If you use memory cards like film...how do you store / organize them?

[Kolia]

Why save as TIFF and not simply keep the RAW file ?

Sony PMB isn't a very good utility. I only use it to upload to the PC and sometime to access shoe of the EXIF information or apply some preset styling option.

Lightroom is better to manage and archive the RAW data.

I just transferred my 20,000 images library from my old 1TB to the new 3TB. It took an hour or so.

 

[Ballistics]

A) Don't have Bridge. I initially edit through Sony's Editor.

You don't need Bridge to do it.

B) I don't need every image loaded. Going thru the Raws thru the editor the first time allows me to either keep and file or delete.

You don't have to load every single image and can do literally this.

C) Since they are saved to folders as TIFFs, where I then can pull them into PS and have at it, keeping the Raws separate and on marked cards lets me get back to them as they were taken. My latest HD is already ready to implode, which means I have to yet again get another one, transfer all the folders and add it to the stack, which is a hell of a lot bigger than a stack of cards.

Hell of a lot bigger than cards? How big is the case you keep the cards in? I guarantee my external HD is smaller.

What is fast for you may not be for anyone else.

No, this isn't a matter of opinion. Faster is faster. More efficient is more efficient. There's nothing about subjectivity here.

Just like not everyone makes fried chicken the same way, one way of doing something is not necessarily the only way.

Again, you are trying to incorporate subjectivity into something that has factual basis. Telling someone that you would prefer driving over taking a plane because it's faster "for you"
doesn't make any sense. I'm not arguing your preference. You prefer to do things that way, and that's great.

Lastly, no one, whether me or any other person you deem less than intelligent (which I certainly am not), should have to go on a defensive because their methods don't meet another's approval. The OP asked a legitimate question, I answered and you all think I'm the moron. Seriously?

I don't believe I ever mentioned anything about your intelligence/intellect nor did I insult you in any fashion.

 

[manaheim]

Can everyone just please chill out?


It's a reasonable discussion and people don't need to add emotion by either remarks or interpretation.


On the topic...

DVDs and such aren't always the best archival because they can die over time. They can delaminate or just stop working: you can theoretically make this work better by buying "archival quality" media, but there are no guarantees.

What I do (and recommend) is this..,

1. Keep Jpegs of "family photos" always on spinning disk with backups to other hard drives regularly (keep in fire proof safe or at a friends house) and occasionally to DVD.

2. Keep RAWs and Jpegs of critical artwork and portfolio pieces on spinning disk, backed up to at least one other drive and archived to archive quality DVDs.

3. Take all other files and archive them to DVD, and forget about them. Remove archived files off of spinning disk after 6 months or so. (If you don't need them in 6 months odds are you'll never need them). (Archived files go into an ARCHIVED folder for easy identification for culling)

4. Keep all DVDs in fire proof safe. Date and number all DVDs with DVD safe pen.

5. Keep catalog of all DVDs on spinning disk with index of all files so I can search for individual items and pull them off a DVD when needed.

6. In the rare case you lose a single DVD... Oh well.

This process works very well.

Seriously the use of the cards is financially impractical. For the $1800 you're going to spend you could buy a VERY robust storage array on the order of probably 20-30Tb and solve both your storage AND redundancy concerns.

 

[LouR]

A) Don't have Bridge. I initially edit through Sony's Editor.

You don't need Bridge to do it.

B) I don't need every image loaded. Going thru the Raws thru the editor the first time allows me to either keep and file or delete.

You don't have to load every single image and can do literally this.


Hell of a lot bigger than cards? How big is the case you keep the cards in? I guarantee my external HD is smaller.


No, this isn't a matter of opinion. Faster is faster. More efficient is more efficient. There's nothing about subjectivity here.

Just like not everyone makes fried chicken the same way, one way of doing something is not necessarily the only way.

Again, you are trying to incorporate subjectivity into something that has factual basis. Telling someone that you would prefer driving over taking a plane because it's faster "for you"
doesn't make any sense. I'm not arguing your preference. You prefer to do things that way, and that's great.

Lastly, no one, whether me or any other person you deem less than intelligent (which I certainly am not), should have to go on a defensive because their methods don't meet another's approval. The OP asked a legitimate question, I answered and you all think I'm the moron. Seriously?

I don't believe I ever mentioned anything about your intelligence/intellect nor did I insult you in any fashion.

You did not (another one, however, did), but are implying that my "methods" are somehow inferior, yet I don't do two steps you do-I don't download before editing and I don't reformat after.
All images are opened and edited in Sony's Image Converter directly from the medium and then saved on my desktop as TIFFs (which the converter does, I don't even have to scroll for a format). It's during this time I delete the unwanteds. Card goes back into the camera. Done.
I fail to see how first downloading (whether selected images or an entire card) saves time, unless the computer itself is lightning fast. Reminds me of my former boss who actually purchased a software to copy and paste files folder to folder until he was made aware that drag and drop was a little easier and he didn't have to open software to do it. I see what I have before any downloading is necessary.
I don't reformat and reuse the cards as if new. Once full, they get marked and put away. As for where they are, they are in little drawers atop file boxes. Those are infinitely smaller than any HD except maybe flash drives. Once or twice a year, those folders containing the TIFFs and their manipulated counterparts then get backed up again on an HD.
The only real difference is that my cards are my initial raw "backup". I don't need extra USB's, I don't need more HD's taking up room and they're handy. Maybe at some point I can even reformat a few for reuse, but it's how I do it. It's quick enough and I haven't lost a single file in 6 years, unlike the thousands I've lost before that with crashed hard drives and the lost cpu.
It's all very very subjective, so again, please do not imply your way is the correct way. It is correct for you and maybe because someone else told you to do it that way and you know of no other. That does not make it the only way and does not mean everyone must follow suit.
The only issue I foresee coming is that the A77 takes the smaller SDs and I can't write that tiny :scratch:

 

[LouR]

Why save as TIFF and not simply keep the RAW file ?

Sony PMB isn't a very good utility. I only use it to upload to the PC and sometime to access shoe of the EXIF information or apply some preset styling option.

Lightroom is better to manage and archive the RAW data.


I just transferred my 20,000 images library from my old 1TB to the new 3TB. It took an hour or so.

They are TIFFs because you can't manipulate raw files in filtering software. I'm sure you knew that. Again, I have the raw files-right where I left them.
I do not have nor want LR. Tried it in Beta a decade ago, wasn't really impressed and never saw the need to try it again.
Don't know what Sony PMB is or what you mean by it. I have Sony Image Converter SR, which mimics the camera's settings, except ISO, so the raw files can be "fixed", ie: noise, wb, sharpening, Ev, etc. Converter does not save changes as raw.
Good for you

 

[LouR]

You know you can just manually copy RAW files from the card to the computer right - I do it myself, no software I just select, right click copy and right click paste to put them into a folder. I then make a folder within that one for the "KEEPS" (which are the edited versions). With simple folder management you can easily archive a lot of photos on a single harddrive without much worry.

And as said the long term costs are significantly less with this approach unless you are shooting very little indeed. If you are then I can somewhat see that you could get away with shooting and not needing new harddrives, however the OP is asking about storage and organising methods which suggests that their data build up is considerable. This is showing that their current method of operation is simply not the most suitable -- partly shown again by the fact that its a very rare approach to the matter.

That is why you are seeing so many comments against it and why people are not readily providing card organisation suggestions.

I am quite aware on how to save files, thanks.
Rare does not make it wrong.

 

[Overread]

Rare does not make it wrong, but it can potentially mean that you're spending a lot of money on a way of working that, with a few modifications, could easily cost you far less and still provide you with the same amount of data protection whilst also being far easier to organise (which is why its used far more than your own method).


In a separate but linked matter try Lightroom again - its first release didn't impress me all that much either, but its gained a lot of functionality over the last few years. Now it can even do selective area editing whilst still being non-destructive editing to the original files. It can do a lot more than in the past. You can get a 30day free trial off the Adobe website of the full product - just download it and try it out (if you want to keep it you just pay to get an access code and you can keep going without any additional downloading).

 

[manaheim]

LouR... frankly I think your attitude is fairly poor here. People are offering advice and you're mostly being defensive and responding with snark. I have little doubt some of that is in response to snark sent your way in the first place, but if you're not going to do anything but snip at people I would suggest you just say "I'm doing it my way and that's all there is to it" and bow out of the conversation. You're not adding anything to this.

 

[Ballistics]

You did not (another one, however, did), but are implying that my "methods" are somehow inferior, yet I don't do two steps you do-I don't download before editing and I don't reformat after.

Your methods are inferior. It's no implication. However, telling you that is not a personal attack.

While you're creating folders, transferring the original files and using up storage better served for other things, re-transferring files as different formats to a stack of DVD's, reformatting the cards and hoping you haven't worn'em out yet, I'm eating cookies and watching Big Bang Theory. Bazinga.

and

I use 4g or 8g and never pay full price. Someone always has them on sale for less than $15. Factoring in all the externals I've blown through, not to mention a $400 CPU that failed to reach its destination for repairs, I'm probably still ahead a few bucks and don't have a gazillion DVD's to go through.

Which is an implication that your method is faster, efficient, cost effective, saves space, and you wouldn't go through a "gazillion" DVDs. When all of that isn't the case.

All images are opened and edited in Sony's Image Converter directly from the medium and then saved on my desktop as TIFFs (which the converter does, I don't even have to scroll for a format). It's during this time I delete the unwanteds. Card goes back into the camera. Done.

Which is the same as bridge. You don't have to download the files immediately, but you said you do it with TIFFs anyway.

I fail to see how first downloading (whether selected images or an entire card) saves time, unless the computer itself is lightning fast. Reminds me of my former boss who actually purchased a software to copy and paste files folder to folder until he was made aware that drag and drop was a little easier and he didn't have to open software to do it. I see what I have before any downloading is necessary.

You can drag and drop. It's the same thing. Bridge is the faster version of dragging and dropping.

I don't reformat and reuse the cards as if new. Once full, they get marked and put away. As for where they are, they are in little drawers atop file boxes. Those are infinitely smaller than any HD except maybe flash drives.

My external HD is 1TB, and has a smaller footprint than my smartphone. It's extremely small. It's the smallest thing on my desk. It's smaller than my mouse albeit slightly wider.

Once or twice a year, those folders containing the TIFFs and their manipulated counterparts then get backed up again on an HD.

Why not just duplicate the RAW files? Why convert to TIFF in the first place?

The only real difference is that my cards are my initial raw "backup". I don't need extra USB's, I don't need more HD's taking up room and they're handy. Maybe at some point I can even reformat a few for reuse, but it's how I do it. It's quick enough and I haven't lost a single file in 6 years, unlike the thousands I've lost before that with crashed hard drives and the lost cpu.

That's not the real difference. The real difference is price, accessibility, management/organization and time.
If the loss of data is a concern, online backup services are dirt cheap. Unlimited backup for $5 a month.

It's all very very subjective, so again, please do not imply your way is the correct way. It is correct for you and maybe because someone else told you to do it that way and you know of no other. That does not make it the only way and does not mean everyone must follow suit.

Again. It's not subjective. Not in the least bit.

Your way is by all means slower, costly and inefficient. You can say all day that your way "works for you", but that's because you don't know the difference. You're being met with resistance by all because it's
not a matter of preference. It really is a matter of right and wrong. If you want to keep the files on your card, by all means, I'm not going to try to stop you, but you have it in your head that it's a different method,
not an inferior method, when in reality it is.

 

[manaheim]

Oh by the way, my drives are setup in a mirror so i won't lose them from a drive failure.

The fact is you just can't blame loss on bad planning or inappropriate level of protection for critical resources. ESP when you are spending SO much money on the cards. You can build a very robust solution with that money.

And worrying about the size of a couple hard disks is a little silly unless you live in a shoebox.

 

[Ballistics]

And worrying about the size of a couple hard disks is a little silly unless you live in a shoebox.

:lmao: Yep... you got me to literally LOL.

 

[Josh66]

The fact is you just can't blame loss on bad planning or inappropriate level of protection for critical resources.

Of course you can! I think probably every data loss I've ever had was a result of bad planning and/or inappropriate protection level.

 

[LouR]

You did not (another one, however, did), but are implying that my "methods" are somehow inferior, yet I don't do two steps you do-I don't download before editing and I don't reformat after.

Your methods are inferior. It's no implication. However, telling you that is not a personal attack.

Constructive criticism? hardly. As I've said before, it's fast for me because I'm not downloading anything and waiting on that only to have to go back and edit.

While you're creating folders, transferring the original files and using up storage better served for other things, re-transferring files as different formats to a stack of DVD's, reformatting the cards and hoping you haven't worn'em out yet, I'm eating cookies and watching Big Bang Theory. Bazinga.

and

Which is an implication that your method is faster, efficient, cost effective, saves space, and you wouldn't go through a "gazillion" DVDs. When all of that isn't the case.

Shall I repeat myself? It is for me. You do portraits, etc., which is high volume. I do not.

Which is the same as bridge. You don't have to download the files immediately, but you said you do it with TIFFs anyway.

Never said I do that. I said once opened and edited, they are saved as TIFFs. Nothing gets downloaded.

You can drag and drop. It's the same thing. Bridge is the faster version of dragging and dropping.

Again, never said anything one way or another about it. And are you a Bridge salesman? What works for you on your system, etc., may not work for me for any particular reason. Maybe it will, why change what works. Because you say so?

My external HD is 1TB, and has a smaller footprint than my smartphone. It's extremely small. It's the smallest thing on my desk. It's smaller than my mouse albeit slightly wider.

Good for you. Mine is not and I don't have room for multi-hds on a desk that already has a printer, monitor, several checkbooks and myriad other things.

Why not just duplicate the RAW files? Why convert to TIFF in the first place?

I answered this already. Because raw (no need to be all caps) can not be manipulated in various filtering software. I work the TIFFs, save the raws. Do you print and sell your raws?

The only real difference is that my cards are my initial raw "backup". I don't need extra USB's, I don't need more HD's taking up room and they're handy. Maybe at some point I can even reformat a few for reuse, but it's how I do it. It's quick enough and I haven't lost a single file in 6 years, unlike the thousands I've lost before that with crashed hard drives and the lost cpu.

That's not the real difference. The real difference is price, accessibility, management/organization and time.
If the loss of data is a concern, online backup services are dirt cheap. Unlimited backup for $5 a month.

Accessibility is no different-they're right in front of me or where I put past ones. Time? I'm not downloading on this 5 year old Dell or reformatting cards before using them. You have no idea how my workflow goes because you have your own and probably is the only way you know. Working in someone else's studio for 5 years, I know their workflow (similar to yours but on a very large scale) and something always got f*ked up if for no other reason than two many pairs of hands on the same files.
Again, you have no idea what I do, how I do it or why, you just think your way is the only way. It is not.

It's all very very subjective, so again, please do not imply your way is the correct way. It is correct for you and maybe because someone else told you to do it that way and you know of no other. That does not make it the only way and does not mean everyone must follow suit.

Again. It's not subjective. Not in the least bit.

Your way is by all means slower, costly and inefficient. You can say all day that your way "works for you", but that's because you don't know the difference. You're being met with resistance by all because it's
not a matter of preference. It really is a matter of right and wrong. If you want to keep the files on your card, by all means, I'm not going to try to stop you, but you have it in your head that it's a different method,
not an inferior method, when in reality it is.

To you. What is right for you is fine by me, so stop trying to convert someone who doesn't need it.
When you tell someone else that what they are doing is wrong simply because YOU don't like it, that IS an insult. How often do you go into someone else's house and tell them they cleaned it wrong? Bet you wouldn't. Same damned thing.

 

[LouR]

This getting nowhere.
Close the thread or something. Some people just like beating others over the head until they "come around".

 

[Ballistics]

This getting nowhere.
Close the thread or something. Some people just like beating others over the head until they "come around".

It's getting nowhere, because you don't listen. No one's trying to change your mind. You do what you gotta do,
but it is inefficient. We're telling you that, because others will come in here and see this thread, and they will know why
using SD cards as your form of backup is a bad idea.


And by the way, saving TIFFs onto your desktop IS downloading, and this isn't your house.