michael_mcblane Posted May 14, 2007 Share Posted May 14, 2007 I have a backup system in place now, with an external 300Gig backup that I backup every day with new work that I've completed. As well as that I have 2 500Gig external units that I backup that 300G drive every week. How I do it is: I put my scans in one file, my downloads from the digital camera in another file, and my "masters" and prints in a third file. My question is: should I redundantly backup those three files every week onto the 2 backups even though 95% of the files haven't changed or should I devise a system to just backup the new files that I've recently completed. I guess I don't understand what happens when you copy files over the same file week after week. Are you taking up new disk space, or is it just copying over the top of the old file. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_mounier Posted May 14, 2007 Share Posted May 14, 2007 I use SuperDuper with my mac. It compares old data on the backup drive with all the files being backed up from my hard drive, and only copies the new stuff, leaving original backed up files untouched. I don't know if that's typical of back up software but it makes backing up my hard drive very quick since it's only copying the new files. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffs1 Posted May 14, 2007 Share Posted May 14, 2007 There are any number of backup programs that will let you configure backups in (almost) any pattern. Just FYI, the backup-terminology is: "full backup" means copy all files. "Incremental" or "partial" backup means only backup files that have changed since the last backup. Typically people will run incremental backups more frequently (typ. daily) and a full-backup less frequently (weekly is common). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Ingold Posted May 14, 2007 Share Posted May 14, 2007 There is a topic with which you need to become familiar - "Digital Asset Management" or DAM for short. There are many books and articles written on this subject, most notably by Bruce Fraser, "The Last DAM Book". Why are all your photos in a single folder? Would you file papers at the office without topical file folders? There is a specific danger in this practice with digital images. Sooner or later the camera will begin to repeat file numbers. The new files will overwrite older files with the same names, and the older files will be lost forever. Start by creating new file folders each time you download images from the camera or card. The folder name should begin with a date code for sorting purposes (e.g., today is 070514), sometimes with a brief description of the topic of the photos (e.g., Cinco de Maya). The combination of file folder and file name constitutes a unique identifier. It is unlikely you will accidently overwrite old files as a results. With your files so organized, you only need to backup recent folders. Hard drives are convenient for backups, but are not secure enough (or ever big enough) for archival use. By separating photos into directories, it is practical to archive them on durable media, such as CDs or DVDs and store them off line. The best way to store files is as you take them. Retrieval is another subject. I use Extensis Portfolio to store thumbnails of each directory. With Portfolio I can assign key words and descriptions, move and copy the thumbnails to more topical "galleries" and do extensive searches. The thumbnails contain pointers to the actual files (which can be on named DVDs), but are themselves small enough to keep permanently on hard disk. Adobe Lightroom has limited database functionality to do similar things, including the retention of thumbnails even if the original files are relocated or deleted from the hard drive. Lightroom may be sufficient for many people. I have tens of thousands of images on file, so Portfolio is a better choice for me. You can still do backups for restoration (rather than for archiving) on a daily, weekly and monthly schedule. Typically, you back up everything, but delete or replace the backups on a periodic schedule. Tapes are the best way to do this type of backup. However, tapes only last about a year in storage, and are only good for 5 rewrites or so before the error rate gets too high. Unattended tape backups require hardware starting at about $3500 (with no upper limit). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_meyers Posted May 14, 2007 Share Posted May 14, 2007 The 'flaw' in your backup strategy is that all your backups are in one place. You are redunantly covered for mechanical hard disk failure but not covered for catastrophy such as theft, fire, etc. Consider moving a hard disk with a full weekly backup to an alternate location such as home if this is a work system or work if this system is at home. Another approach is to make a daily backup to CD or DVD and take/mail those offsite. You can also make a copy of your files on an offsite server; although, many people feel uncomfortable with that -- especially with intellectual property. Finally, with all those hard disks you can set up a mirror of your current working drive on one of the other hard disks and the files will be automatically backed up as you save them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now