«

http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html

Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB
per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD).

This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower
costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale).

Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and
Gigabytes of images
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

"Alfred Molon" <> wrote
news: ...
> http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html
> Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB
> per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD).
>
> This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower
> costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale).
>
> Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and
> Gigabytes of images
>
> Alfred Molon
> ------------------------------
> Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
> http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site




Gave up on optical media when 500GB hard disks dropped to 100EURO or less.
Now I back up nearly instantly to removable drives.
If you install a RAID array, it's even simpler.

Alfred Molon wrote:
[]
> Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and
> Gigabytes of images

I'm considering whether I really want wallets and wallets of DVDs for
backup - DVDs which may not be readable in a few years time. Instead, I'm
thinking of a couple of portable 250GB 2.5-inch HDs......

David

In article <mRJfj.72807$> , david-
says...

> I'm considering whether I really want wallets and wallets of DVDs for
> backup - DVDs which may not be readable in a few years time. Instead, I'm
> thinking of a couple of portable 250GB 2.5-inch HDs......

A highly risky approach. One head crash and you lose everything.

Besides it's sufficient if DVDs last until the next generation of media
becomes available. You then just need to copy all your disks to the next
media generation.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article <1199532306.114264@athprx04>, says...

> Gave up on optical media when 500GB hard disks dropped to 100EURO or less.
> Now I back up nearly instantly to removable drives.
> If you install a RAID array, it's even simpler.

But they are by far not as safe as DVD-Rs. I use a RAID array and in
addition keep backup copies on DVDs.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article <>,
Alfred Molon <> wrote:

> http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html
>
> Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB
> per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD).
>
> This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower
> costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale).
>
> Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and
> Gigabytes of images

Hmm. You might be right, but considering that HD DVD has some powerful
supporters, don't knock it out yet. I also am not sure optical disks
would make good backup media only because writing to them would be a
heck of a lot slower than mechanical disk drives or solid state devices.

Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <mRJfj.72807$> , david-
> says...
>
>> I'm considering whether I really want wallets and wallets of DVDs for
>> backup - DVDs which may not be readable in a few years time.
>> Instead, I'm thinking of a couple of portable 250GB 2.5-inch
>> HDs......
>
> A highly risky approach. One head crash and you lose everything.

Er, no. (a) it's a backup and the originals may still be available (I
tend to keep all my processed stuff on disk, but not the unprocessed
"master"), and (b) the whole point of the two HDs is in case one fails
(portable to that one can be kept off-site).

> Besides it's sufficient if DVDs last until the next generation of
> media becomes available. You then just need to copy all your disks to
> the next media generation.

... and I think I would prefer to copy one 250GB disk to the next 2TB (or
whatever) rather than have to copy 60 DVDs.

Cheers,
David

"Shawn Hirn" <> wrote in message
news:srhi-...
>
> Hmm. You might be right, but considering that HD DVD has some powerful
> supporters, don't knock it out yet. I also am not sure optical disks
> would make good backup media only because writing to them would be a
> heck of a lot slower than mechanical disk drives or solid state devices.

I too assumed that the recent announcement that Warner had chosen BluRay
might mean the end of HD-DVD, but an article today says that consumers have
bought about 60% more HD-DVD machines than BluRay (something like 500,000+
to 300,000+). One of the reasons for those numbers may be that WalMart
sells HD-DVD machines exclusively.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
Alfred Molon
<>], who wrote in article <>:
> http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsr...700383,00.html
>
> Warner chose to support only the higher capacity Blue Ray format (50GB
> per disk for Blue Ray vs. 30GB per disk for HD DVD).
>
> This could mean the death of the lower capacity HD DVD format and lower
> costs for Blue Ray disks due to their mass use (economies of scale).
>
> Good news for all photographers who have to backup Gigabytes and
> Gigabytes of images

In fact, this MIGHT be a very bad news to (smarter? consumers.

I happened to investigate the difference between two formats last
week; ignoring the size difference (which may come and go due to
possibility of multi-layer variants), the MAJOR difference between the
formats is the encryption.

Apparently, Blu-ray MANDATES the AACS encryption. To add AACS, you
need to set up an account with AACS (about $3K - $10K, depending on
nobody knows what), and, after this, pay AACS about $1500 for each
master disk. Currently, the state of debugging is that you need about
3 "try" masters before you get a satisfactory result. This gives the
minimum overhead price of AACS of $9K or more.

This is nothing for major releases; thus people who see HD contents
only via major movies, this overhead does not matter at all. But for
"independent" video producers, this makes releasing Blu-ray
prohibitive. Thus, a Blu-ray-only world would be skewed much more to
the side of big corporations.

[Today, to release a few thousand run costs about $3.5 per HD disk,
and $7 per disk on Blu-ray; AFAIK, this difference is due NOT to the
technical matters, but entirely to AACS fees (it is with a producer
who takes video content, and returns already printed stuff). It
won't go down due to volume economy. The printing price is
practically the same - both per layer, or per gigabyte...]

Hope this helps,
Ilya

P.S. I could not find out on which step the AACS-requirement is
enforced. Is it the player, the Sony printing facilities, or
ALL printint facilities? If somebody knows, please answer...

Thanks...

In article <ThOfj.72964$> , david-
says...

> .. and I think I would prefer to copy one 250GB disk to the next 2TB (or
> whatever) rather than have to copy 60 DVDs.

You can still do that. But you should keep backups on DVD just in case.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site