3 ms·

It helps to consider the smartphone as an "input device" rather than as storage and presentation device. You know you've got a real winner of a photo if right

It helps to consider the smartphone as an "input device" rather than as storage and presentation device. You know you've got a real winner of a photo if right away you want to share it with someone. A backlit cluster of leaves on a beautiful fall day - off to my sister who is a master of such shots. A really great photo of the kids - off to a particular Whatsapp group (Facebook has long ago faded for this sort of thing - yes, I know, Whatsapp is still Facebook). And so on. But at the end of the day, or the week anyway, download all the new stuff to my old-school computer and cull ruthlessly. Only the parts that survive that go into the real collection. Which is still a lot, but cross-referenced by date taken and subject matter, the fulfill the "digital diary" role, not the "art gallery" role. Immediate culling is important. Once the photos are a month or two old, for one thing they seem too important to cull any more; for another so many have accumulated that you'll never catch up anyway. My ultimate storage system - homemade and not publishable quality - has a web accessible, rudimentary full screen, swipeable presentation layer, so I can still show off the photos from it in a similar way to showing off photos actually stored on the phone. But it has the culled collection that is merged together from two phones, several old school digital cameras, and even motion capture surveillance cameras watching the front and back yards.

pkulak 5y ago
Am I ever the opposite. Every photo or video anyone in my family takes goes to the local NAS and that's the end of it. I think of that media more like a diary. It's all sorted by date, and that's it; but it's also enough.
- MarkusWandel 5y ago
  Backups? One advantage of the culled collection (with the pix also downscaled from the original resolution to 2500px on the longer edge) is that I can afford to keep it in quadruplicate. On the main machine, on the server that exposes it to the web (password protected), and on two portable hard disks, one of which is always kept offsite in alternation.
  - pkulak 5y ago
    I've got about 13 years of photos and videos and it's still under a single terabyte. That's pretty easy to keep one copy of in Raid 1 and one remote. If I had 10x... I'd probably just spring for more hard drives and move to Glacier for backup.

pkulak 5y ago

Am I ever the opposite. Every photo or video anyone in my family takes goes to the local NAS and that's the end of it. I think of that media more like a diary. It's all sorted by date, and that's it; but it's also enough.

MarkusWandel 5y ago
Backups? One advantage of the culled collection (with the pix also downscaled from the original resolution to 2500px on the longer edge) is that I can afford to keep it in quadruplicate. On the main machine, on the server that exposes it to the web (password protected), and on two portable hard disks, one of which is always kept offsite in alternation.
- pkulak 5y ago
  I've got about 13 years of photos and videos and it's still under a single terabyte. That's pretty easy to keep one copy of in Raid 1 and one remote. If I had 10x... I'd probably just spring for more hard drives and move to Glacier for backup.