|
SoundMonkey posted:Said it twenty times before, will say it again. Amazon Glacier. Under a buck a month? Every time I've priced it it came out a good bit more expensive than Backblaze (what I use now) for ~1TB.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 06:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
My backup is zero bucks per month, unless a hard drive dies, then it's a lot more for a short period. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 07:04
|
|
|
Eegah posted:Under a buck a month? Every time I've priced it it came out a good bit more expensive than Backblaze (what I use now) for ~1TB. For a TB, ten bucks a month. One thing to keep in mind is that it carries a per-request fee as well initially (a very small one), so if you can archive shoots to a zipped folder it'll be that much cheaper. Full disclosure: it cost about five bucks (in requests) to upload my 50,000 files, then under a buck a month to keep them there. It's nice actually, because I never have to worry about that poo poo again and Amazon will Just Make poo poo Work for less than I spend per month on chewing gum.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 08:42
|
|
|
I just upload original size jpgs to my premium Flickr account. Am I doing it wrong?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 08:58
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:Said it twenty times before, will say it again. Amazon Glacier. Question: Were you using S3 with Arq before you used Glacier? I'm using Arq for S3 now but I'm not sure how exactly the switching to Glacier will work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 11:00
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Question: Were you using S3 with Arq before you used Glacier? I'm using Arq for S3 now but I'm not sure how exactly the switching to Glacier will work. No, I only bought Arq for Glacier. It seems to have really excellent support for Glacier though, even if the initial upload took four days. I think moving stuff between AWS systems is cheaper than uploading from disk, though. EDIT: It appears to store some metadata in regular S3 though, even when exclusively using Glacier: 
SoundMonkey fucked around with this message at 15:45 on Mar 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 15:40
|
|
|
Upload speed is really my main bottleneck for cloud storage. I currently time machine a drive that I mirror to my pictures folder (as well as time machining the main HD) so I've got triple redundancy on a lot of stuff except the older stuff which is only on my external which gets time machined as well. I really need to let go and start deleting Raws from shoots I don't edit and keep only edited TIFFs of selected images.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 16:06
|
|
|
What's a good Windows client for Glacier?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 16:35
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Upload speed is really my main bottleneck for cloud storage. I currently time machine a drive that I mirror to my pictures folder (as well as time machining the main HD) so I've got triple redundancy on a lot of stuff except the older stuff which is only on my external which gets time machined as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 17:14
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:None of which helps you if the house burns down. You need something off-site. ...and off-site/cloud is so cheap these days that there's really no reason not to go that way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:...and off-site/cloud is so cheap these days that there's really no reason not to go that way. but... I heard that amazon might lose 1 file out of 100000k of them... AND ITS COLD STORAGE SO I GOTTA WAIT FOR ALL 745TBs of my images before i can look at the only image i was missing. THIS BACK UP IS OVER. I just signed up for this amazon back up. Now to find how to back up my drat photos. Any good M$ clients that work with glacier/S3?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
Please don't ever do that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
Maybe I am being a bit thick here.... A friend put some photos on their Dropbox. I received a link to view them and duely followed it. Now I receive lots of warning messages that I am over my Dropbox limit. Is it right that viewing a folder on someone elses's Dropbox automatically adds it to your own folder - complete with the implications for space quotas?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
spog posted:Maybe I am being a bit thick here.... If they shared the files with you then yes. I think the only way you can make a link to the files without "giving" them to somebody is to make them globally accessible. Do the files in question show up in your Dropbox now?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:If they shared the files with you then yes. I think the only way you can make a link to the files without "giving" them to somebody is to make them globally accessible. Do the files in question show up in your Dropbox now? Yes, they do. And it bangs me right over my data limit (3.2Gb in a limit of 2.5Gb). So I have downloaded them, then deleted' them (break the link, I guess). It seems remarkably inelegant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 21:05
|
|
|
spog posted:It seems remarkably inelegant. Or a clever way to "fill up" your quota so you'll buy more storage 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:No, I only bought Arq for Glacier. It seems to have really excellent support for Glacier though, even if the initial upload took four days. I think moving stuff between AWS systems is cheaper than uploading from disk, though. Ah ok thanks, I'll check with the creator then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 00:41
|
|
|
What are some good resources for inspiration/ideas? Something that has a lot of galleries of higher quality current stuff - like http://www.photographyserved.com/. The internet is a loving wasteland of bad photography and it gets old trying to sift through them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
Nameless Dread posted:What are some good resources for inspiration/ideas? Something that has a lot of galleries of higher quality current stuff - like http://www.photographyserved.com/. The loving library.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 01:08
|
|
|
Here, go to the library and look at these after. http://www.americansuburbx.com/ http://photographsonthebrain.com/ http://fractionmagazine.com/ http://lpvmagazine.com/
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 01:13
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:None of which helps you if the house burns down. You need something off-site. I'd probably just use that as a chance to restart my portfolio, but arq seems pretty easy to use and affordable with glacier so I might hop on that train when I can find a day to organise a limited archive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 01:14
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:No, I only bought Arq for Glacier. It seems to have really excellent support for Glacier though, even if the initial upload took four days. I think moving stuff between AWS systems is cheaper than uploading from disk, though. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I just downloaded Arq and it looks like everything is actually going through S3 then being transitioned into Glacier storage. You can log into AWS and check S3 and you should be able to see all the encrypted files even though you've selected Glacier as the storage method. I don't believe you can see your files through S3 if they've been sent to Glacier directly. Edit: Actually I don't think it uploads to S3 on second thought. mes fucked around with this message at 01:36 on Mar 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:The loving library. The internet is the loving library. Obviously i'm just looking for newer and less famous stuff, to use their styles as a crutch.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
Nameless Dread posted:The internet is the loving library. Obviously i'm just looking for newer and less famous stuff, to use their styles as a crutch. loving kids these days.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
Nameless Dread posted:The internet is the loving library. Obviously i'm just looking for newer and less famous stuff, to use their styles as a crutch. Follow Miley Cyrus on tumblr and instagram 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
Mest0r posted:Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I just downloaded Arq and it looks like everything is actually going through S3 then being transitioned into Glacier storage. You can log into AWS and check S3 and you should be able to see all the encrypted files even though you've selected Glacier as the storage method. I don't believe you can see your files through S3 if they've been sent to Glacier directly. The billing system sorta treats Glacier as a subset of S3, so it does look that way, yeah, even though it isn't. I can confirm that the only real care-worthy cost is the per-request cost for uploading 20,000 items.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 09:36
|
|
|
Beastruction posted:Or a clever way to "fill up" your quota so you'll buy more storage You're probably right. It means that if you want to share more than the basic free amount, you all have to pay more. Bloody rip off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 12:11
|
|
|
Musket posted:Follow Miley Cyrus on tumblr and instagram Wait a few years and her parents will turn her to porn to squeeze the last nickel from her life.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 13:38
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:The billing system sorta treats Glacier as a subset of S3, so it does look that way, yeah, even though it isn't. I just got confused when I logged in to AWS and saw that Arq created a bucket but then I didn't check Glacier directly. It does upload to Glacier directly if that matters to anyone.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 13:52
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:What's a good Windows client for Glacier? I too would like to know if anyone has used something for windows that they like. I have been using the free version of FastGlacier and it is OK, but I am not all that happy with it but it works well enough that I am thinking of upgrading to the paid version. I played around with CouldBerry Explorer which seems to have more features, but the free version limits the number of items you can put in your queue so it didn't work for me to make my initial backup.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 14:17
|
|
|
Ropes4u posted:Wait a few years and her parents will turn her to porn to squeeze the last nickel from her life. Im pretty sure she will come about this life choice on her own.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 15:31
|
|
|
Musket posted:Im pretty sure she will come about this life choice on her own. Oh, I don't know. She seems like she has a good head on her should....... http://vimeo.com/62555281  (  if your job is like as a pope or something)
8th-snype fucked around with this message at 15:46 on Mar 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:Oh, I don't know. She seems like she has a good head on her should....... I follow her on the twitter, saw that awhile back. :art:
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 15:48
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:The billing system sorta treats Glacier as a subset of S3, so it does look that way, yeah, even though it isn't. I'm still not sure why one would go with Glacier over BackBlaze, which is cheaper when you pass 500GB and doesn't have an upload or download charge.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 02:12
|
|
|
Eegah posted:I'm still not sure why one would go with Glacier over BackBlaze, which is cheaper when you pass 500GB and doesn't have an upload or download charge. I'm not sure that I like that backblaze backs up *everything* without an option to specify what, but I suppose at unlimited that isn't a huge issue. *nevermind looks like you can edit what is backed up Paragon8 fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Mar 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 02:29
|
|
|
Stupid question of the day: how important or useful is the histogram on taking or evaluating a photo?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 19:17
|
|
|
Ropes4u posted:Stupid question of the day: how important or useful is the histogram on taking or evaluating a photo? I only use it to evaluate if I have a true black/true white in my photo. Other than that, my eyeballs do the rest.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
On a non-calibrated monitor it can be very useful. On my old monitor I had to trust the histogram because the contrast of the LCD was so bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 19:24
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:I only use it to evaluate if I have a true black/true white in my photo. Other than that, my eyeballs do the rest. Same here, though I'd love to learn more uses for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 20:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
I mean you can check to see if you're underexposed or overexposed, but unless you're clipping then it's probably not a huge problem that you can't fix in post. I hate to sound lazy like that, so I guess if you're shooting a dark scene and you know your sensor is noisy in underexposed areas it might be helpful to try to bring that histo up a little?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 20:24
|
|
