 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / Digital Photo / May 2005Next (the other next) Gen "DVD" storage
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/27/Nanoscale_DVD/ Heading towards the Tera-byte... Cheers, Alan  Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/27/Nanoscale_DVD/ > > Heading towards the Tera-byte... > > Cheers, > Alan Interesting. Imagine the cost of the burner. But then again, I said somthing similar when cassettes replaced 8 tracks! On Fri, 27 May 2005 10:10:31 -0400, in rec.photo.digital , Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> in <d779og$khu$1@inews.gazeta.pl> wrote: >http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/27/Nanoscale_DVD/ > >Heading towards the Tera-byte... An interesting notion. It would require extensive processing and so would be slow. (Yes, with faster processors it would be faster, but still slower than less complex systems.) I would not expect to see this on the market particularly soon, particularly from a company with no record of innovation. SignatureMatt Silberstein All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus, there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing. >> http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/27/Nanoscale_DVD/ >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > this on the market particularly soon, particularly from a company > with no record of innovation. eh? The zip drive system was, at the time quite innovative. They lost that, and this is their leapfrog (if it comes to fruition, of course). By the time this reaches the market (if), then processing will be faster, memory will be larger, video requirements will be greater, etc. etc. 10 years ago, proposing something like DVD was considered a monumental amount of storage. Today, it doesn't cover a few weeks worth of RAW shooting. Everything just keeps going and going (faster and more). Cheers, Alan. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. It would be great, if it works. I had to laugh at the idea that 800 GB was more storage then normal people would need. I have 490 GB of hard drive connected to my computer, they are not currently all full, but to backup that amount of data would take over 100 DVDs. For years now removable storage has not been keeping up with hard drives. On my first computer, that had hard drive, I had 20 MB of hard drive space, I could back this up with 17 5 1/4 floppys. Pretty soon the hard drives were up to 500 MB and we could no longer backup the whole drive with floppy, but then came CDs and life was good, for a while. When hard drives started getting to the 20 GB range even CDs were getting to be small for doing backups, then came DVDs, but 250 GB drives where right behind them. Blue Ray will help but we are going to be looking at 1000 GB hard drives soon so even Blue Ray won't be enough. Scott For may of us, our first hard drive was 5 or 10 meg. No enough for a single raw image today. And 1 gig of camera storage is roughly the same as 4 rolls of 135/24 film. The changes are amazing. Collin > It would be great, if it works. I had to laugh at the idea that 800 GB > was more storage then normal people would need. I have 490 GB of hard [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > For years now removable storage has not been keeping up with hard > drives. Oh, yes, it has, but not in the price range we would like to have. There are LTO tapes with 100GB, 200GB or 400GB _uncompressed_ (usually advertised as 200GB/400GB/800GB tapes) storage. There are SDLT with similar capacity. But the prices assume that you are at least a small business: e.g. 4-5k for 10 LTO2 autoloader. Or you can go with DLT drives with (up to) 160GB comporessed storage for 2-3K -- again an autoloader. They both are SCSI devices. I am sure there are some IDE based backup technologies as well. Expensive? Maybe. How important is your data to you? Bye, Dragan SignatureDragan Cvetkovic, To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer !!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!! > Blue Ray will help but we are going to be looking at 1000 GB hard > drives soon so even Blue Ray won't be enough. IOmega already do a 35Gb cartridge based backup device. Iain On Fri, 27 May 2005 12:32:18 -0400, in rec.photo.digital , Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> in <d77i2b$kg6$1@inews.gazeta.pl> wrote: >>> http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/27/Nanoscale_DVD/ >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >eh? The zip drive system was, at the time quite innovative. They lost >that, and this is their leapfrog (if it comes to fruition, of course). Let me re-state then, a company with a poor record of innovation. They came up with a single poor product and done nothing since. >By the time this reaches the market (if), then processing will be >faster, memory will be larger, video requirements will be greater, etc. etc. A point I made. But it will still require significant processing: "The angles would be detected by analyzing light after it had bounced off several ridges - calculating which combination of slopes would have produced the result." That looks like a non-trivial problem. >10 years ago, proposing something like DVD was considered a monumental >amount of storage. Today, it doesn't cover a few weeks worth of RAW >shooting. I agree that 1T storage will make sense at some point. The question is how. >Everything just keeps going and going (faster and more). Which does not mean that all technologies are a good idea. SignatureMatt Silberstein All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus, there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing. > On Fri, 27 May 2005 12:32:18 -0400, in rec.photo.digital , Alan > Browne [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > They > came up with a single poor product and done nothing since. <snip> My wife has a polo shirt that proclaims proudly that the wearer was a member of the uh, uh, I forget what Iomega product it was, but it was well after the Zip things. > Which does not mean that all technologies are a good idea. Ya got that right, Pilgrim. SignatureFrank ess >>By the time this reaches the market (if), then processing will be >>faster, memory will be larger, video requirements will be greater, etc. etc. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > That looks like a non-trivial problem. I do agree... But, quadrature phase (QPSK) modems would have been considered a non-trivial problem 25 years ago. They're already well behind us. Some military radios have had dramatic increases in effective bandwidth through complex modulation schemes... and so on. It is non-trivial to do thses things at first; once they're done, they become standard very quickly. >>Everything just keeps going and going (faster and more). > > Which does not mean that all technologies are a good idea. The marketplace arbitrates that. Cruelly. (Whether the marketplace rewards silliness is another matter. People are silly and buy silly things). Cheers, Alan. <snip> > (Whether the marketplace rewards silliness is another matter. People are > silly and buy silly things). > > Cheers, > Alan. Like Sigma SLRs..? The one thing I have a problem with is that much data on one disk, knowing the reliability of media with a far less granular storage method. As more and more data is stored on disk, the medium needs to be more and more accurate. Imagine after 10 years going to find a years worth of photos on your disk and it being unreadable.. $ for $, I think you would still be better of with the linear mag tape or HD storage with one of these as a secondary backup. I read an article not that long ago about a guy from a computer magazine that burnt a stack of cd's about 4 years ago. He burnt them and then put them in the dark of a cupboard in the office and then 4 years later he got them out and checked how they fared. 40% of the disks were unreadable..... I think the same is true of compactflash cards. I used 512mb cards to spread the risk. Considering the alternative with 35mm was a change of roll every 36 exposures to change a card every 145 exposures is hardly an inconvenience and reduces the possibility of loss to just 145 pics and not say 600 with a 1Gb card. > I read an article not that long ago about a guy from a computer magazine > that burnt a stack of cd's about 4 years ago. He burnt them and then put > them in the dark of a cupboard in the office and then 4 years later he got > them out and checked how they fared. > > 40% of the disks were unreadable..... One swallow does not a summer make. We don't know how good his burner was; the quality of the media used; how good was the reader he used to evaluate the disks (did he try more than one reader?); we don't even know if he verified them at the time of writing. I use a reputable CD/DVD burner, and phthalocynanine CD's. Some of my disks are years old, and I haven't found a duff one yet. The DVD's are too new so far to form any idea of their life. Colin |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.