Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Freeware that will split large picture databases into DVD-sizedportions for burning?

Reply
Thread Tools

Freeware that will split large picture databases into DVD-sizedportions for burning?

 
 
Peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2013
On 1/2/2013 6:21 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2013-01-02 15:10:42 -0800, Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>> On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 17:14:41 -0500, nospam <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Eric Stevens
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> External HDDs most certainly do and unreliable it is they can be too.
>>>>>> I've gone through two Seagates and am now relying on a Samsung which
>>>>>> (touch wood) seems to be outlasting the other two combined.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you ever opened one of those boxes? The HDD is standard, and can
>>>>> be plugged in anywhere, including a stand-alone box such as:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.win-star.com/eshop/goods.php?id=81
>>>>
>>>> You are suggesting that its the box which is faulty while the HDD
>>>> inside is still OK? You may well be right
>>>
>>> he is right. the hard drive is almost guaranteed to be perfectly fine.
>>>
>>>> but all I could quickly
>>>> find to replace the faulty units was boxes of 50% more capacity at 2/3
>>>> the price. It was a no-brainer really.
>>>
>>> even more of a no brainer to replace just the enclosure, since that's
>>> all that got fried.

>>
>> Aah - but getting just an enclosure is the problem. Especially on a
>> week end (as it was).

>
> Hell! You don't even need to worry about an enclosure.
> < http://www.newertech.com/products/voyagerq.php >
> < http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/voyager >
>
>
>

Those prices are high:
Just paid $129 for a hot swappable 3T Seagate.

--
PeterN
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
nick c
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2013
Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 13:13:12 -0800, nick c <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>> On 1/2/2013 10:44 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>> On 2013-01-02 21:25:55 -0800, nick c <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/2/2013 5:20 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 14:36:42 -0800, nick c <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tony, I don't intend to get into a barking contest with you but being an
>>>>>>> old dog myself (most people older than I am are probably dead), I
>>>>>>> wouldn't use my age as being an excuse for not wanting to learn new
>>>>>>> tricks.
>>>>>> Nor I, and I'm approaching 525 years-old in barking years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What Brian's reasons are, or excuses - if you prefer - are immaterial.
>>>>>> The point is Brian has been advised of a different (and I agree,
>>>>>> better) system but he doesn't choose to use it. That's his business.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who knows what Brian's position is? "Old man" may be just his way of
>>>>>> saying "Not interested" or "I don't want to spend the money".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I encourage the suggestion of better ways, but not this bullying
>>>>>> insistence and references to being stupid. It could just as well
>>>>>> drive him into being even more stubborn.
>>>>> Terms such as /stupid/ are often used in an attempt to describe a
>>>>> specific condition needed to be emphasized and not meant to indicate a
>>>>> reality. As for driving him to be more stubborn, well ... that might
>>>>> well be stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>>> nospam is carrying on like all of Brian's 100s of DVDs will melt next
>>>>>> week. That's not going to happen. It is kinda funny that there's
>>>>>> this the-sky-is-falling threat about DVDs failing, and how much better
>>>>>> external drives are, but most people recommend two external back-up
>>>>>> drives. Why are two needed if they don't fail?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally, I use two external drives and sometimes a third for files
>>>>>> I'm still revising. But , I've got 12 year-old CDs with images on
>>>>>> them that are still fully functional.
>>>>> I too have confidence in the manner that I chose to save backup data.
>>>>> However, technological advancements seems to render many methods to
>>>>> eventually become obsolete. What we seem to appear to fight, yet at the
>>>>> same time somehow approve, is equipment obsolescence.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just because I'm used to doing things one way doesn't mean
>>>>>>> there's not a better way to do something. If there is a better way to do
>>>>>>> something I would be open to consider it regardless of age or what my
>>>>>>> past habits have been. Ultimately, I am always "the captain of my ship."
>>>>>> You're Captain, so let Brian be Captain of his own ship. He's been
>>>>>> advised of a better way. Let's all back off and let Brian make his
>>>>>> own decision.
>>>>> Well Tony, you just might have presented valid reasons why Brian
>>>>> rejects the suggestions being submitted. However, storage on DVD's of
>>>>> data that consistently gets revised is troublesome and not a good idea
>>>>> regardless of his rejections. For example, the plastic coating on a DVD
>>>>> is absorbent and highly vulnerable to damage.
>>> What revisions are involved?

>> I would assume that a folder of photographs exists on everyone's main
>> drive. As photos are worked or stored, that folder would be consistently
>> undergoing change. Therefore, the backup folder(s) would be subject to
>> periodic changes.

>
> You can revise a DVD-RW, but I wouldn't think that's what would be
> used. I sure never did it that way. A file is copied on a DVD-R and
> the DVD is put away and not used again unless the data is needed.
>
> I've got a spindle of about 75 DVD-Rs left of the 100, and I'll
> probably never use the rest. I don' burn many anymore.
>
>>> When I was backing up to CDs or DVDs, at
>>> the end of the month I backed up the month's files. The CD or the DVD
>>> was not revised.

>> When I was backing up to CDs or DVDs I was a lot younger and less wiser.
>> In the vicissitude of time one would expect to become wiser and change
>> accordingly as we undergo expected or unexpected experiences.
>>
>>> I should also mention that if I had a set of images
>>> that I particularly cared about that would burn them immediately after
>>> processing. Most images, though, could wait until the end of the
>>> month.
>>>
>>> I don't do that anymore. Files are downloaded to C:, processed in C:,
>>> and then as soon as I've finished the processing I run a program that
>>> backs-up new and changed to an external drive alternating between two
>>> externals.

>> Sounds good to me.
>>
>> You can color me Dumbo if I opted to store my photographic treasures on
>> DVDs. "Oops" has no place in my system of things.

>
> Well, like I said...I used external drives now. When I was using DVDs
> and CDs, I never had a problem.
>
>> Ever spill hot black coffee on a batch of DVDs and have it remain there
>> for a minute or two while you look to get something to clean them off
>> with? Sometimes they can still be read, sometimes they can't.

>
> Hasn't happened to me, but would have just burned a new one. The
> files are still on C:.


Now-now Tony, fess-up and admit if you could depend upon never loosing
the files (photographs) on your "C" drive, you would never need to make
backups, unless copying was for the purpose of gaining file mobility.

>
>>> I didn't see any impolite response from him. Saying that he wasn't
>>> interested in changing is not impolite.

>> Nonetheless, thoughtlessly he has been impolite.
>>
>> He posted a request for help and somewhat progressively dictated the
>> terms under which help would be accepted or appreciated.

>
> That seemed to me to be the result of progressively strident demands
> that he conform to the system of others.


When you find someone is doing something you think is wrong, the general
effort would be to try and convince the wrongdoer he is doing something
wrong. That's what a friend would do. The receiver of that effort should
at least acknowledge and be grateful for the help being offered.

>
> I've been in the same boat almost. I have Lightroom, but I don't edit
> in Lightroom. I use it just for a file system. I edit in Photoshop.
> That's the way I prefer to work. I don't mind suggestions about using
> LR for editing, but I don't like being pressed to change.
>
>


No one likes being pressed to change old time-tested, seemingly
comfortable, habits. However, wisdom doesn't come from stagnating
thoughts. The wise one knows the learning curve should always be on the
rise and relevant decisions be made accordingly.

You can color me wrong, Tony, but I still can't see where Duck or Nospam
did anything socially wrong. I have to say if I needed photographic type
advice and openly asked for it I would thank those guys for trying to
help regardless of whether I accepted or not accepted their advice.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tony Cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2013
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 20:58:14 -0500, nospam <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>>
>> I didn't say that. I said I burned monthly *and* immediately after
>> processing with some image files.

>
>which means non-image files are at risk plus any images you didn't burn
>immediately after processing (you said 'some').


What "non-image files"? Text and spreadsheets? Nothing in those that
I worry about risking, but they can be backed-up on a CD. Programs?
I have the original install disks or I'm registered at any site that
I've downloaded for-pay stuff.

My first computer was an Archives CP/M with no internal drive at all.
Programs were inserted on 8" disks in A drive, and data was saved on a
disk in the B drive.

You think I don't understand what can't be at risk and what isn't
worth bothering about?

I finally threw out all my floppy disks and ZIP drive disks, but I may
still have some diskettes in the closet. I started on those when I
bought an IBM PS/2.


--
Tony Cooper, Orlando FL
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2013
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 20:58:16 -0500, nospam <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>if you want to go out and do something else, or even at home, the
>process comes to a standstill. if you have guests for dinner, are you
>going to get up every ten minutes to swap dvds? i'm sure your guests
>will love that.
>
>with a hard drive clone, you start it and it runs unattended.
>
>i don't know why i have to keep repeating it, but you are apparently
>extremely dense.


Because it doesn't pertain to me. First of all, I don't do that
anymore. Second, I've got all day, seven days, to do it if I did.



--
Tony Cooper, Orlando FL
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2013
On 4 Jan 2013 01:37:26 GMT, Chris Malcolm <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>David Dyer-Bennet <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Tony Cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>> On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 10:25:46 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>> wrote:
>>>>Tony Cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm strictly an amateur photographer, so my files are just images that
>>>>> appeal to me. I might do things differently if I was a pro and my
>>>>> images were worth something.
>>>>
>>>>I'd argue that's backwards. For the vast majority of professionals,
>>>>once the images have been delivered to the client, they'll never be
>>>>touched again. Whereas personal pictures, especially family pictures,
>>>>can be valued for generations, and a LOT of them will bring pleasure to
>>>>the original photographer throughout the rest of his life.
>>>
>>> I'm actually more careful in backing-up family event photos right
>>> after processing than I am in my hobby photos. The grandson's Pop
>>> Warner football games, the baseball season, and the holiday
>>> get-togethers get prime attention. Between events, I take so many
>>> photos that I could lose a few weeks and it wouldn't be noticed.
>>>
>>> The pro photographers that I'm thinking of are the ones who do stock
>>> photography, not weddings and family portraits. To the stock
>>> photographer, the files are assets that are sold over-and-over again.
>>> I know several people in this business, and some derive their income
>>> solely from this.

>
>> But those pictures are already on file with their agencies, right?
>> While film era practices are irrelevant now, that's also how it worked
>> the brief period I had some of my digital shots with a stock agency.

>
>I started serious digital photography in 2007 with a camera which
>produced rather noisy images at high ISOs. Today in 2013 I have
>software which is far better at removing noise, plus much better RAW
>converters and editors, plus much better editing skills. As a result I
>can today quite quickly and easily produce obviously improved versions
>of my best post processing efforts of 2007. Plus there's all those old
>images I saved just in case I might want to use them at a later date,
>such as photohgraphs of a building of no particular interest until
>they knocked it down years later.
>
>I think the capacity of hard drives is increasing quite a bit faster
>than the rate at which I'm archiving my photographs, so I'm not
>worried about storage space.


The people I know doing stock retain everything they've ever shot.
They get requests from customers for something like a particular shot,
but such-and-such different.

Wedding photographers also retain files. They may have sold the
package earlier, but they get requests for dupes later. A family
portrait photographer I know recently got an order for replacement
sets he shot over a period of a few years for a family who lost their
house due to a fire.




--
Tony Cooper, Orlando FL
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2013
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 20:58:13 -0500, nospam <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Tony Cooper
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> >Ever spill hot black coffee on a batch of DVDs and have it remain there
>> >for a minute or two while you look to get something to clean them off
>> >with? Sometimes they can still be read, sometimes they can't.

>>
>> Hasn't happened to me, but would have just burned a new one. The
>> files are still on C:.

>
>not when your hard drive crashes, they aren't.


Which is it? A ruined DVD or a hard drive crash? If one happens, you
have the other. Or, is your position that what if Mrs O'Leary's cow
knocks over the coffee on the DVD and the coffee spills into the hard
drive and shorts it out?

What if the cow knocks over the coffee, which spills on the DVD, and
then the cow knocks over a lantern on your desk that starts a fire and
burns up the computer and the external drives? Then, the fire truck
responding to the blaze crashes into the bank destroying the safety
deposit boxes where you have other EHD?

You really do bring up some silly-ass arguments.

You should go to backing-up on CDs. You have too much time on your
hands.


--
Tony Cooper, Orlando FL
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2013
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Tony Cooper
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >> I didn't say that. I said I burned monthly *and* immediately after
> >> processing with some image files.

> >
> >which means non-image files are at risk plus any images you didn't burn
> >immediately after processing (you said 'some').

>
> What "non-image files"? Text and spreadsheets?


anything else you have on your computer.

> Nothing in those that
> I worry about risking,


seriously? do you not use your computer for anything but photos?

> but they can be backed-up on a CD.


just one cd for all your non-image files? you must not do a whole lot
with that computer.

> Programs?
> I have the original install disks or I'm registered at any site that
> I've downloaded for-pay stuff.


so when (not if) your hard drive crashes, you will need to reinstall
windows, then reinstall all your apps (including redownloading them
again), then copy back your data from those cds and dvds and get
everything in the right place and then somehow get all your preferences
and settings back the way you wanted too?

i know you like making things difficult, but that one definitely takes
the cake.

> My first computer was an Archives CP/M with no internal drive at all.
> Programs were inserted on 8" disks in A drive, and data was saved on a
> disk in the B drive.


that's nice. what does that have to do with today's computers?

what did you do when you got a hard drive? back it up to a stack of
floppies? it's the same as backing up to a stack of dvds, just the
numbers are bigger.

> You think I don't understand what can't be at risk and what isn't
> worth bothering about?


it's not a question of risk but of how convoluted the process is.

with your method, it will take a day or two to restore everything the
way it was, quite possibly longer.

with a clone drive, you just swap it for the dead drive and resume
working in the time it takes to reboot.

> I finally threw out all my floppy disks and ZIP drive disks, but I may
> still have some diskettes in the closet. I started on those when I
> bought an IBM PS/2.


probably not readable anyway.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2013
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Tony Cooper
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >> >Ever spill hot black coffee on a batch of DVDs and have it remain there
> >> >for a minute or two while you look to get something to clean them off
> >> >with? Sometimes they can still be read, sometimes they can't.
> >>
> >> Hasn't happened to me, but would have just burned a new one. The
> >> files are still on C:.

> >
> >not when your hard drive crashes, they aren't.

>
> Which is it? A ruined DVD or a hard drive crash? If one happens, you
> have the other.


not necessarily. both could occur.

> Or, is your position that what if Mrs O'Leary's cow
> knocks over the coffee on the DVD and the coffee spills into the hard
> drive and shorts it out?


nope.

i'm not the one who mentioned the coffee, but the point is you don't
want to find out your dvds are not readable for whatever reason when
you are restoring. you *don't* have the originals anymore. if your hard
drive is gone and the dvds can't be read, you're ****ed.

> What if the cow knocks over the coffee, which spills on the DVD, and
> then the cow knocks over a lantern on your desk that starts a fire and
> burns up the computer and the external drives? Then, the fire truck
> responding to the blaze crashes into the bank destroying the safety
> deposit boxes where you have other EHD?
>
> You really do bring up some silly-ass arguments.


nowhere near as stupid as what you just wrote.

> You should go to backing-up on CDs. You have too much time on your
> hands.


yet another stupid comment.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2013
On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 17:59:03 -0800, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>On 2013-01-03 17:20:07 -0800, Tony Cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>>
>> Well, like I said...I used external drives now. When I was using DVDs
>> and CDs, I never had a problem.

>
>Just curious here Tony, did you copy your burned DVD back ups to your
>external drives, or were those files still on your PC HD when you made
>the change from DVD backup?


Some of both. I've upgraded computers over the years as I've added
external drives. Before replacing a computer, I've copied all files
over to something external - disk or drive - depending on what I had
at the time. Then, those files have been re-loaded on the new C:.
With my back-up system, they were immediately backed up to the EHDs.

All of my old digital files and scans that were on CDs or DVDs were
added to the new computer when I bought one. All my digital files are
in my C: as well as in my EHDs. Also, a couple of thousand scans of
prints.

I've been lucky in that I've never had a total crash of any device or
computer. I've upgraded to improve, and that often means that I got
more computer for the same or less money than the last one. As the
new ones come out, the basic features are more than the basic features
of the last one.

The computer I just retired was the first one that gave signs of being
about to go. It kept shutting down every other day or so and it was
making some clunking noises. Still, my back-ups to my EHDs were
current and the machine was technically still working when I replaced
it.

I'm not happy with the change from XP to Windows 7, but I'll get used
to it. I did lose some programs. My Lotus 1-2-3 disks are for up to
Windows XP, but Open Office Calc opens those files OK. I haven't
tried to load CorelDraw Essentials, but that may not work on 7.

The worst mess was Agent (newsreader). I finally found out that Agent
can't be loaded in the Program files in W-7 the way the installation
program is set up. The .dat files have to be in a different
directory. Forte doesn't tell you this. I've now got Agent in their
own file outside of Programs and it works fine.


>> I've been in the same boat almost. I have Lightroom, but I don't edit
>> in Lightroom. I use it just for a file system. I edit in Photoshop.
>> That's the way I prefer to work. I don't mind suggestions about using
>> LR for editing, but I don't like being pressed to change.

>
>I hope that your Lightroom "cat" file is part of your backup protocol
>to your external drives.


LR's set to back-up on EHD on each closing.

In the old computer, I had two LR Catalogs, one for hobby and one for
family. I don't plan to add the family images catalog to LR on the
new one. I moved from LR2 to LR4.

All the family images are in folders by year and in sequence by
date-taken by file number. No one else in my family uses LR, so the
folder system will be fine for them to work with if I'm not around.
Each folder is automatically backed-up to an external HD for new and
changes on closing.

I must do a lot more culling out than most people do. I've got 807 GB
of 920 GB free on C: and I have all my images in C:. I think I'm as
prolific as most shooters, but I don't retain images that don't work.
If I took six shots of same thing, which I often do, I'll keep and
process one and delete five.

Also, while I shoot all RAW now, I don't retain the RAW images of the
family shots. I cull them down, edit and crop, and retain the .jpgs.
I don't see a reason to keep the RAW. I keep the RAW files for my
hobby shots.
--
Tony Cooper, Orlando FL
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-04-2013
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:16:26 -0500, nospam <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Tony Cooper
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> >> >Ever spill hot black coffee on a batch of DVDs and have it remain there
>> >> >for a minute or two while you look to get something to clean them off
>> >> >with? Sometimes they can still be read, sometimes they can't.
>> >>
>> >> Hasn't happened to me, but would have just burned a new one. The
>> >> files are still on C:.
>> >
>> >not when your hard drive crashes, they aren't.

>>
>> Which is it? A ruined DVD or a hard drive crash? If one happens, you
>> have the other.

>
>not necessarily. both could occur.


But both have to happen almost simultaneously for it to be a problem.

If you include that in your scenario, you have to also include that
the internal hard drive and your external hard drives all go out at
the same time.



--
Tony Cooper, Orlando FL
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
problem in running a basic code in python 3.3.0 that includes HTML file Satabdi Mukherjee Python 1 04-04-2013 07:48 PM
Utility to split a WAV recording into 'tracks' (preferably freeware, even more preferably OSS) Alan NZ Computing 36 10-31-2006 01:49 AM
How to split a large avi file into smaller avi by size Avner DVD Video 1 10-31-2005 06:34 PM
[podcast] Expert panel discussion of XQuery, native XML databases, SQL/XML databases Ken North XML 0 07-14-2005 05:50 AM
Tools to extract data from SQL database and convert it into XML & insert XML data into SQL databases Harry Zoroc XML 1 07-12-2004 10:10 PM



Advertisments