I've just completed the reorganization of all my digital images. After this last school session, I had several hundred images scattered all over the place across two computers and two portable hard drives. Don't ask. It's a long, ugly story. Anyhoo, it got me to thinking about data safety and storage systems. I think I've come up with a pretty good system for my photographs and I thought it would be a good idea to share it. But first, a question: what do you fear most, someone stealing your images off the net or losing your data due to a drive failure? Well, I'll tell you what I fear most: hard drive failure, no question about it. First of all, if you're really that fearful of someone stealing your images, you shouldn't have uploaded any of them in the first place. But if you don't upload any of them, how can you share them with anyone? It's a catch-22 but I don't worry about it that much. Anyone who has ever tried to get a photograph sold knows that if anyone downloads one of your images for the purpose of making money off it, well, best of luck, dude. I mean, if you're going to go to that much trouble to market a photograph, you might as well start with a photograph of your own because, hell, that's the easy part. I think the worst that could happen is if someone integrated one of your images in to their web design or a pamphlet without crediting you for it. And I think that's not very likely. Web and print designers are artists too, and plagiarism among our own kind is actually sort of rare. No, my friend, I firmly believe that your biggest fear should be catastrophic hard drive failure.
I spent 21 years as a software maintenance tech on a variety of different computer systems. When I started, we were using punch cards and paper tape. Trust me, I've seen it all. It's not a question of "Will your computer fail?" but rather "When will your computer fail?" That hard drive you have all your digital images stored on will die and take all your images with it. It will happen. It's just a matter of time. So be prepared. It's not that difficult, really. Here's what I do:
35mm - this is easy. Whether its slides or negatives, the film itself is my ultimate backup. I only have a few slides and negatives scanned. The originals are in a climate-controlled safe. If I have a system failure and lose all my digital data, the 35mm slides and negatives can simply be re-scanned. It would be a pain in the ass, but I wouldn't lose anything.
4x5 film - same deal. I shoot Velvia slide film in my 4x5 camera and all the originals are stored in the safe along with the 35mm slides. Again, I only have the choice ones scanned and if I lose a hard drive, I simply re-scan the originals.
This is one reason why a lot of people are sticking with film. Another reason: density. As scanning technology increases, you can always re-scan those slides and negatives and capture even more digital data. With digital originals, on the other hand, you only have what you have and there isn't any more.
Digital originals - I use three hard drives, but you could get by with two if you had to. Let me say this, you should be backing up to a minimum of two separate hard drives in the first place. Period. No exceptions. You could use CDs, but I find that hard drives are easier and getting less expensive all the time. Just today I found a 1TB Western Digital external hard drive for $139 at my local Best Buy. Man, I can remember a day not too long ago when that much hard drive space would have easily cost you a cool grand or more. And I'm not talking the digital stone age either, I mean just a couple of years ago. So at these prices, there's really no reason to not go with portable hard disks. Hell, 160GB can be had for less than $50. I'm not sure you could get the equivalent in CD storage for that money. So go get yourself a couple of portable hard drives and keep your precious digital negatives safe and sound. And here's a file system that works for me.
File naming conventions - This is very important. At first, it might seem logical to name your digital negatives by subject matter. But when you start to think about how you're going to keep everything straight as the years go by and the number of images add up, this concept starts to break down. For example, many photographers spend years concentrating on one subject i.e., trees, waterfalls, New York City, Yellowstone Park, fly fishing etc. For me, it makes more sense to develop a system that is primarily chronological but that allows for additional, general categorization within the file name i.e., designation of camera or film type etc. And I'm speaking now from 30 years experience in trying to keep track of thousands of photographs. So here's how my file names break down:
D2001208123
Where D200 = camera and/or film type. In this case, my Nikon D200.
Where 1208 = month/year. In this case, December, 2008.
Where 123 = sequence number ranging from 001 to 999.
So this file name automatically tells me that this image was shot with my D200 in December of 2008 and was the 123rd image shot that month with that camera/media.
Let's look at another. This time, a scanned film image:
45TC0607003
Where 45 = 4x5 large-format film
Where TC = "transparency, color" (slide film)
Where 0607 = June, 2007
Where 003 = Third 4x5 color slide shot that month
Here's another one:
35BW0505025
Where 35 = 35mm film
Where BW = black and white negative film
Where 0505 = May, 2005
Where 025 = Twenty-fifth black and white 35mm image shot that month
And finally, this example:
35TC0882035
Where 35 = 35mm film
Where TC = "transparency, color" (slide film as opposed to print, or, color negative film)
Where 0882 = August, 1982
Where 035 = Thirty-fifth 35mm color slide image for the month of August, 1982.
So you can see that my file naming convention accounts for camera/media type as well as month/year and a unique sequential number. This makes it easy to keep digital files from different cameras and media separated and organized. The file names don't have to indicate subject matter because that's what IPTC data is for. Further, the date/sequence number concept makes it much easier in the long run to keep track of all my backups. And here's why: by using this naming system as I accumulate images throughout the year, at the end of the year, I have all the images I will every have for that year. There's no going back. I may shoot more images of the Willamette River, but I will never turn back the hands of time. So when I archive my images, I know If I've properly archived that "one special image" of the river. I may shoot more images of the Willamette River, but they will get archived with the later dated stuff. And because I have collected all the images I will ever have for that year, I can place all those images on one portable hard drive and store it in my safe. With the price of hard disk space as cheap as it is, I can afford to have a small, portable hard drive for every year. For example, for 2008, all of my digital negatives for the entire year amount to less than 50GB. So I'll only need a 50GB portable hard drive for archiving. If I used subject matter for my file names, I'd have to figure out a way to include new images to older folders that already exist on archived disks. I don't want to think about that. So, here's how I do it:
During the year, I use two portable hard drives and one network drive: an Epson P-3000 (40GB); a 1TB network hard drive; and a 20 to 50GB portable drive for archiving. After I've captured my images in-camera, I transfer them to the Epson. The Epson has a CF card reader built-in. Once I've downloaded or transferred the originals from the CF card to the Epson, I then make an immediate backup copy to the 1TB hard drive that I have installed on my home network as a shared network drive. At this point, I have two solid backups of my originals. Only then will I delete them off my CF card. Once I have them on my network hard drive I can use Adobe Bridge to rename them and update all the IPTC data and keywords.
On the hard drive, I have my file system set up thus: photos > digital negatives > year > month. As I accumulate files, I can archive once a week to a smaller (20 to 50Gb), portable hard drive which I keep in a climate-controlled safe. I can append to this smaller drive as I accumulate images throughout the year. At the end of the year, or whenever the drive fills up, that smaller drive is "closed out" so-to-speak. I can also use my laptop as a fourth drive. Plus, the Epson p-3000 is a 40Gb unit and I can store a lot on that throughout the year. So I can make sure that at any given time, I have at least three solid copies of all my digital negatives.
This system also affords me the security of "off-site" storage - specifically - the archive disks in my safe. Off-site storage is absolutely critical. It's not enough to have an image on your computer and a backup on the portable hard drive you have connected to your USB port on the back. Because the external hard drive will save you if your computer crashes, but it won't save you if your house catches on fire. Off-site storage is the only thing that will save your precious images in the case of fire, flood or natural disaster. You can get off-site storage in several ways. You can buy storage online and upload your images to a remote server. This can be expensive but has several advantages. These storage systems are maintained professionally in climate-controlled rooms with power backup systems and the whole shootin' match. For serious pros, this is often the best option. Plus, your images are available from anywhere in the world. If you're a traveling shutterbug, this may be the deal for you. Me, I happen to have the good luck of having a separate studio apart from my home and I keep my archive disks in a safe there. If I didn't have that, I would store my archives at my sister's home a few hours away. If I didn't have a relative close by, I would consider storing my archive disks in a locker somewhere at the University or my gym. Yea, a gym locker. Odds are, unless you make an issue of letting people know you have valuables stored there, it's unlikely that someone would break the lock to get to your stuff. Afterall, what do most people store in their gym locker? Gym clothes. Who'd want to steal those? And besides, suppose someone did break the lock and steal your hard drive? What would you lose? A hard drive. You still have all your images on another drive, right? The point is, you really should have an off-site storage location for your archived images.
When someone's house burns down, the things they always miss are the photographs. Just about everything else can be replaced or reproduced. Not photographs. And if those photographs are your business or passion? Well then...
No comments:
Post a Comment