Black and White Photography of New York - Dave Beckerman

Subscribe in a reader

Amazon S3

29 September, 2008 (13:52)

A while back - maybe a year or two - I signed up with Amazon S3 for archiving purposes.  At that time, my upload speed with roadrunner was too slow to do anything meaningful.  But the speed has increased, and this morning I setup S3 with Jungle Disk software and voila - I’m in business.  I’m getting something like 500K to 900K / second and I can now do an export from Lightroom (just pick the good files) and export them to my Z drive which is an S3 drive.

I can keep the same file structure as I’m using on my local drive.  And I can schedule overnight backups.

So for once, I think I have a reliable archival system (i.e. hard drives and DVDs all fail at some point or other).  It will also free up more usable space on my own local drives for production work.

* * *

Jungle Disk

Amazon S3


« Ya Gotta Believe

 Dancing Hasidm »


Comment from JeffK
Time: September 29, 2008, 2:51 pm

Dave wrote:
“hard drives and DVDs all fail at some point or other”

Companies fail too so make sure not to rely on one any more than the hard drives or any other media!

Comment from dave
Time: September 29, 2008, 3:55 pm

Jeff — that’s good advise, and I’m still doing my own backups - but I suspect that I’ll be out of business long before Amazon.

Comment from Mike
Time: September 29, 2008, 5:21 pm

Could you provide links to these products/services?

Comment from dave
Time: September 29, 2008, 6:43 pm

Mike - just added the links to this post. /DB

Comment from Greg
Time: September 30, 2008, 10:17 am

Thanks for the info. I’ve been concerned about my digital files as well and I’m always curious to see what others do to secure/preserve their images.

Until digital came along, I was always freaked that my negatives would be destroyed in a fire or some natural disaster. Digital doesn’t seem to offer much more security, does it?

Comment from Ed Richards
Time: September 30, 2008, 1:45 pm

> Digital doesn’t seem to offer much more security, does it?

With digital, it is easy to have a couple of copies of your files at home and another couple somewhere else, such as at work, or across the country at your cousin’s house. Pretty hard to do that with negatives. It is also easy to grab a couple of remote drives and head for the hills when flood comes, while your negatives may fill up a filing cabinet.

Comment from Luke
Time: September 30, 2008, 9:35 pm

I agree with Ed. You can have multiple copies of your digital negative. With film, you’ve got just one negative, and that assumes you didn’t damage it in processing or that the film didn’t have some manufacturing flaw that caused it to degrade long before it should have - never mind a Katrinaesque experience.

Digital has surpassed film in all technical respects. But film still has a character to it that I like.

Comment from Eugene Z
Time: October 1, 2008, 12:21 am

If your main purpose is backup rather then web-accessible storage then check out
After 34Gb it becomes cheaper the S3.

Write a comment