Very wise but only 10 per DVD means storing a lot of DVD's.

I'ts interesting that a CD/DVD/VHS tape etc can come with a lifetime guarentee, that is up until you record something. This guarentee doesn't include any data contained on the media.
A few years ago I was employed in the digital imaging business particularly with document storage and archiving, (document includes images). Under no circumstances would CD/DVD been recommended for backing up or archiving. Slight changes in humidity, temperature or exposure to light can all effect CD/DVD's.

Having said that - I back up my RAW files onto CD (min 2 copies of each) and then to an external HD.

I think you've probably been very lucky! The majority of the computers I receive for repair or refurbishment have hard drive faults which are usually terminal, that is, requiring a new hard drive and system re-boot. I have had some computers in 2 or 3 times for replacements, generally it's the primary drive that goes, but quite often it's the slave or secondary drive that succumbs to an head crash, sometimes it just simply dies along with all it's contents. I think if a computer is just used for occasional general work, then it's quite likely a hard drive will last up to 5 years, if the computer is to be used continuosly for all sorts of duties, including graphics file manipulation, then 2 to 3 years is a more realistic life span for a hard drive. My computers are nearly always on and have a fairly heavy workout throughout the day.

The way I see it is, why subject yourself to the frailty of long term hard drive storage system when you can have a safe, robust storage system that lends itself to easy cataloguing. A system which is only operational when you need it instead of being continually on and wearing away it's components as it is with a hard drive. A system which will stand up to knocks and bangs of everyday use without destroying it's disks and the data on them permanently.

nirofo.

Hi Jon

When I said I save 10 image files to DVD I didn't mean just ten! I meant I backup to DVD every time I have 10 image files ready, I continue doing this until the DVD is full, in my case that's approx 150 x 30Mb TIFF files (can vary). Obviously with smaller files you'll get more on the disk. When the disk is full I print off a CD box insert booklet complete with CD/DVD title, (e.g. Landscapes) and a full list of the disk contents, (image titles). I have a CD storage rack system with all my CD/DVD's at hand, I have no problem finding a particular image within minutes. I also keep a database of all my image files, stating which CD or DVD they are stored on on my computer, this is also archived on CD/DVD in case of computer failure. So bottom line, the maximum number of unsaved image files I can lose at any one time from the computer is 10, the maximum database data entries loss is 10.

nirofo.

Numerous laboratory tests have proven that CD/DVD's are not safe and robust. I've also had loads of problems with DVD and player incompatibility. There are tables somewhere of which DVD and which player go together.

I've used goodness knows how many PC's over the past 13 years of working in IT, and I've never had a hard disk crash. A few colleagues have but I've shared office space with thousands of people. Many of my machines have been hand me downs. It sounds like nirofo works in PC maintenance where he/she sees failures. But if a component is going to fail then it will probably be the disk as most other bits are solid state. I've had a PSU go once. I suspect that the robustness of HDD's is improving over the years. I go running with my iPod which contains a HDD (Samsung I think) and the little marvel survives.

Even if a HDD does crash on average after 5 years (which I dispute), that's on a par with a DVD if not better. And a 200GB HDD costs ~£80, compared to maybe half that for DVD. But for the convenience it's worth it IMO.

But surely the real question is how long will a powered down device can store the information.

I'm tempted to look into tape drives as a backup method. The initial cost might be offset by the reliability compared to hard disks.

I go along with most of what you say Leif. The 5 year average I am quoting is on Servers in Regional and National Newspaper Production systems running 24/7.

Very interesting discussion regarding reliability of HDD's. If I make two copies of all photos taken in 2005 and store on two disks, how should they be stored?. Horizontally or vertically i.e. manufacturer label facing upward or IDE parallel connector facing upward. Which way would be most reliable given the bearing/oil issue discussed above?

Hi Stephen

I was always led to believe the best orientation for installing a hard drive in a computer case, (tower box) is horizontal, that is with the label facing upwards with the power connector on the left hand side at the back of the drive as you look from the front of the case. I was also led to believe that fitting a drive upside down puts unecessary wear on the bearings. I have never come across a computer fitted with the drive upside down, I have however, come across several computers where the drive/s were fitted vertically, that is with the label facing the right hand side of the computer case. I don't think orientation is as critical as it used to be, however, I still think it best to fit them in the conventional horizontal position. I also think that should anyone decide to use hard drives as their preferred long term image storage system, then they should only be installed as either separate secondary disks, (not slaves), or as external hard drives not linked to the system directly but by the use of a USB2 connection. Set up this way if the primary hard disk goes down, then it's unlikely to take your other non slaved or independant hard drives with it together with all your image files and hard work.

nirofo.