What do they do with their thousands of images?!!

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by pjdilip, Feb 20, 2021.

  1. The difference is the connection for the SSD is Thunderbolt 3 and SD card readers are basically USB connections. Transfer rates are much much faster on an SSD. Also, you can obviously get much larger SSDs then SD cards. Why would you use limited in size ROMs? I can't think of a slower way to access data.
    Especially when you can get raid 5 or raid1 cabinets which provide a fair measure of redundancy and/or reliability.
     
  2. It seems that SD people are trying to keep up. SDXC address up to 2TB and SDUC up to 128TB.

    As far as I can tell, SDXC up to 1TB are available. 2TB are waiting for demand to catch up.
    Also, they have faster transfer rates for the bigger cards, up to about 4G bit/s, and transferring
    on four pins at a time.

    But I believe the discussion was for long-term storage, where write time isn't so important.

    It seems that BD-R is up to 128GB for quadruple layer. I suspect for long-term reliability,
    it is better to use 25GB single layer.

    Otherwise, I have been interested in Ultrium tape. I have an LTO-3 drive, which is up to 400GB
    per tape cartridge. I am not so sure how long-term it compares to the others.
     
  3. And of course most of these images will fly away in time.


    DSC_56994.jpg
     
  4. david_henderson

    david_henderson www.photography001.com

    I have a background in slide photography, which cost quite a lot. This probably explains why, although the number of photographs I make has increased since I turned to digital, it has never touched thousands a day . I've never, ever, come back from a trip even one of 2-3 weeks, with more than say 2000 images spread across a variety of subjects. I do get rid of outright rubbish on the hoof. That 2000 max tends to become c. 1200 max once I've edited at home. I'm happy to keep that number of images from a trip that has probably consumed several weeks of my life in the planning, organising, travelling and editing. About a hundred may actually get "used" in the sense of appearing on a website or self-published book, or placed in a stock agency.

    I could get it down much further but it would take serious time to do that which I'd rather spend doing other things. I've been doing this for years and I still have only a small pile of external drives & 2 internal drives in my computer for images & back-ups. So its not like its depriving me of space or food. But I have to say I'm not interested in photography that involves keeping the shutter pressed down in the hope of the best ever picture of that species , or game, or even wedding. I don't think I'd enjoy sifting through hundreds of similars to find the "best " & I'd probably pick the wrong one anyway. I hope that, for me,each shutter press is a decision.
     
  5. I’ve been at this for quite a while now. In the film days I generally didn’t have to pay for film or chemistry, my employer did. I shot as much as I wanted or needed to and averaged 25 rolls a week. Never caught any grief for going over budget. By and large digital has been the same. I don’t shoot any more on assignment now just because it’s ‘free’. I don’t want to sit in front of a laptop and edit an extra few hundred images from a ball game. Storage is way cheaper now but I’ve found no reason to shoot more. I’m amused at these claims of 15, 16 and more frames/second. More and more I think younger photographers are using tech as a crutch. I wonder what would happen if they were sent on an assignment with something like a Nikkormat or a K1000 and three rolls of film. No winders or motor drives, no autofocus, just one shot at a time. Would they get the job done or just go insane?

    Rick H.
     
  6. Why wonder in anachronisms?
    That’s only because you’re not seeing it through their eyes or with empathy or understanding of today’s reality.

    I’m sure there were plenty of horsemen who thought driving a car was using a crutch back in the day. Look where that got them.
     
  7. There have been a few times when I later wondered why I didn't get some shot, mostly because I didn't
    think of it at the time, and even when the cost is $0.
     
  8. Actually samstevens I was taught to know how to do it myself because sooner or later automation is going to fail. A photographer should know how to determine proper exposure and when the camera is incorrect, how to focus by eye because autofocus can so often miss the mark and does. There are times when you have to be ready immediately and only get one chance. It’s the same reason a pilot has to be able to fly without an autopilot from startup to shutdown, because eventually auto systems WILL fail. It’s something that apparently isn’t being taught now. No, I don’t see it through their eyes or with empathy but I think I have a pretty good understanding of today’s reality and reality is falling short.

    Rick H.
     
  9. Actually, I think you’ve fallen short of reality.

    Sure, terrorists could knock out our electrical grid tomorrow (the kind of extreme scenario you paint in terms of today’s camera technology failing), but I’m not sure that means we should practice typing on an old manual typewriter once a week or we should have preserved our butter churners instead of scrapping them.

    In addition, I think you’re giving today’s serious young photographers far too little credit, several of whom I know personally who learned film cameras in school as well as darkroom skills and who I’m quite sure could and do focus a camera and set manual exposures when the need or desire arises. (The average snap shooter or family vacation picture taker hasn’t been in a darkroom or chosen an exposure for decades, nor should they have.)

    I’m sorry, but yours sound like the misgivings of an old man who simply relishes and misses the past. Look ahead. There’s more future than you think.
     
  10. Something tells me we would not work well together. Apparently you’ve missed my point completely and are comparing typewriters and butter churns to the ability to see when tech has fallen short and being able to deal with that. It happens every day in many activities, photography, driving a car, cooking dinner and so on. I am not saying that we should all go back to sunny 16 and a darkroom, just that we should all be able to see a mistake about to happen and do something about it. And finally no, I’m not an old man but I have no idea how the power grid found it’s way into this discussion.

    Rick H.
     
  11. Boy, have you ever moved the goal post. My argument was with your claim that young photographers are using tech as crutch, which is a pretty clear judgment and indictment on your part. Now you’re claiming that what you said, or meant, was that you’re encouraging an ability to know when tech falls short. I had no way of gleaning the latter from the former. But, thank you for clarifying.

    Maybe we can work together well via questioning, disagreeing, and clarification. Immediate agreement isn’t always the only or best way to work together …
     
  12. Maybe we’ll see.
     

Share This Page