What format do you use for archiving?

[bwana]

I was listening to Scott Kelby on Photofocus last night and, like me, when he's finished with a particular image, he doesn't see the value of archiving in any other format than jpeg.

Still, I'm curious, what do you use? Do you keep the image as a RAW with a sidecar and hope that something will open it in 20 years time? Do you turn your nose up at so called lossy formats like jpeg and save to TIFF or some other lossless format because bigger must be better? Do you print the image and store in in a climate controlled environment?

 

[undesign]

Jpegs all the way - unless it is a very special photo and I may want to edit is later. Then again, I shoot jpeg 90% of the time.

Read an interesting article recently where the writer suggested one should print your photos more often - for longevity. You know, the next generation finding them in the attic kind of thing, unlike your flickr account or backup hdd which will probably follow your own demise one day.

 

[bwana]

Jpegs all the way - unless it is a very special photo and I may want to edit is later. Then again, I shoot jpeg 90% of the time.

Read an interesting article recently where the writer suggested one should print your photos more often - for longevity. You know, the next generation finding them in the attic kind of thing, unlike your flickr account or backup hdd which will probably follow your own demise one day.

You raise an interesting quandary. I'm fairly certain the JPGs themselves have longevity but what storage medium to put them on.

 

[Skerminkel]

... but what storage medium to put them on.

As many as possible, because you never know which one will fail you.
The only fail-safe medium is to write "with love" on a hard copy and give it to your mother. She will keep it forever.

 

[Tacet]

The only fail-safe medium is to write "with love" on a hard copy and give it to your mother. She will keep it forever.

That's a very creative alternative outsourcing solution!

 

[hilton]

I'm trying one of those online/cloud storage facilities. In particular Acronis where for R350 per year I get 250Gb of space.

I think that once you've made the decision NOT to print a photograph, then there's little point keeping the 25mb RAW file but I'm still battling with this

 

[bwana]

I'm trying one of those online/cloud storage facilities. In particular Acronis where for R350 per year I get 250Gb of space.

I think that once you've made the decision NOT to print a photograph, then there's little point keeping the 25mb RAW file but I'm still battling with this

What format do you take to the printer when you print?

 

[hilton]

tiff

 

[bwana]

tiff

Really?

Why? Are you printing large format [-]and need to supply CMYK?[/-] Scratch that - jpg supports cmyk.

 

[hilton]

No particular reason really, probably just scared their printing program will mess with my jpegs.

I'm probably over thought this hey?

 

[bwana]

No particular reason really, probably just scared their printing program will mess with my jpegs.

I'm probably over thought this hey?

Maybe They're as likely to mess with a TIFF. I always tell my printer no correction just to be on the safe side.

 

[hilton]

Thanks I'll give it a try.

 

[koffiejunkie]

I'm still trying to work this out. So far, my Aperture library has fitted on my laptop hard drive so I have not had to worry about the size of RAW files, but after this weekend that might change (unless I take the plunge and get that 600GB SSD).

The problem with throwing away the RAW files, for me at least, is that I'm not convinced I'm as good as working them over as I'll ever be. I still go back to slightly less stellar shots of six months ago and manage to revive them in ways I wasn't able to six months ago. To me, that means my post processing skill is still improving.

Fortunately, so far, the size of my library has grown at a slower pace than available hard drive space. I am thinking of moving my RAW files to an external drive (i.e. using referenced files) but there are some logistical issues to deal with first.

Read an interesting article recently where the writer suggested one should print your photos more often - for longevity. You know, the next generation finding them in the attic kind of thing, unlike your flickr account or backup hdd which will probably follow your own demise one day.

This is another issue that I'm still trying to find a good solution to. It's one of the reasons I'm so anal about geotagging and keywording my images though. I've had he frustrating experience of going through deceased family member's photos and not knowing how half the people in them are or where they were taken.

 

[bwana]

The problem with throwing away the RAW files, for me at least, is that I'm not convinced I'm as good as working them over as I'll ever be. I still go back to slightly less stellar shots of six months ago and manage to revive them in ways I wasn't able to six months ago. To me, that means my post processing skill is still improving.

I'm not suggesting throwing away the raw files, just another, even more rock solid, format as an additional safeguard.

Fortunately, so far, the size of my library has grown at a slower pace than available hard drive space. I am thinking of moving my RAW files to an external drive (i.e. using referenced files) but there are some logistical issues to deal with first.

I'm very happy with the way aperture handles libraries. Every project gets it's own library, they're smaller and easier to manage. I've also got a script that exports the assets in any chosen format, in my case jpgs (quality 11) when I'm done. If I ever need to go back and re-edit something I've got my raw archive(s) but if I just need quick access then I've got the smaller, lighter jpgs on hand. When cloud storage becomes feasible for me the smaller files are going to make my life easier.

 

[koffiejunkie]

I'm not suggesting throwing away the raw files, just another, even more rock solid, format as an additional safeguard.

Aah right. I wouldn't mind throwing the RAW files out if I knew I have squeezed every last drop out of them, but I know I'm not likely to reach that stage soon (if ever).

I was going to suggest png, since it's an open standard, and can do lossless compression, but I just noticed it doesn't do CMYK - only RGB. To be honest, I don't even know if that should matter to me. I print by clicking on File --> Order Prints

I'm very happy with the way aperture handles libraries.

Me too. I just don't think I can keep growing it the way it's going now.

 

[Francois Marais]

When I shoot stock I shoot RAW, but just the happy snap, JPEG.

 

[bwana]

When I shoot stock I shoot RAW, but just the happy snap, JPEG.

This thread is more about what you do with the photos after shooting/editing, when it comes time to archive.

 

[BigAl-sa]

Just remember, jpeg is still 8-bit. If you want to do a *serious* re-edit later, you'll prolly want your RAW or some or other 16-bit format. I keep all usable RAW files plus my editor's format of files I've modified.

 

[bwana]

Just remember, jpeg is still 8-bit. If you want to do a *serious* re-edit later, you'll prolly want your RAW or some or other 16-bit format. I keep all usable RAW files plus my editor's format of files I've modified.

[Fortunatly] I don't have the time, nor the inclination, to revisit my past horrors. When I'm done, I'm done. Likewise with layers. When I've finished with PS I always flatten before I follow it back into aperture.

Like Siris I'm shooting in jpg most of the time anyway.