| Author |
Message |
Jack Frillman
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Dec 08, 2004 6:54 am Post subject:
Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
What is the recommended way of archiving scans?
The main goal is to get the images archived on DVDs before time takes
more of a toll on the originals. Some are 40-50 years old.
I am using a Minolta 5400 with Vuescan or the Minolta software on a
Linux system.
If I use the Minolta SW it's done on a Mac Powerbook.
The options for archiving I see are:
1 - Just doing raw scans and saving these for later processing.
2 - Saving as processed scans as a finished product.
3 - Use the archive option in Vuescan. Thing is I don't how this option
differs from the print and other options. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nospam@comcast.com
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:48 am Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
1 - save raw - you will never get the original scan if you do an
"oops" in processing
2 - every 5 years move scans to the next volume storage media - this
year dvd, 5 years from now magnahelic memory, 10 years from now
holographic crystal - technology changes - how many 8-inch floppy
disks can you read from 15 years ago or 5 1/4 inch from 10 years
ago???
Jack Frillman <jack@dnaco.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
What is the recommended way of archiving scans?
The main goal is to get the images archived on DVDs before time takes
more of a toll on the originals. Some are 40-50 years old.
I am using a Minolta 5400 with Vuescan or the Minolta software on a
Linux system.
If I use the Minolta SW it's done on a Mac Powerbook.
The options for archiving I see are:
1 - Just doing raw scans and saving these for later processing.
2 - Saving as processed scans as a finished product.
3 - Use the archive option in Vuescan. Thing is I don't how this option
differs from the print and other options. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fanta
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 08, 2004 5:29 pm Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
I take two copies (on two different DVDs or CDs of course) of each RAW
scan and each edited scan. Right now I am archiving the edited scans as
24 bit/pixel, Adobe RGB, after unsharp mask, as they were just before I
printed them. The RAW scans as 48 bit/pixel, as saved by Vuescan.
Fanta
Jack Frillman wrote:
| Quote: |
What is the recommended way of archiving scans?
The main goal is to get the images archived on DVDs before time takes
more of a toll on the originals. Some are 40-50 years old.
I am using a Minolta 5400 with Vuescan or the Minolta software on a
Linux system.
If I use the Minolta SW it's done on a Mac Powerbook.
The options for archiving I see are:
1 - Just doing raw scans and saving these for later processing.
2 - Saving as processed scans as a finished product.
3 - Use the archive option in Vuescan. Thing is I don't how this option
differs from the print and other options. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:33 pm Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
Jack,
As well as taking the sound advice in this thread make sure you have
two copies which are kept at different locations. Fire etct can lead to
the loss of everything on one site.
Michael |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jack Frillman
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 09, 2004 3:35 am Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
nospam@comcast.com wrote:
| Quote: | 1 - save raw - you will never get the original scan if you do an
"oops" in processing
2 - every 5 years move scans to the next volume storage media - this
year dvd, 5 years from now magnahelic memory, 10 years from now
holographic crystal - technology changes - how many 8-inch floppy
disks can you read from 15 years ago or 5 1/4 inch from 10 years
ago???
Jack Frillman <jack@dnaco.net> wrote:
What is the recommended way of archiving scans?
The main goal is to get the images archived on DVDs before time takes
more of a toll on the originals. Some are 40-50 years old.
I am using a Minolta 5400 with Vuescan or the Minolta software on a
Linux system.
If I use the Minolta SW it's done on a Mac Powerbook.
The options for archiving I see are:
1 - Just doing raw scans and saving these for later processing.
2 - Saving as processed scans as a finished product.
3 - Use the archive option in Vuescan. Thing is I don't how this option
differs from the print and other options.
|
Can the raw scans made from Vuescan be used by something other than
Vuescan? I guess my concern is for some reason in the future I can't
use Vuescan can I process those raw scans with something else?
That might be stupid question since the raw scans are tiff files. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dances With Crows
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 09, 2004 5:29 am Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 17:35:47 -0500, Jack Frillman staggered into the
Black Sun and said:
| Quote: | nospam@comcast.com wrote:
Jack Frillman <jack@dnaco.net> wrote:
What is the recommended way of archiving scans?
1 - Just doing raw scans and saving these for later processing.
2 - Saving as processed scans as a finished product.
3 - Use the archive option in Vuescan. Thing is I don't how this
option differs from the print and other options.
1 - save raw - you will never get the original scan if you do an
"oops" in processing
2 - every 5 years move scans to the next volume storage media
|
Good points.
| Quote: | Can the raw scans made from Vuescan be used by something other than
Vuescan? I guess my concern is for some reason in the future I can't
use Vuescan can I process those raw scans with something else?
That might be stupid question since the raw scans are tiff files.
|
If Vuescan's "raw" format comes out as a TIFF, it'll be readable for a
very very long time. TIFF is an open standard and just about every
program that works with images can hack it. The main thing to worry
about is the compression method and bits-per-sample you use. Some
software packages can't grok PackBits or JPEG-compressed TIFF. Some
software packages can't handle 16 bits/sample (though this is becoming
more common.) If you're scanning color/grayscale, you're almost
certainly using LZW, so don't worry about compression. If you're
scanning at 16 bits/sample, remember that currently, Gimp 2 will
downsample to 8 bits internally even though it will open the file.
(This is going to be improved soon, IIRC.)
--
Matt G|There is no Darkness in eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see
Hire me! http://crow202.dyndns.org/~mhgraham/resume/
Frustration is annoying, but the *real* disasters in life begin when you
get exactly what you want. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dorothy Bradbury
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 10, 2004 2:48 am Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
o Check your backups are readable
o As mentioned 2 copies at different locations
o Ideally those 2 copies on 2 different media types
---- DVD is one
---- DVD-RAM another (altho more expensive, more error correction & phase-change)
Remember media changes every few years - so change with it.
Some people like mini-servers with cheap SATA drives:
o That can keep images online
o It can also keep images regularly examined, CRC'd etc
o Before the decade is out we will be far above 1,000GB on 3.5" HD
o You can also keep the unit somewhere else - relatives & broadband
Verification of any backup is critical.
--
Dorothy Bradbury |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob Niland
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 10, 2004 3:48 am Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
| Quote: | Dorothy Bradbury <dorothy.bradbury@ntlworld.com> wrote:
o Ideally those 2 copies on 2 different media types
---- DVD is one
---- DVD-RAM another
|
Is there any DVD media that is considered archival?
(apart from the additional problem of interoperability -
not being able to read media just written on another
brand or model of DVD burner).
When the data set is small enough, or can be made small
enough, I'd lean toward putting it on CD-R, since there
is [claimed] archival media for that, and interop seems
to be less of a problem vs. DVD.
Here's a brand of archival CDR:
<http://store.mam-a-store.com/standard---archive-gold.html>
I haven't used any myself, but plan to try it on my
next media buy.
And yes, if you haven't restored it lately,
it isn't really backed up.
--
Regards, Bob Niland mailto:name@ispname.tld
http://www.access-one.com/rjn email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet Service Provider. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hecate
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:11 am Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 16:48:09 -0600, Bob Niland <email4rjn@yahoo.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | Dorothy Bradbury <dorothy.bradbury@ntlworld.com> wrote:
o Ideally those 2 copies on 2 different media types
---- DVD is one
---- DVD-RAM another
Is there any DVD media that is considered archival?
(apart from the additional problem of interoperability -
not being able to read media just written on another
brand or model of DVD burner).
|
The most "archival" is DVD RAM which is rat4ed for a far higher
number of uses and comes in a caddy to stop you getting your sticky
fingers all over it :)
| Quote: | When the data set is small enough, or can be made small
enough, I'd lean toward putting it on CD-R, since there
is [claimed] archival media for that, and interop seems
to be less of a problem vs. DVD.
|
I wouldn't. CDs are the most likely to degrade compared to DVDs
because of the way they are made and store data.
--
Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dorothy Bradbury
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 11, 2004 12:34 am Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
| Quote: | The most "archival" is DVD RAM which is rat4ed for a far higher
number of uses and comes in a caddy to stop you getting your sticky
fingers all over it :)
|
Yes, although re caddy/cartridge...
o IIRC only Panasonic do DVD-RAM writers for DVD-RAM cartridge
o LG do DVD-RAM writers (LG-4082B) that need the cartridge opened
Not that big a deal if you take care - if obsessive wear white cotton gloves,
you would if it were very important paper documents so why not media.
DVD-RAM is very slow.
Will be interesting to see how UBO Blue-Laser MO 5.25" does:
o Super high capacity - several 10s of Gigabytes eventually
o Very high speed - far faster than DVD-RAM
o Very reliable, both DVD-RAM & MO are phase-change media
o Still probably very expensive - 20x the price of an LG DVD-RAM drive
On balance, buy 2 brands of DVD-RAM drive & 2 brands of DVD-RAM media:
o Slim DVD-RAM drive from Panasonic can be had quite cheaply (eg, laptop, USB2)
o Full size DVD-RAM drive from LG is cheap too (eg, desktop)
That way you can test readability in both drives - ie, that your drive is managing to
create disks that only it can read after a period of time (had that on old CDR drives).
Also, if a drive fails you can still access or recover your data in a hurry.
DVD-RAM disks aren't that expensive, if you do 2 copies of data I'd say put one
on DVD+/-R, then one on DVD-RAM (which is reusable, but write protectable).
DVD-RAM is not only phase-change but has more error correcting capability,
a long way towards traditional MO solutions without high drive/media cost.
--
Dorothy Bradbury |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:43 pm Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 16:48:09 -0600, Bob Niland <email4rjn@yahoo.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | Is there any DVD media that is considered archival?
|
Why worry about that? Almost any decent brand of CD or DVD will be
"readable" long after there are no more drives to read it, or the file
format is no longer universally recognized. If it's a decent CD or
DVD, kept out of the light (particularly bright sun light), kept
reasonably cool and physically protected, it will last long enough to
migrate to the next latest-greatest technology in either file format
and/or media type. How many 8-track players (that still work) can you
find these days to play any old 8-track tapes still laying around the
house?
C.R. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob Niland
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:49 pm Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
| Quote: | keyes04@netscape.net> wrote:
Is there any DVD media that is considered archival?
Why worry about that?
|
Because I have mid-1990s Kodak PhotoCDs that are already
unreadable, despite ideal handling and storage. And
they went unreadable several years ago.
| Quote: | Almost any decent brand of CD or DVD will be "readable"
long after there are no more drives to read it, ...
|
a. I wouldn't count on the media being readable. Some
of the cheaper blanks, esp. Russian, are close to
unreadable right off the spindle stack. I've run into
some that were unwriteable right off the spindle,
and the very first CD+RW I ever used immediately
failed to read.
b. We're going to be able to read (readable) 120mm media
for a very long time to come.
| Quote: | ... or the file format is no longer universally recognized.
|
That is a consideration (for Kodak .PCD for example, but
probably moreso for various camera raw files), but probably
not for .JPG (or even .BMP and .TIF), as long as we steer
clear of the near-proprietary extensions (like JPEG
compression inside TIFF).
| Quote: | How many 8-track players (that still work) can you find ...
|
Counter example: you can still buy a turntable that will
play a 100 year-old 78 rpm record. Why? Because it was
easy to build later disk players to handle the earlier
media - and because the 78 rpm media was more pervasive
than 8-track - and because shellac records were more
archival than tape.
Similarly, the 120mm media size chosen for CD, then CD-ROM,
was also adopted for DVD and will be used for the HD
formats. Each new drive family could read all the prior
encodings on the same size platter (well, perhaps excluding
CDV-5, but only the analog data on that).
Any "archival" effort requires stewardship, including
immediate as well as periodic data validation, plus
a data migration plan. But it helps to start with media
that has at least some promise of a long shelf life.
I'm nervous about all DVD media in that role.
--
Regards, Bob Niland mailto:name@ispname.tld
http://www.access-one.com/rjn email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet Service Provider. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Couch
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Dec 12, 2004 12:36 am Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
keyes04@netscape.net wrote:
| Quote: | On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 16:48:09 -0600, Bob Niland <email4rjn@yahoo.com
wrote:
Is there any DVD media that is considered archival?
Why worry about that? Almost any decent brand of CD or DVD will be
"readable" long after there are no more drives to read it, or the file
format is no longer universally recognized. If it's a decent CD or
DVD, kept out of the light (particularly bright sun light), kept
reasonably cool and physically protected, it will last long enough to
migrate to the next latest-greatest technology in either file format
and/or media type. How many 8-track players (that still work) can you
find these days to play any old 8-track tapes still laying around the
house?
C.R.
Actually I have a number of discs from only a few years ago that already |
have read errors. These have been stored carefully in a dry, cool, dark
CD file box, each in individual sleeves. Personally I am not convinced
that any CD/DVD technology is anything close to archival at this point
in time.
Jim Couch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dorothy Bradbury
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:34 am Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
| Quote: | Personally I am not convinced that any CD/DVD technology is
anything close to archival at this point in time.
|
TDK CDR blue were once favoured - those made in India were
lousy, those made in Japan were very good. Yet you couldn't tell
them apart and which you got varied from month to month.
So I'd agree there is a risk in any one media type - you need 2.
o I chose DVD-RAM as vastly cheaper than MO
---- unlike DVD it 1) has better error correction & 2) is phase-change
o I also chose HD because it is online (easily verified) & mirrored
---- by verified I mean inspected regularly
---- by mirrored I mean a simple local/remote server holding a copy
CDR media quality went poor as price was forced down, that may
happen with DVD, and potentially with DVD-RAM eventually.
I also use 3.5" MO, you may think that is invulnerable - wrong:
o As MO has had to compete with new media on price, QC dropped
o So as MO volume drops, so economics drop - opposite of new media
o One batch of media had a surface defect - Philips
o One batch of media was miss-formatted at the factory - drive maker brand!
So perhaps there is a degree of "quality sweet-spot" with backup media
where pricing allows all quality steps before it moves into cash-dog area.
So it is a case of migration
There is one other technology to consider:
o I would first caution that I prefer 2 media types v 1 expensive media type
o DLT has dropped in price considerably with the new slimline 40/80GB drives
o You can get a main-brand 40GB DLT drive for ~£450, probably $450-550
o Tapes are expensive, but their quality is real - the world uses DLT
DLT is Digital Linear Tape, derived from the big open reel systems.
It is different to tape systems developed from audio - eg, Digital Audio Tape
which is a Helical Scan technology which has improved but still =/= DLT. As
the cheaper (yet mainbrand, eg, Quantum) drives are now == DAT, it's DLT.
The Sony AIT & other VX standards I'm not too keen on - less reliable than
DLT by many reports and more importantly fewer vendors making the drives.
The more expensive the drive, the more reluctant someone is to change with
technology re sunk-cost - DVD-RAM drives have the benefit of being 50-70$.
With 2.5" HDs rugged/cost pricing, they aren't so far above DLT tapes either.
--
Dorothy Bradbury |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dances With Crows
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:13 am Post subject:
Re: Archiving Solutions. |
|
|
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:34:53 GMT, Dorothy Bradbury staggered into the
Black Sun and said:
| Quote: | Personally I am not convinced that any CD/DVD technology is anything
close to archival at this point in time.
CDR media quality went poor as price was forced down, that may
happen with DVD, and potentially with DVD-RAM eventually.
|
DVD-RAM has lost the mass-market. That means fewer vendors offering
DVD-RAM media, which could screw DVD-RAM owners eventually since media
is fairly low-margin.
| Quote: | DLT is Digital Linear Tape, derived from the big open reel systems.
It is different to tape systems developed from audio - eg, Digital
Audio Tape which is a Helical Scan technology which has improved but
still =/= DLT. As the cheaper (yet mainbrand, eg, Quantum) drives are
now == DAT, it's DLT.
|
DLT is pretty damn reliable IME. I've never had a serious read or write
error on the 3 DLT systems at work. The DDS systems are much more
finicky and will sometimes throw up errors reading media they wrote
successfully less than a week ago.
| Quote: | The Sony AIT & other VX standards [...] less reliable than DLT by many
reports and more importantly fewer vendors making the drives.
|
? AFAIK, all DLT drives are made by Quantum. The "HPCompaq" or
"Dull" logo on them is just a branding stamp and has nothing to do with
the guts of the drive.
Any really long-term archival project will have to do media migration
every so often if only for space/time. I don't relish the thought of
putting the ~200 DDS tapes we have at work onto whatever new tape system
we eventually get, but it'll certainly save physical space and sysadmin
headaches to have 50 backup tapes instead of 200.
--
Matt G|There is no Darkness in eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see
Hire me! http://crow202.dyndns.org/~mhgraham/resume/
I know the source, and as such, we create the world when he is excited.
He is a rhythmic movement of the penguins is Tux. --MegaHAL, trained |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in