Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > RFF Polls

View Poll Results: How much disk space do your photos take?
None - I'm a film guy/gal 3 8.57%
10 GB 7 20.00%
100 GB 7 20.00%
200 GB 9 25.71%
500 GB 4 11.43%
1 TB 5 14.29%
Voters: 35. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

How many gigaybytes do your pcitures take up?
Old 07-11-2007   #1
Tuolumne
Registered User
 
Tuolumne's Avatar
 
Tuolumne is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Negev, Israel
Posts: 2,989
How many gigaybytes do your pcitures take up?

Much to my surprise I discovered last night that my 340 GB disk has suddently been filled with photos, over 50 gigabytes in the last month or two alone. Of course, filling 8 GB memory cards, keeping all results filtered with Noise Ninja, keeping all JPGs ever exported, etc. etc. does begin to add up. Still - it seems a little crazy. I have now gone out and bought a 1 TB (yes, thats TERABYTE, 1000 Gigabytes) drive for my little measly digital dark room, and I'm not even a professional. How much disk space do your pictures take and do you feel this is getting a little out of control?

/T
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #2
Kin Lau
Registered User
 
Kin Lau is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,680
I'm actually closer to the 300GB mark. A 1 TB drive is looking very attractive right now. I also scan my film and there's 2 shooters in this family.
__________________
Of course I have a photographic memory: over exposed, under developed, grainy and out of focus

<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=583'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #3
aad
Not so new now.
 
aad is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,231
I'm guessing you're storing raw files. JPG will make life more manageable.

My digital files run about 2 gig when I don't clean house. The archives are all film. Now, there's a LOT of that...
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=3426'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #4
Tuolumne
Registered User
 
Tuolumne's Avatar
 
Tuolumne is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Negev, Israel
Posts: 2,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by aad
I'm guessing you're storing raw files. JPG will make life more manageable.

My digital files run about 2 gig when I don't clean house. The archives are all film. Now, there's a LOT of that...
aad,
Yes, I have started shooting RAW files and they are HUGE. I'm not sure it's worth the hassle. Since starting to shoot RAW I've used up more space in 2 months than I did in the preceeding 12. That was something I hadn't given much though to.

/T
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #5
collum
Registered User
 
collum is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 102
there's no > 1Tb

I also shoot with a Betterlight scanning back, each image can end up being 2G+ when i shoot with the pano adapter (normally each is about 700Mb before adding layers).

Currenlty have 5 Tb and need more
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #6
RML
Just live it.
 
RML's Avatar
 
RML is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Amsterdam, Holland or Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Age: 48
Posts: 4,795
Well over 300GB too.

I am thinking of getting the external Maxtor OneTouch 1.5 TB. These are two 750GB disks in a RAID0 setup, so they're each others mirrors. This beast costs some 450 euro here, and I'm off to Istanbul soon. The OneTouch will have to wait a little, though I fear my current disks will be full after I return from Turkey.
__________________
My photo blog

Join the Rangefinder Blog/Site Ring.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #7
furcafe
Registered User
 
furcafe's Avatar
 
furcafe is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 4,294
I'm w/Collum, there needs to be a > 1 TB category.
__________________
Five a Second. Chicago's Bell & Howell Co. (cameras) announced that it would put on sale this fall the world's most expensive still camera. Its "Foton" will take five 35-mm. pictures a second, sell for $700. Bell & Howell, which has found that "families of both low and high incomes now spend over $550" for movie equipment, hopes to sell 20,000 Fotons a year.
--Facts And Figures, Time magazine, Monday, October 4, 1948
My Photoblog

My Flickr stream

My RFF Gallery

My Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #8
migtex
Don't eXchange Freedom!
 
migtex's Avatar
 
migtex is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cartaxo, Portugal
Age: 57
Posts: 764
My 2.5 TB Raid system is about to get at 73%... so.. by Christmas I do need to find some cheap Satas... oh I'm in trouble...
Or shoot less.. or delete more. (Which I never do..)...
__________________
Too many ニコン F's to list... less ニコン D's.... and some ニコン S's and a Bessa R2S NHS!!
My RFF Gallery, My Flickr Gallery, my Olhares.com
Do you Like
Camera FUN? <click>

  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #9
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
 
rogue_designer's Avatar
 
rogue_designer is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Age: 43
Posts: 2,484
I've got two 250 GB lacies that are pretty close to full, I need to archive a bunch of old projects off to dvds soon anyway tho.
__________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
Usually using: M4, Rolleiflex 3.5C, Fuji X Pro 1, Canon 5D MkII, Horseman VHR, Horseman 45LX

---
My Flickr | StreetLevel Photography
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #10
aad
Not so new now.
 
aad is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuolumne
aad,
Yes, I have started shooting RAW files and they are HUGE. I'm not sure it's worth the hassle. Since starting to shoot RAW I've used up more space in 2 months than I did in the preceeding 12. That was something I hadn't given much though to.

/T
I'm sure this will make me unpopular, but..

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm

Sometimes as hobbyists we get a bit crazy. I used to scan 120 film at 4800 ppi in TIFF. Just crazy.
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=3426'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #11
collum
Registered User
 
collum is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by aad
I'm sure this will make me unpopular, but..

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm

Sometimes as hobbyists we get a bit crazy. I used to scan 120 film at 4800 ppi in TIFF. Just crazy.
nothing to get upset about, the site is sort of the National Lampoon of the photographic world... as Ken himself says on his site:

"While occasionally inspired by actual products or experiences, this site is entirely a work of fiction. It's a joke! Any resemblance to any actual people, places, products or anything is purely coincidental. This site is private and provided only for the entertainment of my personal friends and myself.
Read this site at your own risk. I offer no warrantees of any kind, except that there are many deliberate gaffes, practical jokes and downright foolish and made-up things lurking.

I love a good hoax. Read The Museum of Hoaxes. A hoax, like this site, is done as a goof simply for the heck of it by overactive minds."



If you take that into consideration while reading his site, it puts a lot into perspective



jim


  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #12
iml
Registered User
 
iml's Avatar
 
iml is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 947
14.5GB. I scan TIFFs and shoot RAW when using digital, but I only keep digital versions of what I think is worth keeping. All the negs are stored away in dated sleeves, but I only scan what I want to print or put online, so even though I shoot a lot of film, the scans are only a very small proportion. I use a digital camera for colour only nowadays and I generally have a very specific image or two in mind when I use it, so I don't shoot hundreds of digital pictures.

Ian
__________________
RFF gallery

Some photos

Last edited by iml : 07-11-2007 at 15:00.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #13
Morca007
Matt
 
Morca007's Avatar
 
Morca007 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
5.15 gigs, I'm only scanning at 1200 for web display, if I need to print, I'll do a one off scan at 4800.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-2007   #14
amateriat
We're all light!
 
amateriat's Avatar
 
amateriat is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Age: 63
Posts: 4,284
Between my HDs and assorrted DVDs/CDs, I'm probably clocking in at around 100GB. The scary part is, 90% of that is stuff I've shot in the last six years. I still have the previous 24 years' worth of work to get to. (And, the above does not include photography I've done for others; that's probably another 25GB right there.)


- Barrett
__________________

"Print 'em both, kid." -
Frank "Cancie" Cancellare, to a UPI courier, after tossing a 20-exposure roll of film to him.

Here, a Gallery.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2007   #15
narsuitus
Registered User
 
narsuitus's Avatar
 
narsuitus is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,125
IF my calculations are correct:
Fifty 720mb CDs per year = 36gb
Four years of digital = 144gb
For this poll, I rounded up to 200gb total.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:05.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.