Traveling to Europe - Laptop vs External 80 GB Hard drive

I think Paul will be using a Canon 20D, or at least one of the Canon
dslr's, and if I were he I would be shooting RAW all the way. He stated
that his shots will be irreplaceable, so to shoot jpeg and risk
uncorrectable exposure errors is not acceptable to me. I just shot
about 600 RAW images during a 5-week trip to Hong Kong, so my mouth is
where my money is, so to speak.
and
I narrate this because RAW files from a dslr are a considerable size, 7
to 8 MB from my 300D, and probably bigger from a 20D. I get about 66
shots on a 512MB card, so a thousand or so shots will need nearly 8 GB
of card space, and with a safety margin for extra shots he will need at
least 10 Gigabytes of cards. If he does elect to shoot large/fine jpegs
he will need about half that, still about 5 gigs.

He should take an image tank of some sort to load the cards into, as you
say above. I use a 40 GB Vosonic drive, and I use only two 512MB cards,
loading them into the Vosonic as they are filled. I think the image
tanks are safe enough that he won't need to retain images on the cards.
The drives only run for a few minutes while recording the card contents,
and the chance of failure is remote.

If other persons are travelling with him - wife, companion - they can
use the image tank as well, making a considerable outlay on gigabytes of
card space unnecessary.

It's all advice, and I guess Paul will take what he wants from all the
posts, and hopefully come back with his 1,000-odd shots intact. Then,
his work will start for real ...

Colin D.

 

Where are you going? Is there really a place in Europe that doesn't have
mailboxes? Even the poor Soviet bloc regions have mailboxes and internet
cafe's. Just curious about what part of Europe is so remote.

SteveO

 

Having done a ton of international travel -- Africa, Central America,
Mexico, South America, Europe, UK -- and still doing it I think the way
to go is to have a DOUBLE backup capability if possible. I say this
because I have had camera failure, my cameras,luggage stolen, etc.

First, I would not bring a laptop unless it is required separately for
work, and I say this even though I had a tiny Sony Vaio (which died
last month on a domestic trip; fortunately my images and work files
were backed up on a flash drive). I would get an image tank or some
capability to save images on an MP3 player for those times when you
could not cut cd's or dvd's, or copy onto separate cards, at a library,
internet cafe, friend's house, or even a computer shop (where you
sometimes can pay them). I also bring along enough cards to back up
onto extras, keeping them in a shaving kit or someplace not likely to
be checked by thieves once you do get access to a computer. I happen to
like the Lexar Sport flash drives. You can get a 1 meg card for about
$50 and a little MP3 player for it for less -- great combo. Of
course, I put a couple of extra dvd's and cdrs in.

I should say that I have never been in a 'remote' place where a local
post office or library did not have a computer. Even in Central America
one finds computer shops and internet cafes in the darndest places. In
a terribly remote part of Nova Scotia there was a little post office
with a computer easily used for backups and communicating. The whole
world is on line!

I generally travel internationally with my Oly 5060, which has a dual
card slot. I shoot originals on one card and then triage images I
really want to keep onto the second one.
I always set aside editing time to decide which images are 'keepers'
and which are not, thereby saving space. I do the same when
photographing, sometimes shooting raw, somethings best jpeg, sometimes
high quality jpeg. I seldom come back with more than a hundred images
or so. But this is my habit. May not be yours.

Have fun.

 

I'm going to the Arctic, circumnavigating Baffin Island.
Couldn't do that not too long ago because of the ice.

The Antarctic wildlife is, I'm told, rather tame. I need
to be a bit away from the average polar bear...

I'll be taking my Canon 300D and my SD450. And yes, total weight
is limited. Who needs clothes?... ;-)

There are some Inuit villages along the way, so it won't be
all landscape and wildlife photography.

My current plan, likely to change at least 17 times before I
actually go, is to use a friends P2000 for secondary backup
but to take enough CF cards for the 300D to hold most if not
all of the photos.

The possibility of having access to the P2000 has just come
up so it is not yet certain. But by NOT buying one for myself
I can put that money to use buying CF cards. At present
prices it ought to give me a lot of gigabytes.

I'm not likely to do this trip again as age is gaining on me.
But the extra gigs of storage will always come in handy or
be easily saleable if I decide to go that way.

But if I win the lottery I'll be getting the P2000 (or the
P4000). It seems to be a neat tool.

I want to thank everyone for all their help and advice.
Having others to share ideas with has certainly helped
clarify my thinking. I appreciate it.

---- Paul J. Gans

 

Oh yes. Thanks for all the input. Now all I have to do is go.
That's scheduled for August...

---- Paul J. Gans

 

That was the other guy who was going to Europe. I'm off
to the Arctic. No internet but lots of polar bears... ;-)

And not nearly as much ice as 20 years ago.

---- Paul J. Gans

 

Paul J Gans wrote:
[]

Paul, that sounds absolutely wonderful! Very envious. Yes, I can
appreciate the different degree of telephoto required for the Arctic
compared to the Antarctic. The friend with the P-2000 is worth
cultivating - and get the cards instead (or find a further friend!).

On a two-week trip along the Norway coast a couple of years back I took
3500 pictures on my Nikon 5700, which were edited down to 2500 while I was
away. That all fitted on 3 (or was it 4) 512MB CF cards IIRC, at maximum
compression and using the 3:2 aspect ratio where possible. What I forgot
to do was to use the movie modes to capture (in your case) landing in
Zodiacs and things like that. The short movies just add to the context of
the still images. Yet more memory, of course!

Cheers,
David

 

Yeah, that perceived need for triple redundancy makes me laugh too. That
said, I'm looking forward to a trip to the UK mid-year, and I went through
the same decision-making process. I've ended up with a laptop (DVD burner,
external HDD and internal card reader came with it), that I'll take along,
as well as my 2 digicams. So I guess I'll have to be satisfied a with
double-redundant system - HDD and DVDs. The laptop actually was bought to
use as a way to catch up on work when I'm away from my desktop system (90%
of the time at the moment), as well as a portable option for entertainment
- DVD player, mp3 player, TV and games system all in one! Just got to find
a backpack to carry it all around in now.

RobG

 

Yeah, well... if they'd stolen my laptop, the image quality would probably
ensure that they brought it back post-haste! Just in case someone thought
the theives had made the images.

RobG

 

I think that some of this misses the point.

With film you used what you had and if you couldn't buy more,
that was it. Anyone ever run out of film when you were off in
the woods somewhere?

With digital we have the same problem. Running out of storage
capacity. But with digital we have options. We can bring along
some form of mass storage. Exactly what kind isn't the point
here. With mass storage (like an Epson 2000 or a laptop) we
can copy our images to the storage and re-use the card.

But that brings up another issue. What if the copy process
fails? Would it have been better to "run out of film"?

So to ensure that the copies are OK, some of us would prefer
to use a laptop or a storage bank that allows the individual
photos to be examined. But if we don't have such a device
we would like some redundancy.

The advent of digital media has created (as usual) both an
advantage and more complexity in the photographer's life.

In my case I'm going to be where I cannot get more "film".
So I will try to ensure that I take enough "film" with me.
That means many CF cards.

But who knows how much "film" is enough? So I will also
avail myself of a friend's Epson P2000. Given that,
prudence (good word, prudence) says that I should back up
even if I don't have to. And then if I need to reuse a
CF card I can.

No mystery here at all. Welcome to the modern world.

----- Paul J. Gans

PS: I should explain that the friend will be along on
the trip. I'm not "borrowing" the P2000, I'm being allowed
to share it. I expect it will be large enough, but just
barely, if you think about it.

 

There is that.... <grin>

----- Paul J. Gans

 

No. And there have been times when I was in that remote a location,
anywhere from several days to a week. I just paced my picture taking.

If you follow the Sunday newspaper ads, at least once a month some retailer
is practically giving away a 512mb CF or SD card. They're so small and
inexpensive, I can't see running out of storage.

Technically, a copy process would leave the originals on the card. A
transfer process would remove them from the card. If you copy your
pictures, then you should be covered in case you lose or damage your card.
This is comparable to the loss or damage that could happen with 35mm film so
I shouldn't give you a hard time about this point

Really the opportunity for more complexity. Anybody remember life before
cell phones? Wasn't it nice? I think so.

40, 50, 60 pictures a day? ...an hour?

But what do you do when the P2000 dies or goes missing?

Well, in my mind the modern world would have broadband so you could upload
to a storage site. Where in Europe were you going again?

No fighting over it now Enjoy your trip!

SteveO

 

I just re-read that you were going to the Arctic. Sorry for coming off a
little harsh, I just had an annoying evening. I just realized you'll be in
a place where cell phones shouldn't work. How nice. Again, enjoy your
trip!

SteveO

 

I see this kind of thinking all the time "if I don't need something
nobody needs it". There are people who claim no one need a 300mm
lens "just get closer" In your case you assume that since you are
happy to shoot less photos this should work for everyone, but this is
surly not the case.

One of the joys of digital photograph is that is allows us to shoot
without worry about wasting film. And when people are not worried
about wasting film they start taking photos in such a way that they
really start to capture the feel of the place, not just photos you
might find on a postcard.

Scott

 

I feel sorry for the people who worried about wasting film; I never
worry about wasting it, but as you say, not everyone thinks alike.

Taking photos willynilly because I'm not worried about wasting film
would seem to me to encourage rapidfire snapshots instead of capturing
the feel of the place. Thinking about what film I was using, thinking
about what aperture and shutterspeed to use, thinking about what the
subject was -- in other words, taking time to think -- seems to me to
be a better way to capture the feel. That can be done digitally as well
as filmally, of course, but worrying about wasting film is never on my
mind. Again, though, different people have different approaches, so we
should use what works for us, not what works for others.

 

But in the very act of being careful many people limit their photos to
the same old shots we see all the time.

All too often the photos people come back with are the same ones you
might find on a postcard, churches castles, the normal stuff you know
boring as can be.

And when people feel limited they tend to photograph the destination
but not the journey there.

If taking a large number of photos puts one at a disadvantage then it
is rather amazing that the photographers from national geographic
manage to get a good photo from time to time after all they shoot
something like 300 to 400 rolls of film on an assignment.

If you happy with the limited number of photos you can take more power
to you but don't assume that it does not have real value for others.

Scott

 

Sorry, I thought I'd covered that last aspect: not everyone thinks
alike and should use what works for them. Sounds like you've got the
part about doing what works for you nailed down tight.

 

When I went to Africa for a month, I borrowed memory cards from friends and
acquaintances. Many people had, say, a 256MB card and had gotten a 512MB
one, and could spare one of those cards for me while using the other for
themselves.