Are Your Backups Safe?

bwcolor · 10-07-2009

I've taken hard knocks in my office when my staff member tried to conceal her destruction of lots of data by trying to recover files, but she overwrote multiple backups with corrupted data. At home, I lost all of my kids photos/videos from birth to four years old when I was transitioning to a new backup scheme. I intentionally destroyed my backup drive data while configuring it for the new software. My computers hard drive completely died. No way.. bad timing. Luckily, I was able to piece together everything, but it took me months.

Ubuntu Linux servers are inexpensive to put together. I'm no expert, but redundant commercial drives, gigabit networking and little Atom 330 processor/motherboards give me great backup solutions. I get 80GB/sec local transfer rates and solid service. My office server backs up to my home server and the reverse is also true. All of my home computers backup to local drives, home server and business server. Each computer uses three separate programs and backsup to three destinations. Maybe overkill, but then again, I seem to like destroying my own data.

Don't trust one backup program to one destination.

Al Kaplan · 10-07-2009

Lately I've been posting photos on my blog from the 1950's through the 1970's, and because it's just plain easier, I've been posting off of my "back up data". Yup, I've been scanning from the contact sheets rather than the negatives. http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com

No, don't tell me that I should get everything, all my negatives and slides, scanned. I probably won't live long enough to finish the job and still leave time for other pursuits.

Chriscrawfordphoto · 10-07-2009

I have offsite copies off all my external hard drives that i archive my finished work on.

majid · 10-07-2009

Same here. I documented my backup strategy here. I use a Shuttle KPC running Solaris and rsync over a 20Mbps Internet connection. I have 4 different copies for my photos, so I guess I am even more paranoid than you.

pesphoto · 10-07-2009

my negs are safely tucked away in their binders

ZeissFan · 10-07-2009

I don't consider anything in a digital form to be permanent. It won't be today, tomorrow or next month or even next year, but that data will one day be lost.

My photos aren't so great that they require a safe deposit box.

Plus, I'll be dead one day, and you can't worry about it when you're dead.

Roger Hicks · 10-08-2009

There is also a big no-man's-land between caution (backups on external drives) and paranoia.

Cheers,

R.

degruyl · 10-08-2009

My backup strategy:
1. Local copy to external disk
2. Local copy to another local computer
3. Remote backup through [offsite backup provider].
4. Locally stored negatives.

What this does not provide is a archival record. In other words, if I screw up a file, or it gets corrupted, I can't fall back to a previous version. This scheme is only for "catastrophic failure"

On the other hand, a time machine disk might come in handy, but would have to be huge. MF scanned images are huge, and photoshop makes them several times bigger if I use smart objects. That is something I live with.

Am I worried about something after I am dead? Not in the least.

peter_n · 10-08-2009

I use backup software called Retrospect that backs up a number of machines across my LAN to a tape drive. I use a rotating tape system with some stored on-site, some off-site. In the 8 years I've used this system I've needed it once, I had a development server get corrupted and I had to completely rebuild it. The OS rebuild was no problem but restoring the data & dev files back from the tape was a nice experience.

It's an old-fashioned system but it works.

degruyl · 10-08-2009

Tape systems work great, but are only useful if you have the fortitude to keep up with them. In other words: you have to change the tapes, and take the offsite copies somewhere else, etc.

They are faster than wire based offsite backups, though.

rxmd · 10-08-2009

At home I have a copy of my stuff on a network attached storage unit and I'm backing that up to an LTO-2 tape drive.

200 GB on a relatively rugged, low-priced tape that lasts thirty or so years and is omnipresent enough in datacenters that there's reasonable hope of eventually finding someone with a reader seems enough for me at present.

sevo · 10-08-2009

Given that I have survived some five generations of dead tape drives, I don't believe in backups any more. If it is important, print it, or shoot film...

rxmd · 10-08-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by sevo

Given that I have survived some five generations of dead tape drives, I don't believe in backups any more. If it is important, print it, or shoot film...

That's a viable option, provided that all you have to back up is pictures

yanidel · 10-08-2009

I upload all my pictures to Flickr. Full res JPG. No raw files but better than nothing in case everything goes into flame.

Al Kaplan · 10-08-2009

There is no reason why a wife should need more than one pair of high heels and one pair of flats. Get a big box and get rid of all that clutter in the bedroom closet! Then you'll have plenty of room for negative storage. Offer to make digital pix of them before they go off to Goodwill. "Shoe back-up!"

giellaleafapmu · 10-08-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by majid

Same here. I documented my backup strategy here. I use a Shuttle KPC running Solaris and rsync over a 20Mbps Internet connection. I have 4 different copies for my photos, so I guess I am even more paranoid than you.

Solaris...somebody else runs Solaris...

GLF

MartinP · 10-08-2009

(Open) Solaris is interesting.

Sparrow · 10-08-2009

If my pictures are any good someone will conserve them ... if not they, they will die shortly after me.

To believe anything else is delusional, backup is for wusses ... negs and a hard-drive is enough for me