4 ms·
Do pros really want to store their photos "in the cloud"? I'm just an amateur and have ~500GB of photos. Uploading that much is almost impossible over a normal
by lutorm 12y ago
Do pros really want to store their photos "in the cloud"? I'm just an amateur and have ~500GB of photos. Uploading that much is almost impossible over a normal asymmetric home internet connection, and I imagine professional photographers must have multi-terabytes of data easily.
- abruzzi 12y agoI would love to have better peer to peer syncing, so my home desktop could hold all my images, but my laptop could connect and sync a subset for mobile editing. However, you I'm not at 500gb, but I'm large enough (230gb) that I doubt it would be terribly useful. Maybe I'll be proven wrong, but we'll see.
- OmarIsmail 12y ago500GB would take about a week to upload? Maybe a couple of weeks? Having the security and knowledge that 500GB of your precious photos are stored off-site multi-redundancy, blah blah, vs your own hard drives definitely seems worth it to me. I mean, one flood and kiss 500GB of photos gone. That would be a very sad thing indeed.
- rbritton 12y agoNot at all. We have about 4 TB of photos. I signed up for Backblaze last August to get an online backup of just the past few years and it's still ~400 GB from finishing.
- pling 12y agoNot a chance. Takes too long to upload and download and the 'cloud' data usage and rights assignment stuff is pretty unclear. My father (a pro) has about 3TiB on a NAS and AIT backup.
- nimish 12y agoOffsite backups are critical. What happens when wherever you're storing those nas drives / tapes gets flooded or destroyed?
- pling 12y agoTapes are manually archived off site in a safe deposit box monthly. A month window is an acceptable loss. Agree entirely. T'was an idiot company I worked for at the time that stored their backups in the basement of the World Trade Centre. Yes that worked out well...