing to read them with. Proper archival is simple, although no 
> necessarily quick and inexpensive:
> 
> Two or more copies on different types of media.
> The copies must be stored in different locations.
> The media must be periodically verified and rotated out faster than 
> the media degrades or becomes obsolete.
> 
> Cheers,
> Mark
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m, "pjb74nz" 
> <peter@> wrote:
> >
> > Starting again regarding the above. 
> > 
> > You are all on the same track regarding your existing files. But 
> I'm 
> > not even certain you will be able to put the disk into a matchbox 
> > sized device we now call a PC.
> > 
> > In the previous discussion everyone talked about the backup 
method, 
> > system or media readability in the future. The possibility of 
loss 
> > due to fire, flood, lost or stolen. Media corrosion due to age 
etc 
> > etc etc.
> > 
> > BUT what about the fact that in a few years, (yes a few years) 
that 
> > your RAW files will not be able to be converted to DNG. Why 
because 
> > Adobe may be bought by a company that doesn't want to support DNG 
> > anymore for whatever reason. Mainly financial. Google looks like 
> the 
> > company that would buy Adobe and why would they care about RAW or 
> > even TIF, JPG and GIF. They just want to control the ability to 
> share 
> > not archive. If they did they may want the rights to your files 
> just 
> > so you could look at them. 
> > 
> > Now what happens if Microsoft and Mac OS is a distant memory and 
we 
> > all are using "Google Quick Start" on a mobile device that is 
> smaller 
> > than a CD or DVD and only capable of taking the replacement for 
> what 
> > is now known as Flash drives. Or maybe the only input or output 
> > device is a Google web device and all they understand is a file 
> > without any .xxx extension, which is now a thing of the past, and 
> > images are digital signatures and compressed to a single pixel 
and 
> > can be expanded to several thousand billion pixels in a second 
and 
> be 
> > read by pointing the device at fresh air. 
> > 
> > Does all this sound like science fiction. Maybe but I don't think 
> so  
> > because this is how I see things progressing. The PC as we know 
> today 
> > is a pig of a beast and is just waiting to be replaced.
> > 
> > I'd be interested in your comments and before you ask, our 
cameras 
> > would all be wirelessly connected to Googles website as well. 
Every 

> > photo shot will be sent to their comets travelling the world and 
> > sucking up information and sharing it with all.
> > 
> > Peter Banks
> > Telecommunications Technician
> > and IT Engineer for over 30 years
> > New Zealand
> >
>

hit the delete key and keep only those that 
> are required at that point in time. Whereas our old family albums 
> from our Grandparents contain every shot that was taken with that old 
> Kodak Box Brownie.
> 
snip

> History will be the worse off for information because of it.
> 
> Peter Banks
> New Zealand
>  
 
Editing is more important than saving because it hints at a glimmer of
intelligence, unlike saving. Generic "information" is mere noise.

Photos of unknown, unidentified generations are nearly worthless.
Thomas Jefferson's family didn't have photos, but somehow he did
relatively well as a person. There may be people in New Zealand who
also did similarly OK without snaps. This stuff is valuable to those
for whom its valuable, to others it's clutter. 

It's far more important to write reasonably well than to be a good
archivist, photographer or digital technician. If we don't write
something about our collections of photos, we might as well burn them.

Djon, Mediated learning and being an archivist go hand in hand. Without
points of reference, many of those photos sitting in the archives will
indeed have very little direct meaning. What is the point of the photos in
the first place? Family memories? Personal memories? Historical context? Or
just a "pretty picture"?  It is up to the viewer to determine their value
unless a context has been provided. Writing is a great way to add that
aspect to a photo. Some of that comes in the xmp data now and I suspect very
little comes as a pencil or ink scribe on the back with a short but telling
account of why. : ( 

 

Eric

 

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street

Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

http://e.neilsen.home.att.net

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

Skype ejprinter

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of djon43
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 5:38 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Archiving photos and data for recovery in the
future.

 

hit the delete key and keep only those that 
> are required at that point in time. Whereas our old family albums 
> from our Grandparents contain every shot that was taken with that old 
> Kodak Box Brownie.
> 
snip

> History will be the worse off for information because of it.
> 
> Peter Banks
> New Zealand
> 

Editing is more important than saving because it hints at a glimmer of
intelligence, unlike saving. Generic "information" is mere noise.

Photos of unknown, unidentified generations are nearly worthless.
Thomas Jefferson's family didn't have photos, but somehow he did
relatively well as a person. There may be people in New Zealand who
also did similarly OK without snaps. This stuff is valuable to those
for whom its valuable, to others it's clutter. 

It's far more important to write reasonably well than to be a good
archivist, photographer or digital technician. If we don't write
something about our collections of photos, we might as well burn them.

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]